Rejected By High Art; Loved By The Public. Is
Jack Vettriano A Victim Of Art World Snobbery Or Is He Just A Bad Painter ?
This is a copy of my dissertation, the images referred to are not published here but a full list of those used in the dissertation are below.
CONTENTS
Page
1. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 3
2. INTRODUCTION 4
3. Chapter 1 FANTASY 6
4. Chapter 2 POPULAR 12
5. Chapter 3 REJECTION 17
6. Chapter 4 GOOD PAINTER, BAD PAINTER. 22
7. CONCLUSION 26
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY 27
List of Illustrations
Fig 1. Vettriano, Jack. The Singing Butler, 1992. Private Collection.
Fig 2. Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi Da. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, 1597. Doria Pamphilj
Gallery, Rome.
Fig 3. Vettriano, Jack. The Innocents, 1995. Private Collection.
Fig 4. Vettriano, Jack. The Billy Boys, 1994. Private Collection.
Fig 5. Constable, John. The Hay Wain, 1821. The National Gallery.
Fig 6. Canaletto, Giovanni Antonio Canal. Il Ponte Di Rialto Da Nord, Venezia, 1724.
Pinacoteca Del Lingotto Giovanni and Marello Agnelle, Turin.
Fig 7. Vettriano, Jack. Elergy For a Dead Admiral, 1994-1996. private collection.
Introduction
Some years back, approximately around the mid 2000's, whilst going about my daily life I would occasional catch a glimpse of what looked like movie poster art from the 50's, nice designs, beach scenes, glamorous socialites pouting over a long smoke, exotic classic cars, whimsical scenes from an unattainable imagined world, a jet set lifestyle only available to those with wealth. You would see the images on posters, on cards, in DIY stores as readymade canvas prints. The images would register fleetingly; a question mark would ping into my head: what is that all about? It’s nice, it’s escapism, but what's it all about? Then one day, I was watching breakfast TV on the BBC and the presenters introduced a painter, untrained, introducing him as one of the most successful painters of the time, having sold millions of prints, but despite that he was not accepted by the art establishment and, in enters Jack Vettriano the creator of the said images.
When I heard this introduction I took a little bit of an interest, after all I was interested in painting. Similarly to Vettriano, I was untrained, working class. He was making a sustainable living from it which, at the time, would have been one of my aspirations. What I learnt from the softly spoken Scotsman was that you can set yourself aspirations and make a living from those aspirational ambitions despite negativity from the supposed experts; the art world establishment. As a person that sufferers from a lack of confidence in my own abilities I was momentarily motivated by his success then, as normal, the real world takes over and thoughts of becoming a painter fade away, just as the unattainable daydreaming world depicted by Vettriano fades away.
Sitting here, half way through my degree in Fine Art, I realise that the seed of my motivation for being here may have been sown when I first saw that interview with Jack Vettriano. If you work hard enough you can achieve anything you want, despite the possibilities that the art establishment will disregard your work, despite the art snobbery that supposedly exists in the world, but being half way through the course, understandably, I can now question that theory, does this art snobbery exist?
During a lecture, one of Jack Vettriano's paintings was used as a comparison against an Edward Hooper piece. We were asked to scrutinise these paintings and as, in the past Vettriano's paintings were judged by some to be unworthy. If I remember correctly, it was described as vacuous nonsense. This annoyed me at the time because I didn’t see a meaningless painting; I saw a world of escapism, the working class dreaming of a better life, a lifestyle sold to us in publications such as the magazine Hello, it is a world of aspiration, an aspiration that, considering the timing of the start of Vettriano's success, could be the aspiration fuelled by Thatcherism.
In this investigation I will ask the following questions: is Jack Vettriano any good? Are his paintings vacuous nonsense? By examining his work further and by taking a closer look at Britain’s class sociology, is the art world’s dismissal of his work valid or just plain snobbery ?
Chapter One – Fantasy
Who is Jack Vettriano? On the face of it I can answer that in a couple of sentences. He is one of the most popular artists in Britain; his paintings sell for thousands. ‘The Singing Butler’ was voted by a poll commissioned by Samsung in July 2017 as the nation’s third favourite painting (McFee,R. 2017). When it last sold, it fetched over £700,000 (Seenan, G. 2004), a record for a Scottish painter. He has been honoured by the Queen with an OBE for services to the visual arts. Can he now be deemed a successful artist? Well, not quite, Vettriano is not a success when it comes to acceptance in the high art world. He is ridiculed by critics and high art institutions alike. Sandy Moffat, who up until 2005, was Head of print making and painting at the Glasgow School of Art said “He can’t paint, he just colours in” (Noval, E. 2018). To begin to try and answer the question posed by the title of this investigation I have to ask again, really, who is Jack Vettriano?
