The Prose of a Con-Artist

THE ~HOSE OF ACON- HTIST consumers. The ideological construction ofthis class meant that they upported only those artists who reinforced through their arti tic practice colonial visions without confrontation. Although the political composition of this country has since changed, the nation's ideological relationship with art remains the same; the bourgeoisie court painters have been replaced by academic artists. Like everything else in contemporary life, market forces have played a vital part in the development of the tragi-comedy called South African art. Typically, our museums in relying less on any kind of self-governing criteria and more on the advice and input of commercial galleries began to acquire the very works that had been produced for a "domestic" interior decorator market. These acquisitions in turn reinforce the direction taken by the galleries in the sort ofwork they choose to promote, hence the growth and development of such work. The absence of professional, non-commercial spaces and lack ofalternative institutions for more progressive practices has in turn legitimized the national art historical direction through an absence of real voices of dissent. Modernism distilled into formalism has been the dominant language informing South African art production since the 196Os. This formalism, however, is not the "hard" language that became known as Minimalism, but a "soft" formalism perverted by sentiment. Under isolation, taste, style, nostalgia, and sentiment developed into the primary criteria informing the production and assessment ofart. Isolation later degenerated into xenophobia and by implication an ignorance of international developments in the language of art transformed into fundamental mistrust and rejection of the course that art history in many parts of the world was taking. The sentimental foundation that South African art was built upon became conducive to the proliferation of stereotypes, generalizations, and myths about the nature of its art. "Good" art was not judged according to international precedents , but according to the "morality" ofthe maker. The assumption was and remains that good art is morally affirmatory in the form of Kendell Geers That South African art is in crisis hardly needs expounding. Two important international events, the Johannesburg Biennial and the Rugby World Cup, took place in Johannesburg in 1995 when compared illustrate some of the problems confronting South African art. The former attracted an unprecendented 5000 people to its opening, while the Cup Final (at Ellis Park Stadium) attracted 62,000 spectators with a conservative estimate of an additional 3,000,000 television viewers from South Africa alone. A handful of spoilers complained about the five million Rand spent on the biennial, yet the fact that Rupert Murdoch bought the television rights to future rugby matches in the Southern hemisphere for two million Rand elicited no such response. The realization that art is not a priority for most South Africans is neither new nor profound. In fact, more people visit the Randburg waterfront on a Friday night than visited the Biennial during the entire three months that it was open. On the other hand, I can't blame them, personally preferring a good cup of coffee to attending another exhibition of bland, predictable art. Life is so much more interesting than art. As deliberately provocative and generalized such a statement appears to be, it makes the necessary point. South African art remains the domain of hobbyists, and here I include in addition to the artists; the critics, dealers, and collectors alike. This is a catch-22 situation in that unless artists commit themselves professionally to art, there is no reason why collectors, dealers, and critics should in turn respond professionally. Yet at the same time it is only with the moral and economic support of serious collectors, dealers, and critics that artists push themselves beyond the safety of established conservative models. As a colony with an economy based on a minority leisure class controlling a massive proletariat, only those from the former class have access to the time and capital necessary to produce art. It was the wives and offspring of the Randlords (or their equivalents) who could afford to amuse themselve with art, either as producers or as ImmJoumal of Contemporary African Art" Spring 1996 aesthetic material transformation (beautiful ) and that "bad" art is aesthetically objectionable (ugly...