Archives for May 2009

Back from Cannes and turning my thoughts to public art. Tonight, in London, the Art Fund, will be hosting a debate entitled "Can The Public Be Trusted to Choose Public Art?" Given how much public art has sprung up in the last decade, you might assume there was an enormous public appetite for it. But that isn't necessarily so.

I remember interviewing Richard Serra in London last year and he talked, with some disappointment, about the graffiti sprayed over his only work on permanent display in the UK. Work by sculptor Henry Moore has also been stolen and allegedly melted down, and there are always going to be people who fundamentally object to having any public money spent on art - although even they have to acknowledge the success of works such as Antony Gormley's Angel of the North and the figures on Crosby beach in Liverpool.

However, while Gormley's invitation to the public to stand on the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square might seem like the ultimate manifestation of PUBLIC art, I can see it running into problems of the health and safety variety. Watch this space.

Mark Wallinger's White Horse, in Ebbsfleet, will no doubt attract enormous attention when it is built and in his case there was certainly some public consultation, but on the whole public art is imposed on communities and very often used in urban regeneration plans.

A few years ago I went to Chicago's Millennium Park, which showcases a fine example of participatory public art, with Jaume Plensa's contemporary park fountain, with its very own high tech gargoyle, and Anish Kapoor's shiny, giant coffee bean. Art in public spaces is generally chosen by committee, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

Would it work better and more consistently if the public played a greater role in what their communities will see every day? And what might happen to art if they did have a say? Or is the vision of an artist paramount? What do you think?

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Footballers and film festivals may not seem like obvious bedfellows. But in the last few years I've been coming to Cannes, there seems to be at least one major footballing legend here promoting themselves or their movies.

In recent years, there have been films about Maradona, Zidane and Pele. This year sees Eric Cantona playing himself in a surreal comedy about life, love and Eric, directed by that Cannes favourite, and former Palme D'Or winner, Ken Loach.

From the man best known for his gritty, social realism, Looking for Eric is more magical realism. A Manchester postman, Eric, played by Steve Evets, is at his wits' end and tries to kill himself.

A little recreational drug use prompts a vision of Eric Cantona, little Eric's hero. Cantona dispenses his usual laconic aphorisms and is very comfortable in a self-mocking role. At one point, he says: "I am not a man, I am Cantona."

I asked him about the mythology surrounding him and he just bats it away, clearly delighted that he is sitting next to Ken Loach.

For his part, Loach manages to find politics even in this highly entertaining comedy. He told me that a central scene in which little Eric and his mates take on some pretty scary local thugs, is an illustration that the Thatcherism that there is no such thing as society has now shifted. That people are prepared to do things for each other.

Film-making itself feels like a political act when you are Ken Loach. He is clearly delighted to be in competition once more and with Eric Cantona playing lui meme, he may have found his breakthrough movie.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Ever since bikini-clad Brigitte Bardot paraded for photographers on the Croisette, Cannes has been synonymous with A-list female glamour.

But what about women behind the camera? The Palme d'Or has been won by a woman only once in its 62-year history. That was by Jane Campion in 1993 for The Piano.

She is back in Cannes, and back in competition, with Bright Star, the story of the love affair between Fanny Brawne and the poet, John Keats.

This time, she is not the sole woman vying for the top prize. British director, Andrea Arnold, is also in competition with only her second feature, Fish Tank. As is the Spanish director, Isabel Coixet, with Map of the Sounds of Tokyo.

I asked Jane Campion if it was just as hard now for women to make an impact at this level of film-making as it was when she won in 1993.

Her answer was typical of her playful and insightful view of the world. She said she didn't think women grew up with the same harsh criticism that men did and, because of that, were not cut out for their first experiences of the harsh world of film-making.

"Women are not used to that, so we have to put our armour on and get out there," she said.

She added that she would love to see more women directors and joked that this had to happen because women "represent half the population and gave birth to the whole world".