Born in 1951, Vettriano grew up in Scotland at a time when Britain was divided into social groups based on class. Although the dividing lines are not clearly distinguishable “Probably there would be about as much agreement that Britain in the late forties and early fifties could be divided up into a number of social classes, though there would also be much disagreement about how and where lines are drawn” (Marwick, A.1982. p17), our social environment affects who we are and what we become. At the time, in the fifties, sixties and seventies, the class system was based on history; a post industrial revolution society, a post WW1 & WW2 society and a “class (that) is shaped by history” (Marwick, A.1982. p18). Class also has a subjective element to it, “class has a very strong subjective element” (Marwick, A.1982. p18) based on how an individual see things around them, their education, what they read, what they listen to, it all builds a picture up of how we see ourselves. In Newmarket, where I’m from, it would have been gazing on in excitement, as race goers in glittering pastel shaded metallic masterpieces drove past, I would imagine being able to drive one of those cars, Rolls Royce, Bentley’s and Jaguar’s. The ladies wrapped in the latest fashions, sporting millinery art atop the perfect bouffant accompanied by starched up gentlemen, laughing; sipping champagne. These vision are another world. Visions of how the other half live, the glamorous elite, you see it in the movies; your imagination can run wild. In a fantasy world, imagination is allowed to run free, taken to its limits, visions of how other’s lives are, all very naive and materialistic of course. We all know the race day could be at the cost of a dreadful hangover and no winning bets, a disappointing day in reality, but what the imagination sees is excitement and glamour. The imaginer is not aware of the down side of a bad day at the races, the imaginer is in the world of escapism, a world invented to make a lesser place better, a place created in the imaginers mind as a defence against its real place in society. In some ways, it’s oblivious to the understanding of another element that defines class, our place in the world “we can quite unequivocally perceive areas of inequality in modern society: power, authority, wealth, income, job situation, material conditions, and cultural and lifestyles” (Marwick, A.1982. p18)
I relate in some ways to Jack Vettriano. I see this immediately watching a documentary titled “What Do Artists Do All Day?”. He gets up early to start work, he has a work ethic, one for hard work, he gets on with it, as a youth Vettriano may have had the same visions of escapism as I had, instead of race goers, his observed wind swept beaches, travel posters of sun kissed destinations, Saturday night dance halls, glamour imagined from the golden era of Hollywood, films made for the masses to lighten the load, lift the weight from the weary, brightening the dark days of the post war period, politically and socially a time of consensus, “consensus was laudable in respect of maintaining social harmony” (Marwick, A. 1982. p81). People accepted their lot as Britain dragged itself out of the post war gloom. I can only imagine, just as Vettriano can only imagine what a better life was, and imagine he does; he escapes.
Jack Vettriano started work as a miner at the age of 15 (Quinn, A. 2004. p8) and flitted from one job to another. He began painting at the age of 22 after a girlfriend gave him a set of watercolours for his birthday (Quinn, A. 2004. p9). Vettriano is a self-taught painter, learning from guide books, (Quinn, A. 2004. p9) he has never been to art school. At the age of 41 his life changed, after being told he was good at painting beaches, Vettriano created what has become one of his most famous pieces The Singing Butler.
Fig 1. (Vettriano, Jack, The Singing Butler, 1992, Private Collection.)
Being told you’re good at beaches is enough; if you love to create, it’s enough to carry on painting. As a youngster, I was told that I took good photographs, if you’re told that, you grasp at it, you carry on doing it, learning as you go, as it were, becoming better, more confident and eventually making a living, as I did. I became a self-taught professional photographer, whether I was any good is not a question to be answered here but it mirrors what Vettriano has achieved. Nobody taught him how or what to paint, he just paints, paints who he wants to be; he paints fantasies which are born from his imagination. An imagination fired from days gone by, seen through the eyes of a child, an adolescent, a young man and now a mature man. However, the question you have to ask is, just because what you do and enjoy showing, saying and doing is popular with the wider public, doesn’t mean it is any good. In the realm of fantasy art, where does The Singing Butler sit? Is it worthy of sitting in a gallery, next to a great masterpiece? Let’s examine how Vettriano’s fantasy stacks up against another, for example, and I recognise for some my example is not a fantasy but an imagination, but I as a person of no religion regard it as fantasy so, if I take Caravaggio’s Rest On The Flight into Egypt
Fig 2. (Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi Da, Rest on the Flight into Egypt, 1597, Doria Pamphilj Gallery, Rome.)
A painting I have stood in front of, an awe-inspiring visual delight; the detail is staggering. It’s a scene painted from the artist’s imagination that is a fantasy, it’s not a real scene, but it’s an imagination of a story based on 2000 years of Christian teaching. The figures are clearly defined, whether fictional or not we know who they are in the fantasy story, a painting that represents deeply embedded emotions and human ritual that prevails in western religious cultures, for some it could move them to tears.
Vettriano’s fantasy is his own fantasy, his imaginations, the characters in his painting are anonymous faceless figures but who are they ? Why are they on the beach? There are no answers to those questions; we don’t know, although I have attempted to understand where Vettriano’s paintings come from, they don’t come close in comparison to Caravaggio’s genius, The Singing Butler it’s a materialistic fantasy, so by definition it’s hollow and empty. Vettriano’s imagined world is that of a world dished up by the spectacle, a world of simulation, a world debated in Jean Baudrillard's book ‘Simulacra and Simulation’. Here’s a quote taken from the book and used in an article for the Guardian “the defining problem of the age since the 1970’s when he wrote that the Marxian problem of class struggle had been replaced, in the "post-industrial" era, with the problem of simulation” (Poole, S. 2007). A false reality served to simulate our fantasies, fantasies that get us all through the drudgery of existing at all, we all do it every day to fulfil our mind’s own materialistic ego’s and perversions, to justify our existence, we do it from the value of our taste. Vettriano paintings reflect the taste of what Gans’s describes as “low culture” (Gans, H. 1999. p115).
