The Turbine Hall at Tate Modern has become a space where art goes to wither and die. The latest installation is a perfect example - weak, feeble, and barely worth noticing in such a massive space. It's baffling what Tate's priorities are when it comes to selecting artists for the annual commission. And the Turner Prize? Once a showcase for provocative and shocking art that engaged audiences, it has retreated into obscurity.
The blame for this stagnation can't be laid solely at Maria Balshaw's feet. While she may be taking the fall, she's also an opportunity for Tate to reinvent itself. The achievements announced in her departure speak of "diversification" - a noble quest indeed. But beneath that surface lies a loss of artistic ambition, aesthetic thrills, raw horror, and beauty.
The problem is starkly evident in the gallery displays. Critics rarely comment on these, but visitors are stuck with them. Tate's galleries have become an insult to coherence, with masterpieces like Rothkos, Picassos, and surrealists often hidden from view. The rehang at Tate Britain was a 2023 debacle, praised for its harsh criticism but ultimately for prioritizing politics over art.
There have been some great shows, but they were marred by unnecessary side battles. Cézanne's blockbuster in 2022 was superb, but the inclusion of contemporary artists with irrelevant, politically charged interventions didn't help. When trying to understand Cézanne's complex work, such distractions only add to the confusion.
One can almost imagine Edward Said being perplexed by these stilted attempts at relevance. The Turner Prize has lost its way, staging shows in Bradford that seem more like exercises in studied wholesomeness than genuine artistic exploration. The exhibitions themselves are a mere echo of what once was - brilliant retrospectives of modern greats.
Tate's current priorities lie with ideology over art, politics ahead of aesthetics, and bad ideas over thoughtful radicalism. To change this, Tate needs to reassess its values, not just replace its leadership. Otherwise, the departure of powerful women like Penelope Curtis after criticism will be seen as another misogynistic removal from power.
The lack of ambition at Tate Modern is a symptom of a larger problem - an institution more interested in ideological posturing than genuine artistic exploration. The question remains: what's next for this iconic space? Will it continue to prioritize politics over art, or will it rediscover its passion for showcasing the most innovative and provocative works?
The blame for this stagnation can't be laid solely at Maria Balshaw's feet. While she may be taking the fall, she's also an opportunity for Tate to reinvent itself. The achievements announced in her departure speak of "diversification" - a noble quest indeed. But beneath that surface lies a loss of artistic ambition, aesthetic thrills, raw horror, and beauty.
The problem is starkly evident in the gallery displays. Critics rarely comment on these, but visitors are stuck with them. Tate's galleries have become an insult to coherence, with masterpieces like Rothkos, Picassos, and surrealists often hidden from view. The rehang at Tate Britain was a 2023 debacle, praised for its harsh criticism but ultimately for prioritizing politics over art.
There have been some great shows, but they were marred by unnecessary side battles. Cézanne's blockbuster in 2022 was superb, but the inclusion of contemporary artists with irrelevant, politically charged interventions didn't help. When trying to understand Cézanne's complex work, such distractions only add to the confusion.
One can almost imagine Edward Said being perplexed by these stilted attempts at relevance. The Turner Prize has lost its way, staging shows in Bradford that seem more like exercises in studied wholesomeness than genuine artistic exploration. The exhibitions themselves are a mere echo of what once was - brilliant retrospectives of modern greats.
Tate's current priorities lie with ideology over art, politics ahead of aesthetics, and bad ideas over thoughtful radicalism. To change this, Tate needs to reassess its values, not just replace its leadership. Otherwise, the departure of powerful women like Penelope Curtis after criticism will be seen as another misogynistic removal from power.
The lack of ambition at Tate Modern is a symptom of a larger problem - an institution more interested in ideological posturing than genuine artistic exploration. The question remains: what's next for this iconic space? Will it continue to prioritize politics over art, or will it rediscover its passion for showcasing the most innovative and provocative works?
. They've lost their edge, you know? The Turbine Hall used to be this epic space where you could witness game-changing art installations, but now it's just a bunch of meh stuff that fails to impress. Like, what happened to the days when artists like Rothko and Picasso would blow our minds? Now they're all hidden away in some corner, ignored by visitors and critics alike 
.
. It's supposed to be this radical platform for new talent, but it's just become a safe space for artists who can't handle controversy. I mean, where's the risk-taking? The innovation? It feels like they're more worried about being liked by everyone than pushing boundaries and making us uncomfortable 
.
. They need to take a hard look at what's going on behind the scenes and ask themselves: are we prioritizing art or ideology? Because right now, it feels like they're more interested in virtue-signaling than showcasing truly groundbreaking work 
.
. It just feels like more of the same old stuff - weak and uninspiring. The real problem is that they're letting politics dictate what art gets shown, rather than focusing on something that actually sparks conversation and change. Don't get me wrong, I think it's awesome when art tackles tough topics, but sometimes you need to leave some things unsaid 
. Tate needs to take a step back and remember why they started doing this in the first place - to showcase incredible art that pushes boundaries and makes us feel something 
.
. It feels like they're just going through the motions these days 
. The Turbine Hall is meant to be a game-changer, but it's always been lacking that wow factor 
. I mean, where's the edge? The risk-taking? The art that makes you feel uncomfortable and think deeply about it? 
. It's like they're more worried about being liked by everyone rather than pushing boundaries and challenging our perceptions 
.
. Where's the excitement? The controversy? The sense of discovery? 
.
, not just some token attempts at relevance 
. Until then, I'll be skipping the Tate Modern exhibitions and sticking with the museums that actually care about art 
#TateModern #ArtLovers #CuratorFail
i mean what happened to all that edgy, thought-provoking stuff that used to go on there?! 
#TateModern #TurnerPrize #ArtisticRegression
especially after that 2022 cezanne show - what happened to depth and substance?! 
#TateExhibitions #MisguidedPriorities
like we need more of the same old ideologies being peddled under the guise of "radicalism" 
like what happened to all the cool art shows they used to have?? did they get rid of the guy who curated them or somethin??? i mean i love rothko and picasso as much as the next person but why cant they just leave their masterpieces alone?? 
. It feels like they're more concerned with making a statement than showcasing actual art. The Turner Prize used to be so groundbreaking and thought-provoking, now it just seems like another excuse for artists to virtue signal 
.
.
. They could be like, "Okay, let's have some artistic risks and maybe even some old masters on display" 
. And instead of fighting with other galleries, they should just focus on being awesome in their own right 
It's like they're trying to win a prize for most uninspired art installation ever! 
What happened to the days when you'd walk into Tate and just lose yourself in the masterpieces? Now it feels like a chore, you know? 
. Fingers crossed that they'll get their act together soon! 
. And don't even get me started on the Turner Prize - it used to be this super cool showcase for edgy art, but now it just feels like another excuse for artists to be safe and conformist 
- Rothko's, Picasso's, that kind of vibe. Not sure what Tate's problem is, but I hope they shake things up soon 
and I'm still trying to figure out how to use it. Like, I know there's an app store and stuff, but I keep accidentally buying weird games that my grandma likes 
. Do you think they should just stick to showing old masters or something? 
. But seriously, Tate needs to get back to its roots and prioritize art over politics and ideology. It's time for them to have some tough conversations about what they want to achieve and how they're going to do it.
. it's like they're not trying to showcase the masters anymore. the turner prize has become so predictable and safe. where's the risk-taking? the bold statements? it feels like they're more concerned with being 'woke' than pushing artistic boundaries. 