It is the centre of art-world fashion. It is usually bad, boring and pretentious. So what is it that video art is trying to do that television can't do better?by Ben Lewis / October 22, 2005 / Leave a comment
Published in October 2005 issue of Prospect Magazine
There is nowadays only one kind of artist who can obtain a solo show at a leading public art gallery with only seven works to his or her name while still less than 30 years of age. A video artist.
Evidence of this is the show that Nick Relph (26) and Oliver Payne (28) are enjoying for a month at the Serpentine Gallery. Both the Haunch of Venison and White Cube galleries are also exhibiting video art. It is the drug of choice among the young of the art world. But it is easy to overdose on this powerful tranquiliser and lapse into a catatonic state.
This year’s Venice biennale was swamped with overhead projectors and wobbly blown-up DV images. Why is there so much video art? It occasionally has something to do with the talent of the artists, though not often enough to measure scientifically. But most of the time it has to do with the fact that curators are more naive when it comes to video than other mediums. And that is because art theory is particularly accommodating towards video art.