Fig 3. (Vettriano, Jack. The Innocents, 1993. Private Collection)
The Innocents painted in 1993 is a great example; it’s full of fantasy, simulation and spectacle. It’s a painting of a young couple sitting, the man looking off to his right, the girl resting her head on his shoulder; her eyes are closed. From the style of the fashion, it’s set in the 1950’s, they are sitting on a boardwalk in front of a building and the light of the piece is low. From the spectacle, it has a commercial value as it simulates all that is a perfect day; people want to buy into that. It does however have something unnerving. There are two figures in the background, one in the window and one behind the door. The painting is selling, what looks like, a ‘rose tinted’ moment; the end to a perfect day for a courting couple. The light suggests it’s the end of the day by its colour, an evening chill is apparent, the man has offered his jacket to the girl, it is wrapped around her shoulders, relaxed, her eyes closed she is in a good place, protected and warm. His look is one of expectancy, is he going to get lucky perhaps; is it time to go home? Nevertheless, it’s been a fulfilling day. The setting is fanciful, loosely similar to the spectacle of the Disney ideal, “Disneyland is a perfect model of all entangled orders of simulation (Baudrillard, J. 1988. p171), what I understand Baudrillard means here and what I refer to as the Disney ideal is layers of different realities bought together to imagine a hypo-reality, a fanciful perfect moment. A board walk suggests a seaside setting, colourful striped awning enhances that, perhaps they are in front of an ice cream parlour having just enjoyed a sweet thing, now closed, another indicator that it’s the end of the day. It’s all so cliché and wouldn’t look amiss as the backdrop to an ice cream advert, it simulates, it sells a fanciful moment, layers of separate realities married together.
Although Vettriano would deny it, what Vettriano has captured here is his fantasy. His longing for the perfect date, a likeness of Vettriano is in the window looking on, gazing on at the contented couple, fantasising that was him, with a young girl on his arm, but it’s a fantasy, the longing is closed to him, signified by the CL in the window, closed and the figure standing by the door is facing towards him, arms folded, its perhaps a sign of a barrier to finding love.
The Innocents is an early piece but it signifies all that Jack Vettriano is and continues to be today. According to the artist himself “ the things that move me have been in front of me all my life, they’re called women” (Camden, C. 2013. min 2.26). He has his adoration of women, I think he loves the power women have over men, he’s an escapist and fantasist, controversially a voyeur perhaps. This is what he loves to paint, in reality a love he possible doesn’t have or enjoy, a fantastical view of a world born out of illusion, but is this a valid base to achieve success in a high art world? The answer is no; based on the narrative and context of his paintings, I can see why his exclusion continues. The work lacks depth and contains the fantasy of just one man, Jack Vettriano.
Chapter Two – Popular
In this chapter, I have put Vettriano’s popularity down to the art tastes prevalent in two of the taste cultures that exist today in modern Britain. It is important to explain where I get the sociology of class for my assumptions from, of how a certain culture taste buys into a certain type of art. In Herbert Gans book Popular Culture & High Culture he talks about American 20th century culture; it is relevant to western culture and our British culture. He examines the difference in people’s tastes and culture according to their level in society, education and wealth, what they watch on TV, what they listen to musically, what they read, what art they like. Where I use the term class, he uses the term public. He describes five different publics and cultures as “high culture, upper middle class culture, lower middle class culture, low culture and quasi-folk low culture”(Gans, H. 1999. p95). The two classes I describe as liking Vettriano’s work, lower middle class and working class come under his descriptions as lower middle class culture and low culture, in art terms he describes lower middle class culture taste as liking mass reproductions of “the landscapes of Cezanne and van Gogh, the dancers of Degas” (Gans, H. 1999. p113). When it comes to art of the low culture, he describes the taste as “secular representational pictures with vivid colours” (Gans, H. 1999. p118). Both descriptions fit into the definition of Vettriano’s art, mass produced and colourful representational and vivid. My understanding is since 1979 and the beginning of Thatcherism, class in the UK was no longer determined by history and birth but became defined by education and wealth; wealth generally enables a better education. Low culture education is generally “non-academic high school education and have often dropped out” (Gans, H. 1999. p115). The lower middle class educated tend to “have attended and graduated from university” (Gans, H. 1999. p110). Today, class is invisible to the human eye alone, we may make an assumption just by looking at an individual and may decide unconsciously that person is this class or that class by the way they dress or walk. To illustrate this sub-consciousness, I would like to draw on the experience of author Darren McGarvey. In ‘Poverty Safari’, he describes an incident when travelling as a working class person from a working class part of Glasgow to a middle class part of the city. Here, he encountered a group of his peers and McGarvey and the passer-by’s made a judgement on each other, not engaging in conversation but just on the way each party looked and walked. He describes “An intoxicating bravado took hold as I agonised about why the group fell silent as they passed me. I reasoned that I had been harshly judged by snobs” (Mc Garvey, D. 2017 p28). What happened is that each party subconsciously decided the other was somehow different; the author by bowing his head and the group by falling silent.
