7th October, 2004

Suicide artwork was not interactive!

Busy couple of weeks? Well, yeah. Not sure where to start really. There’s been controversy, hedonism, speculation, derision, joy, fatigue - the usual. I’ll share a little of this with you. Let’s start with our efforts to encourage suicide amongst emotionally fragile people.

Suicide cover

Oops! No - that’s not what we were doing with the You Are Here Festival, although the front cover of Monday’s Nottingham Evening Post would have you believe differently. This piece of malicious, ill-though-out, one-sided and lazy journalism sought - across the cover and three pages, and backed with equally damning editorial - to ruin our festival the day after it closed. Even a freelancer’s review was chopped and re-headlined to fall in with the editor’s vitriol.

Basically, one artwork amidst thirty or forty was deemed a “sick and irresponsible stunt” by the newspaper, with the offending journo seeking out the grieving parents of a suicide victim, the local Coroner, and the Police for anti-art commentary and week argument against an artwork we selected for the festival. Yes, the artwork was about suicide, but was objective, thought-provoking, and sought not to glamourise or promote it as a sensible option. Suddenly, art is responsible for suicide amongst young people. I’ll let you make your own minds up about the ideas behind the work, and would ask you to read our official statement in response to the fucking stupid article which the paper published yesterday - too little too late, but at least we got to say our piece.

Best quote from the article came from the Arts Council of England:

“The [suicide artwork] should be viewed objectively, and is not intended to be interactive.”

Ha-ha! Priceless support from the funders there. We’ve got a few allies over at The Post (who have supported us in the past), and we are told that the editor and the gimp who penned the article were rubbing their hands with glee sitting on the story. Bloody children. The paper has vilified a number of artists and artworks over the past few years, typically branding such costly, confusing or controversial material as anything from “rubbish” to a “waste of public money”. One artist (our city’s number one, and world-famous installation artist) was almost ruined by the paper. Now, this lazy hack is suggesting that we shouldn’t receive any more funding for this annual event that makes a huge difference to the community, and helps advance the careers of many artists and curators.

The moral of the story? It’s either “Be careful who you trust”, or maybe “The Evening Post is a pathetic, dangerous rag written by mindless morons who couldn’t give a fuck about those they hurt in order to sell newspapers”. Still, I’m not bitter…

Aah. Feel better now. Aside from that, I launched a new website (details soon) in front of an audience of nearly 200 - which was nice, ran a workshop for almost fifty people, and neglected my blog for almost two weeks. So yes, been busy. If you’re pissed off about the neglect, imagine how my Mother, girlfriend, mates and cat feel about it.

Prev / Next


If you enjoyed this article, please subscribe to my Internet of Natural Things letter, and maybe grab the RSS feed. Thank you.