Why Frieze is Still Playing David Beckham and Missed a Trick Shot

I just read over on Artinfo.com that sales by young emerging artists were pretty good at the Frieze Art Fair. Which is nice. Hmmm. Reading between the lines of this bacon saving, I'm reading something more along the lines of "Art world struggling to sell stale art but managed to sell a few tit-bits". IMHO [and unless I totally missed something?] the show was not ‘hot’ and properly lacked guts. Where was the X-Factor, the bleeding edge and the genetically modified new blood? With a broad brush I’m saying that irrespective of age or emerging status, the majority of the Frieze fair art was actually bad monkey art grade unimaginative tosh.

Bouncing out of a recession Frieze 2009 was an opportunity to blow people and the cobwebs away, and to try something new. Let’s look at the spin picture another way, with the same devastatingly broad brush, the art world is founded on the principal of the Emperors Clothes, the opinion of a few and sales hype regurgitated and force fed down the throats of the beautiful people by clipboard clutching hawks. Absolutely there was some well executed and cool classical stuff going on at Frieze but blow me it was hard to find in the herds. Frieze is about art for walls [and floors], not art on walls. And sure it's fine to play David to pull the crowds. But moving on, where was the weird, wired and wonderful? And why doesn’t it sell, that’s the problem. The art herd needs a new LED powered sheep dog to lead it, and a new tune to whistle. Frieze you missed a trick, you old [show / sheep] dog.

Read my further Frieze Art Fair rantings ---> Freak Show at the Frieze Art Fair.