In today’s society, our class is defined by our taste culture. To help illustrate the differences in the sociology of class, I will use a personal analogy as a delivery driver. I deliver groceries to customers on a weekly basis. By looking at the contents of an order, I can determine a customer’s cultural taste. For example, a customer having boxes of frozen processed food and non-branded products would generally be a person of low culture. Having a limited education can determine choices in diet and an ability to earn high wages; therefore this limits their budget. These people could have “skilled or semi-skilled factory work” (Gans, H. 1999 p115). On the other hand, a person taking delivery of foods such as fresh fruit and vegetables and more expensive branded products would generally be of a higher culture in tastes. Arguably, this customer would be in a higher salaried job for instance as, Gans describes, the upper middle culture tend to be “professionals, executives and managers” (Gans, H. 1999. p106). Similarly to food, the art on these customers’ walls also reflects that same cultural difference. The art on the wall of the customer receiving the frozen unbranded food would generally have art that is mass produced reproductions, the type of art bought from large retailers such as The Range, mass produced kitsch art that performs an aesthetic purpose, by filling a gap in on the wall, such as Vettriano. The customer receiving the fresh food would generally have original work or limited edition prints, art/exhibition posters.
Much has been said about the popularity of Vettriano’s work. At the height of his popularity in the 1990’s and 2000’s, he was making £500.00 per year from his art (The Scotsman. 2004). In a South Bank Show documentary about Jack Vettriano, titled The Peoples Painter, Melvyn Bragg interviews several people, people I would have described as fans, asking what they liked about Jack Vettriano. the responses he gets are not dissimilar to those fans of pop stars or actors:
“I’m just basically a massive fan of Jack Vettriano, I just love his paintings” (Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter, 2004. Min 29:52).
Vettriano is a celebrity and he has a celebrity following. His original works are collected worldwide by people such as Jack Nicolson (Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter, 2004. Min 1:33). As previously mentioned, Vettriano is part of popular culture; fan is a word derived from fanatical. It does seem to suggest that he was popular with the public. But why so popular? Why at this particular time?
Fig 4. (Vettriano, Jack. The Billy Boys, 1994. Private Collection)
In my view, the reason Vettriano’s work was so popular at this time comes down to aspiration. The aspiration of some, not all, let’s say a significant minority, a minority I refer to as a culture rather than class, of the lower middle class culture and the low culture of Britain. Aspiration fuelled by the legacy of Thatcherism “Thatchers appeal to their self-interest and their aspirations” (Evans, E.J. 2004. p27) and the soft Tory polices of New Labour Blairites, Vettriano’s art is art of its time, as people bought into and benefited from the self-interest of individuality. “Britain by the late 80’s had become a more grasping, greedy, mendacious and mean-spirited society and so it has remained”(Evans, E. J. 2004. p147), namely Thatcherism. It furnished their aspirations; his imagery is easy on the eye and colourful. They are aspirational, escapist, pleasing and entertaining, perfect in a new home, or the re-decorated dining room. There was nothing better to communicate perceived affluence than having a framed print of ‘The Singing Butler’ or ‘The Billy Boys’ on the wall, branded by the Vettriano; printed in a large trendy typeset.
Admittedly, my statement that Vettriano’s success is down to an aspirational legacy of Thatcherism is a grand one, but as a small fraction of the whole, it is true. What people are influenced by is down to the political and social environment of the day, for instance, as the second half of the 19th century progressed; fuelled by the industrial revolution the middle classes of the day became more affluent and started decorating their homes to express the fashions of the day, hence Victoriana. As the 20th century progressed, people’s wealth increased, education improved, affordable home decorations and furnishings were obtainable by lower middle class culture and low culture households. Items became affordable such as three piece suites, coffee table and bedroom suites. When it came to wall decoration, many low culture sitting rooms where adorned with prints and reproductions of such works as Constable’s ‘Hay Wain’ (my childhood council home certainly was.)
Fig 5. (Constable, John. The Hay Wain, 1821. The National Gallery)
Along with the aforementioned furnishings, all enabled by social change, people began expressing their improved circumstances within their own homes. The author Alison J Clarke said “The modern household, then, defined as a site of provisioning, social relations and economic management, holds vital historical position in relation to the modern state and class politics” (Clarke, A.J. 2001. p25). People buy into their expressive self and a fashion. Vettriano is a fashion people can buy into. It is affordable art for the low and lower middle class cultures. Vettriano’s paintings fit in with the decorative tastes of low culture, a taste that could be described as tacky and showy or Kitsch, but overall and significantly it performs a function. Functionality is a trait of low culture and possessions should serve a purpose. Whether it be a Vettriano print, a Constable reproduction or Van Gogh print, a Manet, a Monet print, they all occupy a space on the wall. It finishes a room; I don’t think the picture on the wall would be seen as art at all, not in the way it would in an upper middle class home. After all, there is no low culture high art world. The Vettriano print could be a celebration purchase to commemorate the re decorating of the room, a souvenir if you like. It could have been bought as a memory of an experience with a loved one or a gift but overall it has a function and that function is to be aesthetically pleasing according to the personally private taste of the occupier. If the home happens to be that of a lower middle-class culture occupier, the reasons for having a Vettriano print are different. At the height of Vettriano’s popularity, lower middle class culture was the real upwardly mobile beneficiaries of the Thatcher and Blair era, truly aspirational, many with brand new homes on brand new village like estates, homes that were used to socialise with friends and family. The Warndon Villages in Worcester are a prime example. Building began in the late 80’s, an estate local to me, an estate as a delivery driver I deliver to on a daily basis. It’s the type of place people buy into, or move to, unlike some low cultured people who may be in social or privately rented homes, they’re not stuck there by poverty; they have chosen to be there. They have bought into a dream; as Grayson Perry would say the residents “rest in an aesthetic duvet” (All In The Best Possible Taste With Grayson Perry, part 2. 2012. Min 15:07). I see all the signs of a typical aspirational lower middle class culture existence. The consequences of aspiration and the materialism that brings, the new or nearly new SUV on the drive, homes decorated in a taste that says individuality but is in fact a mass produced readymade simulation designed to feed the desire of the aspirational lower middle class culture. It’s a rejection of the taste of their low culture roots and embraces the aspiration of bettering themselves. The brand is king in this type of household, but it has to be the correct brand. At the height of Vettriano’s success, he was one of many brands of success. Lower middle class culture would buy into that; put it on their walls. It attempts to communicate good taste, a conformation to a new tribe and the rules of acceptability, progression in the world and buying into the dream. So unlike in a low culture home where a Vettriano print is a functional, private space filler, a gift or memory, in the lower middle class culture house hold it is a statement to visitors of the home owners aspirational success. Again, it’s not seen as art but as an announcement of success. Even though both cultures buy art for different reasons, it is the same type “ Lower-Middle class art continues to be mainly romantic and representational, shunning harsh naturalism as well as abstraction” (Gans, H.1999.P113). These are the people who buy into Vettriano, the people of low and low middle class culturural taste.
