Sir. As Victoria White recently noted that I may be your next Minister for Arts, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on a current disturbing trend in Irish art criticism.
Your correspondent, Luke Clancy, presents a stark view of the public art he thinks should adorn the city (April 23rd). He describes some popular and interactive sculptures such as Rynhart's Molly Malone, McKenna's Two Women and O'Doherty's Anna Livia as "seeming to demonstrate the odd inarticulacy of a certain type of `popular' representational sculpture." He sees them offering "an image of Ireland as a place in which public art is carried out in the visual language of the lowest common denominator", and the only solution to them as "the bull dozer". In a second article ("Set nothing in stone"), he expands on his vision by approvingly quoting Sandra Percival that "it is wrong to aim for general acceptance of a work rather than create, something that has its own value.
Is an example of such superior work the steel atrocities imposed on the people of the Coombe and Ballymun? I can assure you that they would prefer a Molly Malone any day!
What is most depressing is the conflict he manufactures between these "representations" he despises and the transitory art events he seems to like. I too enjoy experimental work and love Renco de Fouw's doors in Temple Bar, but I also think Molly Malone has a strong place as a "popular representation" and as a centre of much good humour and interactivity. I enjoy, too, the current fashion for "temporary art" and would particularly mention the compelling work by Kathy Herbert of Belfast in this regard. The animus against "popular culture" was illustrated by the comment from Abbey Director Patrick Mason that he was proud that he had no television in his house. And he wonders what has happened to Abbey audiences?
Finally, Luke Clancy's observations are very much in line with the traditional negative consensus among Irish critics regarding all forms of "popular art". Joyce couldn't find a publisher in Dublin (and he wonderfully satirised their blinkered mentality in Pomes Pennyeach), just as years later Roddy Doyle had to do the same to cries of "but is this literature?" as he went on to world acclaim. There was also the ease of The Passion Machine and its wonderful plays like Studs and Brown Bread, playing to packed working class audiences ("but is this theatre?"). Similarly, Brendan O'Carroll was shunned by last years Dublin Theatre Festival but then did his show to packed audiences in a space he rented himself ("but is this funny?"). Historians will remember the eternal shame of the Hugh Lane affair, though also the marvellous role of James Larkin, the (popular?) trade union leader in the controversy.
As to Hegarty and Stone's computer generated piece which I can enjoy approvingly accompanying Luke Clancy's article, I can only ask "but is it film, is it literature, is it architecture?
Come on leave Molly Malone alone! - Yours etc.,
Bayside Walk,
Dublin 13