Last year they had Grayson Perry’s sexed-up pots and the Chapmans’ graffiti-covered Goya etchings as an antidote to the more overtly “serious” art of Anya Gallacio and Willie Doherty. This year the overwhelming impression is “yawn, politics, yawn”. The artist Tacita Dean said: “It’ll even put insomniacs out.” Brian Sewell was equally caustic: “This exhibition is tedious to an extreme.” And our own Rachel Campbell-Johnston pronounced: “It scores points for topicality but is as visually striking as a Strasbourg conference of ministers.”
The Turner Prize offers the only real chance of an annual cultural debate outside art’s elite circles. Last year’s show attracted 100,000 visitors, so we decided to take our own critical jury to the exhibition, and who better to judge than that most hard-to-please of audiences, a group of mobile-toting teenagers? Apple Orchard School, Surrey, and Bishop Ramsey School, Middlesex, kindly provided our team of teen critics.
To begin with Apple Orchard were more interested in showing off their drawings of sports cars than discussing the unusually political shortlist. Bishop Ramsey College had no idea what the Turner Prize was, and some of them had already been in — and out. “I just did it in five minutes,” said Phillip Newham, 17, “I’m really worried, as we’re meant to be here for an hour.” By the end there had been a few epiphanies and only a few yawns. Louise Perugia, 16, summed it up best, “The show’s good but you need an explanation for everything.” Here’s what our young jury had to say as we followed them around the exhibition.
Jeremy Deller
“I’m not making the big painting or something ‘new’ . . . I’m more interested in living things than inert lumps of whatever. I try to connect things up.”
Rachel Campbell-Johnston on Deller: “I would like Deller to be awarded the prize. Culture, he tries to assure us, is truly demotic. His art is off the wall.”
TEEN VERDICT: “A WASTE OF SPACE”
Deborah Tomlin-Taylor, 16: “This is a total waste of space. Is that scribble (Deller’s The History of the World, a wall flow-chart linking acid house to brass bands) meant to be an artwork? None of this looks like he put much effort into it. I like paintings that you can stare at for hours and get totally absorbed in. You can’t get that from a photo of a bus.”
Louise Perugia, 16: “It’s not conventional art, so you have to be interested in the subjects he’s presenting, but I like the comparisons and links he makes. I think some of themes are too specific. What’s acid house, for example? I don’t want to have to pick up the books he’s provided to figure it out but I am interested in other people’s lives and past histories.”
Phillip Newham, 17: “You have to put a lot of effort into thinking about his work, and people don’t have time to do that in this day and age. I just want something that moves me. He focuses on serious events but a bunch of photos and couple of videos doesn’t do it justice, there’s no real excitement here. Having said that, I like his stuff the best.”
Daniel Thompson, 16: “If you want to write a book, be an author. Anyone could write ideas on a wall. You can say, but could everyone have those ideas? I’d say yes, if they spent enough time in the library. Even if I knew all the background to all of Deller’s work, it still doesn’t seem of interest. It’s just like a history lesson.”
Raquelli Zohar, 17: “He plays around with things and that’s art, making things happen. You need to have a personality to do that more than anything else, that’s what makes him intriguing.”
Kutlug Ataman
“In art you can pretty much do what you want. My art is concerned with showing that all reality has that fictive quality, that we should be suspicious of what is called ‘reality’.”
Rachel Campbell-Johnston: “Why, when there are hundreds of artists who could shoot impossibly long video pieces in which almost nothing happens, choose him?”
TEEN VERDICT: “WHAT MAKES THIS ART?”
Ashley, 17: “This is what art is meant to be about. The chance to express things that other people feel but never have the chance to express.”
Aaron, 16: “These people are getting stuff off their plate. Their beliefs are strange but it’s important to be reminded that it’s OK to have more than one belief. This really inspires me to speak up more. Look around the room, no one’s laughing, they’re all listening.”
Bea Hammond, 17: “This is just social documentary. There’s nothing you couldn’t find on TV or in a magazine. It’s just using reality as is, rather than taking it and trying to make something new.”
Adam, 16: “I like this the best. It’s strange — you’ve got people saying stuff like, ‘I felt the coldness of my grave’. But it’s really coming from the heart. It could be strange to some people, but to the speakers it’s completely normal. That’s what art is for, remembering the differences.”