Chapter Three - Rejection
The high priests in the church of high culture are certainly no fans of Vettriano, there are plenty of disparaging and vitriol quotes to choose from, art critics from the broadsheets certainly can and do put the boot in when it comes to Vettriano “badly conceived soft porn” from the Daily Telegraph (Noval, E. 2018)
“is not even an artist” Jonathan Jones, The Guardian (Jones, J. 2005)
Though not all in the high art world are against Vettriano. Out on his own is Julien Spalding, art writer and a former gallery owner who has championed popular artists such as L.S.Lowry (The Scotsman. 2004). Spalding stated in an article published in The Scotsman back in 2004 that Vettriano is a “potential artist of our time” (The Scotsman. 2004). In the past, Spalding has questioned why large amounts of public funds are allocated to high art exhibitions such as the avant garde Damien Hirst when perhaps public money should be spent on what the public likes, which Spalding describes as “both popular and profound” (Alberge, D. 2014). So why is it that one of the most successful artists of our time along with other popular artists are rejected by the high art establishment? It may well be down to popularity within mass culture, Vettriano’s work is mass produced “Popular culture is undesirable because, unlike high culture, it is mass produced by profit-minded entrepreneurs solely for the gratification of a paying audience” (Gans, H. 1999. p29). Also, as Vettriano borrows from high culture, such as paintings, “I just copied painting” (Camden, C. 2013. min 2.00) is there a fear of dilution? “Popular culture borrows from high culture, thus debasing it” (Gans, H. 1999. p29). For example, elitism comes with a certain attitude and behaviour born from the need to achieve or innovate the best of or excellence in a field, such as the arts. The high arts and high culture are dominated by an elite art set, “dominated by creators and critics” (Gans, H. 1999 p100). When I use the word elite, I use it as a positive term, similar to the word elite being used to describe let’s say Lewis Hamilton as an elite racing driver. The elite in the art world, the avant garde, expect art to be created from a set of values that originate from a valid context and narrative validated in a creative process, researched and has artistic excellence at its core “high culture, which is portrayed as non-commercial, producing a heterogeneous and non-standardised product, and encouraging a creative process in which an individual creator works to achieve his or her personal ends” (Gans, H. 1999 p31). The culture of high art is different from popular culture because popular culture is mass produced for profit “mass culture is an industry organised for profit” (Gans, H. 1999. p30), made to feed a frenzy. Vettriano’s work fits into this understanding of what popular culture is, his work meets the needs of the masses to decorate their homes; he creates to meet a demand. The elite have a view that his work lacks context and a valid artistic intention, “The popular arts are, on the whole, user oriented and exist to satisfy audience values and wishes” (Gans, H. 1999. P76). The rejection of Vettriano is that high culture dislikes what is popular, it favours the avant garde and protects against the gradual process of dumbing down. Vettriano, purely by just practicing the art of painting is borrowing from high culture, copying from some of the great painters of centuries passed such as Monet, Hopper and Van Gogh. The elite could argue that his work dilutes standards, degrades the value of high art. If by accepting his work and lower standards, are these then debased?
