Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To me David Hockney is a truly inspirational artist and after my first Hockney exhibition (many many moons ago) the way I saw landscapes was changed forever.


I suddenly remembered at the weekend that I hadn't yet got my tickets for the Hockney Royal Academy exhibition. To my horror, when I went to book I found that almost every date and time slot was sold out. I managed to get tickets for Easter weekend but only just.


If, like me, you'd been meaning to book but hadn't quite got around to it, then can I urge you to click on this link and book whatever you can get. Don't let it be the one that got away.


http://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhibitions/hockney/

Went a couple of weeks ago I thought it was good he is a clever painter.

I particularly likd what he'd done with the video screens, though had to watch a while to get it.

The stuff done on iPads was good, then I realised it was done on iPads.

Clever bastad.

Went to the Hockney last Thursday. Very impressive. Too much work to be honest; it could have done with a serious edit. However, amid all that vibrant colour, expressive handling and luxurious paint, the best things were the smaller charcoal drawings. Wow, the man can draw.
No Sue, it's based upon the quality of what you get for your money. Whilst I feel for peoples personal circumstances these are never going to be the overriding factor in setting a price for a major exhibition, which they could easily have priced significantly higher, but instead the RA have set a price that is within reach of as many people as possible. Surely.

I wasn't referring to the value or otherwise of the ticket price, I was referring to your statement that it "seems pretty cheap."


I meant, to a lot of people including myself, ?15 isn't "cheap", regardless of how great value for money it might be.


If I misunderstood what you meant, then apologies.

Sue - I dont think its possible to say something is cheap without taking into account what you are getting in return. To me cheap means inexpensive, and value for money. And having been there last night I thought it was excellent value for money, therefore cheap.


I think Brian Sewell is complaining more about a charity charging for entry. But who knows he just seems to want to have a general whinge about the whole exhibition.




This exhibition is at the Royal Academy because it will bring in a multitude of punters and, with the outrageous admission price of ?14, mightily increase the profits of the grand old whore of Piccadilly, masquerading as a charity.


In old age [Hockney is 74] he has acquired a clumsy bravura and he strokes, stabs and dabs the canvas with seeming confidence, but in truth much of this is the stuff of habitual gesture, of industry, repetitive, for he knows no other way of covering such an acreage of canvas. He is surrounded by sycophants, none of whom has the honesty to tell him what he needs to know - that he has fallen far from the saturated brilliance of his last brief fling with quality, the Grand Canyon drawings and paintings of 1998 or so, one of which acts as a benchmark in the scene-setting first room of the exhibition; no one has warned him that in dogged repetition what fire he once had has become a thing of ash and ember; and no one has dared suggest that though all the cocksure recent stuff dashed off for the exhibition works well as braggadocio, it is ultimately dull.


Indeed, half these pictures are fit only for the railings of Green Park, across the way from the Royal Academy, and would never be accepted for the Summer Exhibition were they sent in under pseudonyms.


As for Hockney's rivalry with his master, Claude, this is sickening impertinence, contemptible.


Hockney is not another Turner expressing, in high seriousness, his debt to the old master; Hockney is not another Picasso teasing Vel?zquez and Delacroix with not quite enough wit; here Hockney is a vulgar prankster, trivialising not only a painting that he is incapable of understanding and could never execute, but in involving him in the various parodies, demeaning Picasso too

Probably a designer dress at ?5k or whatever may be considered "value for money" by some people.


That doesn't make it "cheap".


To say ?15 is "cheap" is coming from the perspective of somebody who isn't on a very small income.


I run music gigs, and we give a 33% discount to people who are unwaged, even though we generally have to pay the musicians a lot of money.


It would be nice if galleries did the same. Some of them do.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...