Raquelli Zohar, 17: “I believe in reincarnation. It’s not a Western idea so it’s amazing to see people here listening to these first-hand accounts. It’s also well exhibited. You want to know how he’s hung the screens. It’s technically impressive, in the same way that a good master painting is well executed.”
Deborah Tomlin-Taylor, 16: “In this work you have 12 people who believe they have been reincarnated. I am interested in each of them but I don’t get what makes this art. It’s clever the way the films are shown, but still, he could put it on TV not in an exhibition. I suppose it’s clever that he doesn’t tell you what’s going on. You really believe they’ve been reborn. It’s skilful but not art. It’s not really documentary either. I don’t know what it is.”
Langlands & Bell
“We’re interested in people’s intentions and ideas . . . the bigger picture. We won’t ram Afghanistan down people’s throats. But we do want people to learn something about existing structures.”
Rachel Campbell-Johnston: “You could have learnt as much from a house makeover programme: a tour of bin Laden’s hideout feels like an estate agent’s digital survey.”
TEEN VERDICT: “IRRITATING”
Philip Newham, 17: “I thought the computer game (The House of Osama bin Laden, 2003, a virtual model of bin Laden’s home) was a shoot-’em-up at first and then realised whose house it was. That gave me a shock. It gets boring though. You need to do more than just climb walls. Overall though, I liked how they’d dealt with important issues. They present a side not allowed on the news — it’s more expressive.”
Deborah Tomlin-Taylor, 16: “I thought their art was interesting. It’s an unusual way of documenting what happened after the Afghanistan War, but the novelty of how they present their ideas wears off quickly. It’s clever but not very artistic.”
Aaron, 16: “It’s irritating because the buttons don’t do anything on the game, I just want to find Osama and shoot him. And what’s the light piece (Frozen Sky, 1999, featuring acronyms of international airports) about? JFK. LHR. No idea. I come from Essex.”
Raquelli Zohar, 17: “I’m from Israel and in Western society people don’t understand why bin Laden bombed the twin towers. A building is a symbol and it’s something people believe in. I think it works comparing the two symbols, bin Laden’s house and by implication the twin towers. It’s a strong point.”
Bea Hammond, 17: “I liked this the best. The game brings up an important issue — that young people today are apathetic about events in foreign countries. It’s very stark. You could see kids getting frustrated with no one to shoot.”
Yinka Shonibare
“I want to challenge people’s perceptions of history. I want to take the legacy of ‘clearing up’ that you find in Modernism and re-introduce pattern and ornament.”
Rachel Campbell-Johnston: “His work is humorous and challenging of authority, it questions cultural stereotypes. It’s also about cultural collisions.”
TEEN VERDICT: “LIKE A FAIRYTALE”
Jonathan Wright, 16: “There’s lots of movement and colour, it’s like a fairytale. I like how he’s playing with African culture and art history. I can relate to this, the others are too distant. But it annoys me that his sculpture doesn’t have a head.”
Daniel Thompson, 16: “This is more art to me than the others. I still don’t like it.”
Bea Hammond, 17: “It wasn’t as subtle as I expected. The symbols were all too obvious. He’s dealing with interesting issues but you don’t have to think about it too much.”
Louise Perugia, 16: “I love the colours and different textures. You need a lot of imagination to enjoy his work. He knows how to present things so you want to stay and look.”
Adam, 16: “I like the mixture of African fabric and paint. I also like how the fabrics have everyday things on them like the Mercedes sign and shoes. There’s one over there that looks like crisps. It’s a relief to see everyday things among all this strangeness. The film’s a nut show!”
Deborah Tomlin-Taylor, 16: “I don’t like it but it is the most artistic. I want him to win. He’s the best of a bad bunch.”
Raquelli Zohar, 17: “His stuff is beautiful and art should be pleasing to the senses, otherwise you might as well go to a lecture. It’s a complex idea of the meeting of cultures, identity and nationality. I like the whole show. It questions what art is all about, and that’s why the prize is interesting. But I’d like Yinka to win. However, I don’t think any one of them should win £40,000. I don’t think anyone deserves £40,000. Do they need all that money to make the points they’re making?”
