School Of Saatchi : Feedback

Personally I didn't like School Of Saatchi.

I believe it was more focused on modern contemporary art than r

ejoicing in the talent of some of the other artists, who painted in the style of the realists and painted things as they saw them.

I believe some of the finalists simply put objects together in the hope that they formed a meaning or an abstract way of thinking.

For example; Eugenie Scrase. For the first piece of work they exhibited for Saatchi, she hung a whistle onto a bathroom handle then fixed it to the wall.

When the judges walked around to look at the pieces of art and ask questions about them, Tracey Emin asked about it's meaning and connotations.

"She explains the handle because she likes handles, things you can grab, its physical. The whistle hanging is also at

a "grabbable" distance, she explains."

There is also lipstick on the whistle, to which the judges decided there is all in all a lot of sexual connotations in this work.

I believe the judges put the sexual connotations and rawness into Eugenie's mind as when she was asked if that is what she was aiming for, she simply said yes.

The judges put those ideas into her mind, and i believe that she didnt choose to go in the sexual direction, as to a physical interaction with art.

Eugenie went on to win the competition with this:

And apparently she's meant to be studying at the Slade School of Fine Art.

Believe me, i'm not necessarily one to dismiss modern art, but i only appreciate it when thought and meaning has been put into the work as opposed to finding a tree trunk had fallen onto a fence and asking the owner if i could possibly take this as my work; which Eugenie did.

In my art class, we have to delve into meaning and really search for what it is we want to show in our artwork.

You have to think long and hard and come to a conclusion that is new and fresh to the art scene, as many things have been re-interpreted before.

It makes me angry when a student who studies at art school is chosen to win the competition.

IT gives a horrible distorted view of what art student are actually about. It's not just putting paint to paper, or creating a sculpture from whatever rubbish you find, it'd finding new meanings and creating something to exhibit and for people to enjoy.

As the public said in Hastings, they prefer 'normal' art. I'm not dismissing modern art, but people should really think what art is, and to appreciate art with understanding and to think about why it has been created.

And students, to create something to be proud of, that you've put effort in to create meaning and thought.

Overall, i believe the series displayed art in a disappointing light. There are so many great artists who use skill to form amazing works of creativity, whereas all art seems to be defined today, is as objects that can be thrown today in any structure and labelled as art, using no creative talent or understanding.