http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html en-gb 30 Tue 29 Dec 2009 13:33:39 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=18#comment9 So I filled in this online form for the BBC/Saatchi Best of British competition knowing that I would have to give my home address to enter. I made a change to my name so that when the product/service spam started to come through my letter box I would know where it came from. It arrived a few days ago via a TV celeb who's opening a facility near to where I live. HA think I'll continue walking - save a load of dosh. So that's the Best of British is it. Cant say 100% where it came from but I feel fairly sure. Wed 06 May 2009 11:18:10 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=16#comment8 Actually No 7 (may I call you Mike?) there is a lovely line in Absolutely Fabulous where Patsy turns to Edina and says "But is it art Eddy? The whole thing was a piss take, of course, of modern art, but it is a legitimate question. Who exactly determines if it is art or not?When the US became the leading world power after the second world war part of the spoils of victory was to determine what is art. Clement Greenberg was the high priest of all this until he dissed Andy Warhol and a severe bear market in his personal stock ensued.Since then US cultural imperialism has thrown up quite a lot of good stuff such as Rothko. You personally might not get it but it us undoubtedly great art and recognised as such.If the current financial crisis means that the world is shifting on its axis yet again then who knows maybe great art will be Chinese and western art will enjoy its own severe bear market much as Russian constructivist art has since the collapse of the Soviet Empire.You might not like this stuff Razia describes but it does have merit - and a lot more than the third rate nineteenth century impressionist art by Russian painters that was fetching absurdly high prices in London even quite recently although that bubble has now burst.Human beings are not perfect and quite easily fall into attaching too much value to things such as tulip bulbs. That is just the way things are and the way that they always will be. Just chill and enjoy what you can would be my advice. No point in railing against it, although I do entirely understand the way you see things and why you have come to your conclusions.As invitigarta points out these young ladies are rich, cultivated and Ivy League. But so what? So many young rich, cultivated, Ivy League women throw their energies into investment banking these days. What would you prefer that they do? Dissing peoples' energy just because they are rich and well connected can come across as being the politics of envy and that is to my mind, at least, quite a slippery slope. But what do I know anyway? It is just nice to see Razia's blog firing up with some real debate! Thu 05 Mar 2009 16:21:04 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=14#comment7 From your article, I fail to see how "Russia is leading the charge" in contemporary art. Perhaps Russia is leading the charge in rich young, ambitious, Ivy-League-educated people interesting in acquiring cultural capital, but that is far from what the title suggests, which is that Russia is spearheading some kind of Renaissance. Thu 05 Mar 2009 15:57:41 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=12#comment6 Am I a Philistine or is it that the contemporary art market is yet another speculative bubble just waiting to burst? The test of time is the real measure of the value or otherwise of art. Are today's "geniuses" to be confined to the dustbin of history, forgotten even within their own lifetimes? Most probably YES! Thu 05 Mar 2009 09:51:45 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=10#comment5 Actually I should have added on the subject of spam, Mr Duff, you should click on to Nick Robinson's blog where you will find, rather good I think, stand up for Evan Davis on the subject of another odious bore - Health Secretary Alan Johnson - eating deep fried spam fritters for breakfast. It's the one before Our Gord got up on his hind legs in Congress. Our Gord in congress, sexual or otherwise. Now there's a thought to ponder on this fine morning Mr Duff. Best wishes from your odious spam loving friend and fellow blogger thatotherguy2PS Still friends I hope Thu 05 Mar 2009 09:27:43 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=8#comment4 re billy_carryduffA reaction! How sweet of you to write. A self serving odious bore? What fun! At least you have been paying attention to the drivel and have formed an opinion in print. One does wonder sometime whether anyone actually reads this stuff. Actually I have had a look at Mark Mardell's blog but, as you say, it is incredibly tedious. Much like his TV reporting. I can never make head nor tail about what he is going on about. Anyone else willing to take a pop at me? It could be such fun.....or am I being attention seeking and self serving again. Perhaps Mr Duff can tell us. Thu 05 Mar 2009 09:22:15 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=6#comment3 @ streetphotobeing mmnn yes indeed :)@ thatotherspamguy2you are a crashing and odious bore. your posts are little more than spam. no one is interested, no one is impressed. may i direct you to mark mardell's euro blog, the natural environment for contributors of self serving drivel. Thu 05 Mar 2009 08:14:40 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=4#comment2 I can quite understand why you would refer my posting with the lyrics to Lincoln City's Clover and The Duke to the moderators Razia literally within minutes of the post. But it does, does it not tell us that art for art sake only goes so far. Powerful words knocking the establishment status quo are really just not to be tolerated are they? It always amuses me that academics who pore over the lives of radicals and revere them so in print would run a mile if they came across one of them socially today, be it Burns, Byron or whoever. We need to reflect on our own double standards and hypocrisy, hoping along the way that our artists never cease to take issue with it both in images AND in words. Wed 04 Mar 2009 17:01:48 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=2#comment1 Who ever is the new name to give value is just that, a name, its the system that's the problem.The fine art world has more in common with affinity fraud than any objective assessment of art. So strong is the feudal nature of this world that there are those who only believe there is subjective judgment. You have a situation where a small but powerful group of curators and collectors are able to pick up and give mega value to which ever artists they chose to trumpet. This power to give value trickles down and everyone else steps into line including the artists who's sole concern is their career, they challenge nothing. The wannabes have their value as well - to the wealthy art people, scammers, exploitative TV and other art people "on the make" - reality shows, pay to enter competitions and the like, usually with their own little ego trip power game along the way - the equivalent to making people jump through hoops which usually amounts to some form of humiliation so the judges can get their rocks off.If the fine art photo world is anything to go by its mega bland un-challenging stuff that mostly uses 19th Century methods to produce high level image quality but is chained up and bound by a technique that demands a specific method of articulation which doesn't allow a progression of making the image - you have to use a tripod to use a 10x8 camera. Its only in scanning and processing that improvement has happened, I say improvement and not innovation because the concept and use of layering photo images to produce a single image happened in the 19th Century. Layers are what make Photoshop a powerful imaging application.In terms of the art market as far as I know there is no regulation. I would guess its wide open for corruption. Wed 04 Mar 2009 15:46:19 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/raziaiqbal/2009/03/russia_leads_contemporary_art.html?page=0#comment0 Fuddy duddy Sandy McCall Smith in the Wealth: First Million slot in Saturday's FT was opinioning that the contemporary art market is a bubble waiting to burst. I would imagine that dear old Sandy will be harruphing all the way to his local Tesco Metro (which he shares with Jo Rowling, Ian Rankin, and Alistair Darling) to stock up on good claret to celebrate when his prophecy comes true. But I personally take my hat off to both ladies. It shows imagination, promise and, I think, a breath of fresh air from a new generation.What I most like about going out to The Jazz Bar in Edinburgh is the sheer absence of baby boomers. Like Sandy no doubt they are tucked up in bed with a nice glass of hot chocolate and a hot water bottle gazing lovingly at an old master or some sentimental Victorian painting on the wallI can't see dear old Sandy hot footing it to Moscow for this show. But I certainly wish that I could be there. Good luck to all involved, artists, organisers and the talented art entrepreneurs. Wed 04 Mar 2009 13:14:09 GMT+1