Skip to navigation | Skip to search
No photo credits available.
No photo credits available.
No photo credits available.
The incongruous sight of a dry stone wall shed taking shape in the Royal Academy's classical courtyard has had visitors scratching their heads in recent weeks.
It's there because of Modern British Sculpture, which opens in the RA's Main Galleries this weekend. The shed is a reproduction of artist Kurt Schwitters' Merz Barn, the disused Cumbrian farm building that the German émigré was in the midst of transforming into a hybrid of architecture and installation art when he died in 1948.
The Merz Barn was a typically multi-disciplinary work for Schwitters. Associated with Dada and Constructivism early in his career, Schwitters came to reject most 'isms' in favour of his own term - 'Merz'. His innovatory approach was an early form of assemblage art, combining painting, sculpture and collage with a hoard of found objects such as newspaper clippings and bus tickets. 'Merz' was itself a found object of sorts - Schwitters reportedly spotted it in a newspaper fragment in one of his collages.
In the film below, the RA's Dr Adrian Locke explains why the Merz Barn was chosen for the courtyard and puts it in the context of Schwitters' life and career:
RA Magazine's blog is compiled by members of the editorial team plus invited guest bloggers from the Royal Academy and beyond. Get in touch here.
All comments on this post - (1 comment)
Yesterday I saw Modern British Sculpture at the RA. Ex-art student friend Lorraine came too. There's a sort of cabin in the square, with one wall very nicely flagstoned, and another, brick wall, with okay pointing, but not as craftsmanlike as what a Queens Scout mate of mine did on his kitchen, the first time he'd ever done bricklaying..... On houses-as-art, I liked the first Rachel Whiteread inside-out house, the emptied mould - though that was it, I didn't care to see any more ! But this isn't up to much. Inside, the really modern stuff is mindless inartistic wallpaper or floor covering or garden bric-à-brac with no sense of colour, composition or anything else that you can name. Only the Hirst exhibit is WORKED ON ( by his studio team), but it's too disgusting for words. Its glass cabinets have to be sealed in....The programmers allege that it's "class-conscious" - Eat my shorts ! Lorraine and I agreed, the lack of thoughtfulness or craftsmanship in the exhibits was pathetic. You could almost see art students in front of you saying, "I have nothing to learn from art college, I know what I want to do." (actual words I once heard) Take the dozen SUN page 3 breasts, stuck up on a wall in two rows. So bloody what ! It happens that twenty-five years ago I went next door to my neighbours' house, when it was gutted and empty. One small room had been taken over by local lads and turned into a wanking room, with 4 walls and the ceiling ENTIRELY covered by SUN page 3 breasts. Suppose that was replicated, with an opening for viewers to enter, which was more or less invisible from within. Claustrophobic, low light, but enough lIght or spectators to take in the scene. Then the room whirls round giddily, flashing lights as in a disco, then utter blackness. Stop, whirl, flashing lights again, and so on. (Sound effects could be added !!!!! Why not ?) The point being to make an "installation" which actually affected people in some way or other, like the unique Gormley room filled with fog. That suggestion could be worked on, no doubt, but you get the idea : there's something to it - not nothing. A few works from c1890-1930 were interesting or even moving, as the WW1 frieze. A couple of sculptures by Eric Gill were interestingly sexy (instantly OMINOUSLY sexy if you know about his appalling predatory sexual behaviour towards women and to his children. A devout Christian, Gill, I believe. ) All Moore's and Hepworth's works are passionless pebbles or lumps with holes in. I said to Lorraine, Moore gave this massive lump feet, and toes, for some reason, but not toenails. Why has he poked in eyeholes ? It doesn't cry out for eyes, any more than toes. Sans breasts, sans cock, sans balls. I wondered why one of his, a giant slewed slab with a porthole high up, was familiar. It was from Battersea Park. It should have been called, Walking the Dog. Thenk gawd, one worthwhile room with, also, a random collection of "influences", stunning ancient art from the BM and V& A, which could have been infinitely more extensive, though that would have showed up the moderns. The Victorians certainly knew what to steal from the colonies. Hey ho, Julius
Posted on: February 16, 2011 10:03 AM by Julius Hogben