Would this encourage lower standards as acceptable, which could then lead to high art being swallowed up into popular mass culture and disappear forever. It is a form of protectionism; high art culture tends to be made up of highly educated people, “writers, artists and the like” (Gans, H. 1999. p100). Academics and wealthy collectors from upper and upper middle class status “almost all highly educated people of upper and upper-middle class status” (Gans, H. 1999. p100) who may well look down on popular culture as a threat to the status of high art, popular culture in the past has been viewed to have a negative effect on society as a whole “The wide distribution of popular culture not only reduces the level of cultural quality or civilisation of the society” (Gans, H. 1999. p29). Evidence of this clash of cultures is born out in one exhibition. In June 2011, The Royal West of England Academy in Bristol, a privately run gallery, put on an exhibition of Jack Vettriano’s work which included his most famous piece, The Singing Butler. The aim of the gallery was to attract a wider audience and bring business with much needed revenue their way. By putting on an exhibition of Britain’s most popular artist it would certainly do that, the academy director at the time Trystan Hawkins said “someone could come to see a popular artist's work and then look at other exhibits” (BBC. 2011) hinting that the general public who enjoy popular culture, those in low culture and lower middle class culture I have referenced in previous chapters may well be drawn to other works of art associated with high art culture. He also said "My job is to get more people into the building," "I talked to Joe Public on the street about what they'd like to see and Jack was top of the list.” (BBC. 2011). Controversially and contrary to Hawkins aims the Academy President Simon Quadrat resigned citing the staging of populist exhibitions was undermining the integrity of the Academy, it seemed the academy was proposing several shows to include popular artists, he believed the academy was heading in the wrong direction referring to the Vettriano Show he said 'It would be foolish to say that the only way of bringing people through the door is by putting on populist art, It could be a grave mistake and anything like that undermines the integrity of the art we show.'(Daily Mail. 2011). Quadrats resignation along with several other board members clearly underlines that keeping the avant garde separate in cultural terms is one of principle in high art culture. Their fears may well be valid but only time will tell. The elitism practiced by the high art gods in the Paris Salons in the 1850’s got it wrong with the Impressionist; perhaps in the 21st century the gods are wrong again. The tide of the popular could be impossible to hold back; the lines between popular and high culture are becoming increasingly blurred. If I take my theory that the high culture elite’s rejection of Vettriano is based on a fear of the popular invasion, could that fear be fed also by an institutional snobbery, a snobbery based on Vettriano’s class, and his popularity with parts of society usually not associated with the high arts? At the time I am writing and as part of my research in Oct 2018, I contacted Vettriano’s agent to request an interview, which was politely declined. However, I did also ask where I could see some original works by the artist. To my astonishment, but really should I have been that surprised to learn in the whole of England there are no works on public display. Vettriano’s representative wrote:
“Hi Richard, I’m afraid I don’t think there is anywhere in England with an original on public display.”
In a documentary by Melvyn Bragg broadcast in 2004 titled The Peoples Painter, both the Scottish National Gallery and the National Gallery in London declined to answer the broadcasters question on why one of the most popular painters in Britain was not represented in the National Galleries. Both these galleries are publicly funded institutions paid for with public money from the public’s taxes. In the past, representations have been made to display Vettriano’s work in Scotland’s National Museum. In an article published in the Scotsman after one of the sales of The Singing Butler, the paper asked several art professionals if it was wrong that Vettriano was not represented in Scotland’s national galleries. One of the comments was favourable to the idea of placing a copy of the Singing Butler in the National Museum of Scotland. The managing director of the Scottish Gallery, Guy Peploe was quoted as saying “as an image maker he is a fascinating part of cultural history and can’t be ignored” (Quinn, A. 2004 P8). It could be argued that national museums reflect the different tastes in art of a nation, after all the taste of those people who see themselves within a defined group such as those in the tribe defined as low culture should be able to see art that is for them, something that they can accept, relate to and recognise as art, in popular culture collectables are a good example of this. Many people collect, they just exercise different types of collecting, according to taste, wealth and affordability. Vettriano prints are highly collectable; at the height of Vettriano’s popularity many people had more disposable income “the combination of more spending money and education has helped to add to the variety of cultural products on which people can spend their time and money and, if they choose, to mark their taste and class difference. These include such modern inventions as “collectables”, which are less expensive than original art” (Gans, H. 1999 p18). Vettriano is popular in the tastes of low culture and lower middle class culture, but should collectables be in national galleries and museums, or remain on or over the mantel piece? National galleries see themselves as protectors of the high arts and its values “ the fine arts were seen to embody the highest values of civilisation” (Peterson, R.A. 1997. p81) Is this snobbery? If I look at what the definition of snobbery is, or could be, most would agree the meaning is one that regards one’s self as better than another, one could be a single person or a group or an institution, a judgement born from prejudice, this prejudice being the fear of popular culture engulfing high culture, spawning a type of snobbery called negative democratised snobbery, this I understand is to mean that a majority of a minority through a need to be different will seek to protect their prestige and elitism by institutionally disregarding, in this case art, by a particular artist, Vettriano, because he is part of low culture.
Academics and collectors of the fine arts would probably feel they have a role to protect against the popular mass culture, although the role of the academics is different from those of the collectors and the business around collectors. The collectors’ role is born from the need to protect the monetary value of fine art. This form of protectionism is not born from snobbery but is based more on the exclusivity and innovation of the art. This raises the question whether Vettriano is an innovative painter. The academic, their role, I argue is a negative form of democratised snobbery. These quotes taken from a journal article about highbrow snobbery certainly supports my theory: “The defence of the distinction between high and low culture, and the concern over the degrading nature of the latter, continue to this day” (Peterson, R.A. 1997. p86). “culture is inherently snobbish. Contact with the best that has been said and thought in the world makes people intellectually exclusive and makes them draw distinctions”(Peterson R.A. p84). The distinction being in my view is a judgement based on a democratised snobbishness towards low culture taste. In the past high art has been slow to recognise the culture of women and the culture of ethnic minorities, it is also in the same way slow to recognise low culture tastes.