New Zealander Campion praised the Australian government for its support of film-makers of both sexes which, she said, was one reason why there were so many strong Australian women directors.

And she asked what happens - given there are almost always an equal number of men and women at film school - to all the women?

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Why is it that Cannes audiences love gritty realism? Is it because the glitz and glamour outside is just so excessive that inside, on the cinema screens, they prefer a truer picture of the world?

I wondered about this contrast after a screening of British film Fish Tank, which is in competition for the Palme D'or. The story of a fifteen-year-old girl (played by newcomer Kate Jarvis, who was cast after being seen arguing with her boyfriend at Tilbury Station) whose life changes when her mother's new boyfriend moves in, it is unrelenting in its portrayal of poverty and the hopelessness of the central characters' lives.

Nonetheless, the press audience cheered and clapped at the end.

Among the British directors beloved here are Mike Leigh and Ken Loach - and they are hardly known for their upbeat visions of the world. Okay, I know Mike Leigh had a recent success with Happy Go Lucky and, this year, Ken Loach is bringing a bit of magical realism to the Croisette with his Eric Cantona story, Looking for Eric. But both these directors made their reputations with serious, and often grim, portrayals of society. Andrea Arnold, who directed Fish Tank, seems to be following in their wake.

On a lighter note, I spoke to the new Doctor Who today. Matt Smith is in Cannes promoting a short in the Critics' Week competition. The film is called Together and the experience has drawn him to the form. He told me he wants to make a short film one day. and maybe even go on to to direct a feature and bring it to Cannes.

So, for all those fans desparate to see him as the new Doctor, it is clear he is an actor refusing to have his career defined by any role, no matter how big a star it makes him.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

A look at the making of Up - and the technology behind 3D filmmaking.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

The 3D specs handed out at the first press screening of Up were a little on the clunky side, but the red and black items were, nevertheless, a sought after item on the Croisette.

Opening Cannes with an animation - and a 3D animation at that - is a radical departure for a festival that hasn't been hugely surprising in quite a while. And it marks a defining moment for the technology and the artform.

There are more and more 3D cinemas being built around the world, and Executive Producer on Up, John Lasseter, told me today that all of Disney / Pixar's movies will be made in 3D from now on.

Is it the third age for 3D, having been dismissed in the 1950s and 1980s? Lasseter is hopeful. And there are several other 3D projects touting for business in the Cannes marketplace.

An endorsement from the festival raises the artform out of the past, too easily dismissed as a gimmick. This is a defining moment for cinema and the business of cinema.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Eric Cantona starring in a surreal Ken Loach comedy? It could only be at the Cannes film festival, where I will be for the next few days and where Mr Cantona's appearance on the red carpet is likely to be a highlight.

The festival will open with a 3D animation, called UP, from Disney/Pixar, a first on both counts. Is this the beginning of the third age for 3D following its "moments" in the 1950s and the 80s when it was cast aside as gimmicky?

Apart from that, Cannes returns to its first unashamedly arthouse competition in years, with Ang Lee, Jane Campion, Michael Haneke, Lars von Trier, Ken Loach and Quentin Tarantino among the big names vying for the Palme D'or.

The usual 4,000-plus journalists will be jostling for access and, of course, hoping to chance upon a cinematic masterpiece! Look out for my Cannes blogs as well as radio and TV reports.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Détente is in short supply in the world of architecture.

A quarter of a century since Prince Charles made his now infamous "monstrous carbuncle" speech denouncing modern architecture, he has been invited to give another lecture at the Royal Institute of British Architects.

The event, which takes place tomorrow night, is sold out - but in recent days, prominent architects have been calling on their colleagues to boycott the speech.

The background to this is The Prince of Wales' intervention is a proposed housing development in Chelsea. The design, commissioned by the Qatari royal family, is by Rogers Stirk Harbour, and has been derided by the Prince as "unsuitable" and "unsympathetic". What has incensed leading architects is that the Prince has written to representatives of the Qatari royal family suggesting an alternative plan by his favoured architect - the classicist, Quinlan Terry.

