Pip's Art Projects: John Moores Painting Prize... The Oscars Of Painting??

At the beginning of the year I visited the John Moores Exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery and I must say I felt a bit scandalized by the winner. I wanted to know why this painting had won such a presigous award, and so when we were asked to do a literature review for our LSA2003 module I decided to vent my anger by doing a little bit of research.

I really enjoyed what I learned and just wanted to share this with you too.

‘Spectrum Jesus’ by Keith Coventry was the 2010 John Moores Painting Prize winner. The piece depicts the face of Jesus Christ. Coventry, who was inspired by the art forgeries Han Van Meegeren produced of master Johannes Vermeer, has in turn taken Meegeren’s ‘Christ’ and forged it in the style of German Expressionist Emil Nolde. This renewed image ‘offers subtle contemplation on the notion of the original and the copy’ – Stephen Deuchair (director of the art fund). Although the contemporary piece does have similarities to the original in composition and choice of subject, in my view other aspects such as palette and quantity, and thus meaning have changed.

Spectrum Jesus is just one of a group of around forty images from Coventry’s ‘Repressionism series’. The works were originally intended to be viewed as an installation depicting Christ in the form of a spectrum. Coventry embraces “the literal idea of Christ as 'I am the light'”, and maintains that “the display of these paintings in a row is a way of showing that element." Coventry claims that the main element he admired inVan Meegeren's fake Vermeer was its expressionist quality, yet felt unable to capture “that kind of spiritual look.” He therefore decided against expressionism, “to go for an idea that I have called 'repressionism', meaning that, as I worked on each of the canvases, bringing the tones closer together, eventually all the expressiveness of each one would be completely wiped out, leaving little except the texture of the paint." Both these statements speak of the work as a whole but for practical reasons the installation could not be exhibited in its entirety. However, analysing just one piece out of context we cannot evaluate the work in such a way. In my opinion, the rest of the work is undone and the singled out piece affects us in a different manner to that originally intended. We find ourselves looking more closely at the brush strokes and aspects such as the reflective glass for extra meaning.

The reflections of the glass give an added dimension to the piece. Coventry’s work often shows an interest in the dark flipside of idealism; urban decay, social failure, drug abuse and alienation. The reflections are said to ‘slow the experience down’ which allows the viewer to take in the image. I feel there is an added dimension of the viewer seeing his own reflection in the glass and therefore seeing himself within the image alongside Christ. In my view, associating a religious icon with such negative contemporary themes may be a judgement on society. This may allude to the loss of morality in modern day life or possibly the loss of spirituality.

I agree that the piece, when viewed as a whole series, has achieved meanings on many different intellectual levels. However, when the single frame is separated from the series it loses its impact.

In conclusion a painting that relies so much on external props for its relevance - the reflective glass in front of it and its inclusion in an installation – cannot be judged as a painting in the purist sense. Moreover I question whether an exhibition, described by some as ‘the Oscars of painting’, should so readily accept recycled art.