Conceptual works keep getting thrown out with the general detritus at the end of the day. Is it because it`s trash?It was reported in the Telegraphyesterday that a Damien Hirst, owned by Chris Evans, might have beenaccidentally taken to a charity shop. It is an appealing story, and notthe first time art has been mistaken for junk. Last year an early AnishKapoor sculpture made from polystyrene, resin and cement was chucked out by waste disposal experts. Marc Quinn`s infamous frozen blood head was rumoured to have been defrosted in Saatchi`s freezer and staff at Tate Britain threw out a sculptureby Gustav Metzger, mistakenly thinking it was a bag of waste paper. Theacceptable response to such stories appears to be one of horror andincredulity, not for the loss of the artwork, but for its original costand the collector who bought it. Surely there is no greater evidencethat the work was rubbish, than its accidental trashing.Conceptual art is almost 100 years old and it is arguably viewedwith as much suspicion now as it was in 1917 when Marcel Duchamp first submitted a signed urinal for inclusion in an art show in New York.Coincidentally, that artwork also went missing; it is the conceptualcross to bear. But artists are always quick to confront the situation.Movements throughout the 20th century challenged the veracity of theart work, creating art from raw ingredients, appropriating junk, andscavenging skips in order to jeopardise perceptions of value.From the Italian movement Arte Povera {poor art}, to Carl Andre`s notorious firebricks bought by Tate in the late 1960s to Ceal Floyer`s empty bin bag,artists continue to offer us their idiosyncratic visions of beauty.That we sometimes cannot see it is not a reason to dismiss it asrubbish.
blogs.guardian.co.uk/art/2008/06/modern_art_is_rubbish.html