The mayor of a town in Malta has called for a "phallic" sculpture displayed close to the main airport to be removed ahead of the Pope's visit this weekend.

Mayor John Schembri described the art work as "vulgar" and "embarrassing", saying it should go "as a sign of respect" for Pope Benedict XVI.

Colonna Mediterranea was created by artist Paul Vella Critien and has been on show in the town of Luqa since 2006.

Mr Critien responded by calling his critics "ignorant" and "uneducated".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8617305.stm

--------------------

Gus: art imitating life, possibly a phallic symbol ahead of its time for the blue people of "Avatar"...

forgeries

A collection of paintings that have caused art aficionados to turn a deep shade of purple and have provoked upset and anger throughout the art world are to go on show.

The forged works include a fake Botticelli, which was bought for a higher price than a genuine work by the artist sold at the same time. A gallery director almost had to resign because of another one, a fake Holbein.

In an unprecedented spirit of public transparency (and perverse pride), the National Gallery in central London is dusting down its holdings of forged paintings, accidentally bought as genuine works, supposedly by Botticelli, Holbein and Durer, among others, and showing them off to the public.

--------------------------

Gus: forgeries, copies, adaptations, rehash, new coat of paint isn't a new phenomenon... I would say that many artists could become great forgers if they were paid enough money... But evolved art is not about copying. It is about showing new ideas, and it does not have to be rude or offensive. Mind you there are very few NEW ideas left to be expressed, including the concept of non-expression.

From John McDonald at Uunleashed —

...

The Trustees of the Art Gallery of NSW did not demonstrate any knowledge of Leach's oeuvre when they awarded him this year's Wynne Prize. Neither did they show much understanding of art history, as the picture was self-evidently based on an old master landscape. Finally, and most importantly, they completely disregarded their own rules, which stipulate "Australian scenery".

Nobody expects the Trustees to recognise a work by Adam Pynacker, or even to know much about Sam Leach. But with two artists on the eleven-person committee - Lindy Lee and John Beard - there is no excuse for missing the art historical reference. Judging by the responses in the newspapers, the Trustees did not miss the Dutch overtones, they simply pushed on without feeling the need to check anything with the artist.

The only excuse offered is that they "didn't have time", which is nonsense, as anyone who has ever judged an art prize knows. Should there be the slightest doubt it is easy to make a phone call and ask a few questions.

For the most part, Capon and his Trustees have not been in the mood to offer excuses. They simply deny there is any problem. It's not an embarrassment. It's a great little picture. "So what?" was Capon's first response. According to Lindy Lee, the work's relationship to Dutch art "wasn't particularly an issue."

These cavalier responses do not address the fact that the work is palpably not an Australian landscape. The best that Sam Leach might say in his defense is that the little stars he has added to the sky are Australian stars, which would be stretching the definition of "Australian scenery". So far, the artist has simply said it is "an imaginary landscape".

...

The art dealer Martin Browne has written to the Trustees demanding that Leach's work be withdrawn from the exhibition on the grounds that it does not meet the published entry criteria. Will this have any effect? So far, the controversy has been a publicity windfall for the AGNSW, and a succes-de-scandale for the artist. The Trustees appear to be in denial and willing to ride out the storm. They do not seem to be unduly worried about perceptions of arrogance and stubbornness, or the suggestion that they can rearrange the rules to suit themselves.

This episode has made a mockery of the prize in a year when it looked stronger than it has on the past few occasions, with plenty of other entries that might have been considered, notably those by Kevin Connor and Philip Wolfhagen. The Trustees' decision sets a dismal precedent for all future Wynne Prizes because it suggests that a winning entry need not be an Australian landscape, and can even be a copy of someone else's work. The fine line between a copy and a quotation is invisible to most people. Let's hope it doesn't require lawyers to make this distinction.

--------------------------

Gus: the trusteeeees can't be trusteeeeed.... see picture at top and Gus' comment below it..

The board said today that central to its debate was "the legitimacy of 'appropriation' in the contemporary art world and its ramifications on such an award as the Wynne Prize". But while the trustees noted Leach's painting had the "light and air" of a Dutch 17th-century landscape, they also recognised "its quality and its mysterious implications of the natural world".

"In that sense it is an idealised landscape, one where time and place are indistinct."

Leach's Sydney representatives, Sullivan + Strumpf Fine Art, said the trustees' decision to uphold the award "has been gratefully received by the artist and his many supporters in the arts community".

The trustee and artist John Beard said the board's decision was unanimous and a very satisfactory result.

The board said it agreed that "what might constitute an Australian landscape was a matter of interpretation and had changed enormously since the Wynne Prize was first awarded in 1897".

---------------------

Gus: in other words, the board has no knowledge of art, no knowledge of "Australian" landscape, no understanding of the bastardry of robbery, does not have a calendar, and has no idea about the meaning of "interpretation"... The members of the board should go and fiddle with themselves... while the artist, as good as he is with his triple zero brushes, should hang humble amongst his peers... May be, should he wish to keep the title, he should give the prize money to struggling artists who painted Australia without the bullshit of "mysterious implications of the natural world" while mimicking a Dutch artist dreaming of mountains while seeing windmills...

The Tim Olsen Gallery has cancelled the Ben Ali Ong exhibition 1000 Years Beside Myself after a story in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald revealed the artist had used pictures taken by others for artworks under his name.
Following the publication of the story, the Tim Olsen Gallery emailed journalists about 5.30pm yesterday, with an announcement that the show was cancelled.
"Due to the circumstances presented in today's Sydney Morning Herald, regrettably and with sensitive consideration, we have cancelled the Ben Ali Ong exhibition," the email said.The announcement concluded by saying that anyone with inquiries about Ong's work could contact him directly on his email address.


Ben Ali Ong has held a dozen solo exhibitions in the past five years and made the finals in leading prizes such as the Moran photographic, the Blake and the Head On.The exhibition, which was due to open at the Woollahra gallery on Wednesday, consisted of atmospheric black-and-white photographs, which were typically priced at $2400 each.


But it had emerged that at least two of the Singapore-born artist's works bear remarkable likenesses to stock images for sale through photo agencies.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/artists-wings-clipped-after-herald-expose-20120902-257xh.html#ixzz25GfIv97u