To further explore the exclusion of Vettriano from high art recognition, the definition of the word ‘culture’ should be taken into account. The word ‘culture’ could be used as a “description of a way of life”, “a state of process of human perfection”, “the body of intellectual and imaginative work” (Williams, R. 1961. p32). The culture described as a way of life I understand to mean how a culture behaves socially. In British society, the class system is a prevalent way of life culturally. For instance, at the risk of generalisation, a low culture person could go to a football game, a lower middle class culture person to a rugby union match, a high culture person to a fox hunt.
The state of process of human perfection could be a description of a society’s cultural attitude to work or a useful contribution to society, an example a society that has the culture of paying their taxes.
The definition that describes culture as a body of intellectual and imaginative work describes a means to recording the experience of human emotion, for example a society that embraces poetry, painting, opera, writing or sculpture to name but a few. If by taking these definitions as valid definitions it could help support my theory that Vettriano’s exclusion is in fact not snobbery born from prejudice but snobbery born from democratised snobbery. Because Vettriano is a painter culturally his work should sit in the culture described as a body of intellectual and imaginative work, but it doesn’t because it is not seen as so by those who define what is intellectual and imaginative work, it could be concluded that culturally his work is a way of life, he just paints, its seen as unintellectual and unimaginative, its popular just as going to the match is, it represents a culture but doesn’t advance a culture, it contributes to a way of life, it doesn’t define a culture. So if it’s not snobbery based on prejudice but snobbery based on democratised snobbery, which I do declare to be a valid form of snobbery when used to protect quality and standards then by cultural definition Vettriano is an unintellectual and unimaginative painter, but is he? In a previous chapter I have explored a particular narrative and context to his work, whether it’s a valid reading of his work and supports a view that his work is imaginative and intelligent I remain undecided, my conclusion will only be validated in the next chapter where I will evaluate the quality of his painting.
Chapter 4 - Good Painter Bad Painter
In previous chapters, I have attempted to examine why Vettriano’s paintings are not accepted in the high art world, why none of his paintings are given the status, status enough, to be given space in any of the national galleries of Britain. I have endeavoured to give a narrative and context to his work, looking at it subjectively. I have also examined the social and cultural reasons for his exclusion. In this chapter I will examine the quality of his painting; in order to do this I will look, in my inexperienced capacity or to the best of my limited knowledge, to juxtaposition a painting I think is good and one of Vettriano’s most popular pieces. To do this I have chosen, as an example by an exceptional painter, a piece by Canaletto, Il Ponte Di Rialto Da Nord, Venezia from 1724.
Fig 6. (Canaletto, Giovanni Antonio Canal. Il Ponte Di Rialto Da Nord, Venezia, 1724. Pinacoteca Del Lingotto Giovanni and Marello Agnelle, Turin.)
I have chosen this piece because it was part of an exhibition I saw whilst in Rome. It had the biggest impact on my own understanding of what good painting is and I have seen it with my own eyes. The Vettriano piece I have chosen, to assess its painterly qualities, is Elegy For The Dead Admiral. I have chosen this as, similarly to the Canaletto, it features a big sky, water and figures; unlike the Canaletto, I am making my judgements from a reproduction in a print book which I believe is a fair comparison as Vettriano’s work is generally viewed in a re-produced print form. It is important to note that I am not comparing the two painting against each other but just making observations about the quality of the painting.
Il Ponte Di Rialto Da Nord, Venezia is a landscape with a huge sky, over half of the piece is made up of sky which is full of subtle colours, red, greens and blue, gentle tones to define the clouds, apart from one splash of bright highlight, the reflection of which appears in the water at the bottom right hand corner of the foreground. You see a gradual change in tone left to right as the painter moves across the canvas to his light source. The depiction of the architecture has the quality of a draughtsman. Typically of Canaletto, the painting is framed with everyday observations such as the awnings over windows fluttering in a slight breeze, each awning touch with a highlight that’s not just a single mark of paint but tones gradually. The composition of which draws the viewer to gaze upon the busy waterway, there is a subtleness of colour tone as the painting moves from light to shade. For me, the genius of the
Fig 6. (Canaletto, Giovanni Antonio Canal. Il Ponte Di Rialto Da Nord, Venezia, 1724. Pinacoteca Del Lingotto Giovanni and Marello Agnelle, Turin.)
painting is the detail in the figures, seen here in a photograph I took of a section of the painting. The energy of the gondoliers punting to the dock, in their stance there is an expectation of arrival, mirrored by the boat itself. The touch of the oar to water, even the way the light highlights the face of the seated passenger. There is no facial detail, but there is a poise there. On the ornamental carved wooden bow of the boat, the detail achieved with highlight and shadow is remarkable. On the dockside people are in conversation; there is movement and life in their actions and postures, even in the figures that disappear into the shadows. This particular painting is a great example of a type of painting called Vedute or Vedutised, which translated into English means view or painter of views. The detail in Canaletto’s paintings are even more remarkable when you think about when they were painted. Before the invention of photography, an early biographer of Canaletto wrote that he used a method of copying, that of camera obscura, to achieve his detail and accuracy. However as recently as 2017, a research project found using infrared cameras Canaletto painted from sketches “hailed as “categorically” proving he did not trace the works using camera tricks.” (Furness, H. 2017). I highlight this fact because it somewhat begs a question about those painters who paint from photographs: Is the quality of their work looked at differently from those who work from memory or sketches as Canaletto did? Elegy For The Dead Admiral is a painting made from a photograph; that’s how Vettriano works, from photography, as seen in the documentaries “The Peoples Painter” and “What Do Artists Do All Day”.