Construction on the former site of the Chelsea Barracks began last year

Leading the charge to boycott his speech is Peter Ahrends, whose firm's design for the National Gallery extension was the target of the carbuncle speech. Soon after, the plan was rejected in favour of one by Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown.

Now, Mr Ahrends is focussing on the intervention over the Chelsea building on the grounds that the democratic process and procedure of planning is being interfered with.

The speech the Prince made 25 years ago had huge ramifications for architecture and individual architects. He opened a national debate on modern architecture which struck a chord with the public mood. It may well happen again this time around.

Broad and mainstream interest in architecture is greater than it has ever been. Many architects are concerned with community-led planning and make it their business to be concerned with the issue of climate change. In that, at least, there is common ground with the Prince. And his charge against mediocrity has over the last two decades been dismissed in the shape, variety and excitement of buildings which have emerged.

To avoid the embarrassment of empty chairs tomorrow - though I doubt Mssrs Ahrends and co will succeed in persuading everyone to boycott - surely RIBA should re-cast the event, not as a lecture, but as a genuine debate between Prince Charles and his supporters and his detractors.

I'd queue to hear that.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

Is music compatible with Islam?

This is a question which has concerned the artist formerly known as Cat Stevens for some time. When he decided to convert to Islam in 1977, he changed his name to Yusuf Islam and turned his back on music - pop music in particular.

Only recently has he toyed with songwriting again, mainly instrumental pieces and music for children (A is for Allah), having devoted the last three decades of his life to education and humanitarian work. After dipping his toes into album-making three years ago, with An Other Cup, he has now made the decision to sign a contract with his old record label, Island, and release an album, Roadsinger, which sees a return to his gentle, melodic glory days.

We spoke earlier this week, and I asked him about his relationship with music in the context of his faith. He replied that music was not right for him when he converted, not least because he had been embroiled in a world of sex, drugs and rock and roll. But he appears completely comfortable with making pop music now, and may even be going back to touring.

There have been Muslim scholars who have said that music is forbidden both by the Koran and by the Hadith. And we are well aware of the manifestation of extreme interpretations of this, in the shape of the Taliban. But Yusuf - as he is now known - has taken what he describes as an "open view" on music and the Koran.

"I have music in me and the joy is to share it", he told me. It isn't surprising that his new album sounds a lot like his 1970s material. He hasn't listened to anything for decades and regards himself as a "musical pod, buried for a long time and now opened up and discovering treasures like they were yesterday".

One of the songs (only available as a bonus track if you order the album online) is about the time he was prevented from entering the United States, suspected of being a terrorist. It was a case of mistaken identity, which he lampoons in the song, Boots and Sand (also featuring Dolly Parton and Paul McCartney).

As a high profile British Muslim, he was, by his own admission, chosen as a mascot for various organisations and marched out at conventions. Now, though, he wants to go back to what he knows best: Writing and performing songs... and thinking.

Yusuf, the pop star, may reach a whole new audience in a completely different way.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

For all the fevered speculation surrounding the post, the name of the new Poet Laureate has been a rather badly kept secret.

Carol Ann Duffy is one of the most significant names in contemporary poetry. Much will be made of the fact that she is the first woman in the post. Let's just acknowledge that and move on.

What should be shouted from the rooftops is that she is a fabulously interesting, exciting and more importantly, original poet. She has achieved that rare distinction of being a critical and a commercial success.

That she already starts from a base of popularity amongst lay readers and crucially, amongst school children, will give her a massive advantage in a role which in the 21st century, should be more about advocacy than marking minor moments in the lives of the Royal family or the state

Above all, I would like to see her surprise us. And on the day she takes up her post she already has. She will give the annual £5,750 stipend that comes with the job to the Poetry Society for a poetry prize.

What are your favourite Carol Ann Duffy poems? What would you like to see her do with the role?

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• NowPublic |
• Reddit
• - What's this?