›Van Gogh in Ireland (Dr. Friedrich Meschede) 
Last year I was sitting in the office with an artist whose
exhibition had just opened in the gallery. By chance a critic,
whom I like very much because of his writings came in - he was
on his way back from holiday in Berlin. I introduced him to the
artist and he immediately addressed a question to her: 
"I have just seen your show upstairs and I would like to ask 
you something. I am indifferent to the fact that you are 
creating these paintings, but tell me, why do you exhibit 
them?" 
One can imagine that we were very upset and confused by 
this attack. The artist could not answer immediately; I was
unable to think of some remark to take this hurt away. The 
critic remained friendly and said that he would like to discuss
this problem with us. 
He spoke with my guest for more than an hour.

This story illustrates the problem that faces every person who
is involved in the business of making art and exhibitions. This 
event focuses upon the conflict between, on one hand, the very
private starting point, when somebody decides to express them-
selves through a visual language instead of through speech, and
on the other hand, th public arena which includes the history of
art and contemporary critical discourse.

A definition of what we are accepting as art is that it has to 
be exhibited and therefore must also be seen in the context of 
earlier works. Thus a dual viewpoint operates, since art is 
considered not only in the context of contemporary work in all
its variety but also in an historical context. The artist must
risk having his work compared to preceding works which are now 
viewed as masterpieces.

Paradoxically, this is a truth that can be disproved by every 
new work of art. The gap between the private language of the 
artist and the public's perception of this cannot laydown 
criteria for what is seen as art but this polarity helps to 
establish the structure on which such a definition of art 
depends. If art is simply a private discourse, it is a kind of 
diary which is judged by technical quality: the skilled 
application of paint to canvas; the professional casting of 
bronze; the masterly chiselling of stone. Many would argue that 
this is the arrogant point of view of an academic who is 
distanced from the actual creative process involved in art but
this detachment inherently prevents creation. Nor is it true to
say that critics and art historians define what is to be seen as
art: they judge by comparative assessment of works. Art is the 
statement made by an artist who then risks the comparison of his
work with the work of others.

The staging of an open submission exhibition such as the ICE
(Irish Contemporaries Exhibition) in Dublin in 1991 is an 
unusual way of trying to bring about a show of visual art which 
intends acting as a showcase for the finest contemporary art.
However this concept comes from a long established tradition in
the history of the presentation of art. In the 19th century 
France the Salon was held annually in Paris. Being refused for 
years, the painter Gustave Courbet established his career on his 
own outside the Salon. Masterpieces like "L'artelier" and 
"Bonjour Monsieur Courbet" set a new agenda. Of Course this is 
an assessment made with the benefits of hindsight. Every working 
artist who submits for an open exhibition is hoping for selection.
Cezanne's work was rejected in this same way later in the 19th
century. It happened to Kadinsky in Munich in 1912 and brought 
about the foundation of the "Blaue Reiter" group. It brought 
about the Sessessionists in Berlin. These groups brought the 
subject of art to the attention of the public because it became
a topic for general discussion and was written about in news-
papers. It is the time when newspapers published the "feuilleton",
the forum to discuss culture and related matters. The history of
the once refused and undiscovered artist became a myth. 
Vincent Van Gogh is the best known example of this. His life, his
sorrow at being misunderstood during his lifetime, even his works
are now part of this legend.

The idea of the open submission exhibition, as with the Salon in 
19th century France, is a Utopian vision, that art can be elevated
through selection by a democratic decision-making process. The 
political innovations after the French Revolution, with its 
emphasis on the concept of equality, were the starting point for 
the creation of the structures that form the basis of democratic
societies in Europe today. However, to me, art is the one subject
that cannot be assessed democratically, A jury, whatever it's 
number or variety of opinions, cannot really decide in the case of
art. Therefore, Van Gogh's myth is the winner of today, because he
is the example not of the best artist, but of the best metaphor of 
an anti-democratic force and the quality of an individual power. 
We have to look for this myth, this struggle and loneliness of one's
idea, and sometimes there is a long time waiting for G
  

Dr. Friedrich Meschede