I have to say that based on the painterly quality of Vettriano’s work when compared with some of the paintings I have observed closely, which I have touched on earlier, Vettriano is not a good painter. Elegy For The Dead Admiral is a study of a group of four people sat around a table set up on a beach, set afore a sea/skyscape. The subjects are windswept indicated by the tails of the musicians and butlers coats and the subject’s hair moving in the wind, but the style of the painting gives no movement. The clothing is simply blocks of black and grey; the figures are stilted and stiff, even the table cloth looks like stone. The sky takes up over half of the composition but the clouds have no movement on this breezy day. They are still, only moving in tone from blue grey tones in the distant cloud, to a warm grey tone that has subtle highlights across the whole piece. It keeps the same tone which results in a background that looks flat, there is no reference to the point of the painters light source even though the subjects are portrayed in bright warm colours. The single line of surf that divides one quarter of the painting is a very bright constant highlight; the sea looks dead calm and no white horses. The emblem on the back of the chair is badly painted as are the lines on the chair, representative of an afterthought. The figures have no life, no intention, the faces are featureless, as quoted before experts say his painting looks like colouring in, which I have to agree with, some professionals in the art world do have the odd positive thing to say about Vettriano’s painting skill, curator and author of The Eclipse of art Julian Spalding says “what Vettriano has is the ability to create tone” (Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter. 2004 Min 30:30), the fashion designer Terence Conran who has decorated his club The Bluebird Club with Vettriano’s paintings says “he handles light remarkable well” (Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter. 2004 Min 30:48) but overwhelmingly in the art world reviews and comments are dismissive of the quality of his painting the editor of The Jackdaw says “easy to look at and undemanding” “slightly sleazy, soft pornie” “the surface of Vettriano’s painting is very unappealing, its very perfunctory, like colouring in” “appeals to people unversed in looking at painting” (Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter. 2004 Min 36:34).
That is a very interesting quote and very helpfully brings me to the point of concluding and having an answer to the question this essay asks “rejected By high art; loved by the public Is Jack Vettriano a victim of art world snobbery or Is he just a bad painter”
Fig 7. (Vettriano, Jack. Elergy For a Dead Admiral, 1994-1996. private collection
Conclusion
When I started this investigation I think the motivation behind it was fuelled by what could be described as a chip on the shoulder, a class thing, myself blinded by a reverse snobbery. I saw a painter from a working class background failing to be accepted into the high echelons of the art establishment, a snobbery of sorts, thinking Vettriano’s rejection is because he is working class. I can now conclude the class of an artist is not a determining factor when judging art as good or bad; your taste culture is the determining factor. Thanks to this investigation I can now conclude that Jack Vettriano’s work is rejected by the high art establishment not because of class, but because it just doesn’t fit into the taste culture of high art but there is a snobbery of sorts, a democratised snobbery. It’s too popular for high culture it is not innovative or exclusive enough for the avant garde, it’s not pioneering enough, it’s badly painted and yes it is ‘vacuous nonsense’, however tastes change, who’s to say in the future Jack Vettriano will not be hated but revered in the art world.
Bibliography
Books
Baudrillard, J. (1988) Simulacra And Simulation, in Poster, M (ed) Jean Baudrillard Selected Writings. Cambridge. Polity
Childs, D. (1997) Britain Since 1945, A Political History. 4 edn. London. Routledge.
Clarke, A.J. (2001) The Aesthetics of Social Aspiration, in Miller, D (ed) Home Possessions, Material Culture Behind Closed Doors. Oxford. Berg.
Crow, T. (1996) Modern Art in the Common Culture. London. Yale University Press.
, Evans, E.J. (2004) Thatcher and Thatcherism. Oxford. Routledge.
Gans, H (1999) Popular Culture and High Culture. Oxford. Basic Books.
Marwick, A (1982) British Society Since 1945. London. Penguin Books.
McGarvey, D. (2017) Poverty Safari. Edinburgh. Picador.
Perry, G. (2014) Playing to the Gallery. St Ives. Penguin Random House.
Quinn. A. (2004) Introduction, in Vettriano. J Jack, Jack Vettriano. London. Pavillion Books.
Williams, R. (1961) The Analysis of Culture, in Reader A, Storey. J(ed) Cultural Theory and Popular Culture. Harlow, London, New York. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Journals
Peterson, R.A (1997). “The Rise and Fall of Highbrow Snobbery as a Status Marker”. Poetics. 25 (2). Pp 75-92. doi 1: 10.1016/50304-422x(97)00013-2.
Haag, E.V.D (1956). “Snobbery” The British Journal of Sociology. 7(3) p212-216
DVD
All in the Best Possible Taste With Grayson Perry, Parts 1, 2 and 3. (2012). DVD. Directed by Neil Crombie. Channel 4.
Jack Vettriano: The Peoples Painter. (2004). DVD. Directed by Bob Bee. Southbank Show. ITV.
WEB PAGE
