An experience at the Tate.

By Alex Pennick Year 10

On first stepping through the hallowed turbine hall, 18 students and two teachers are confronted by some things you don't see every day (unless you are in the habit of hallucinating). Discussion echoes through the refugee halls of London 2058 AD, a time when rain is destroying the city and monuments mutate into quasi provocative sculptures by Dominique Gonzales-Foerster (well, recreated by her) in what Sky News calls ‘something bound to create controversy’. The debates the Tate is famous for creating ensue immediately. Every person seems divided even in themselves as to what their opinion is and how it is justifiable. For today is not just about the merit of the pieces collected by the Tate, but a debate on what classifies as works of art.

We have three supposed art students in Sixth Form, come to give their opinions behind the pieces. One however is simply posing as one; a joker in the deck. Each of them steps up to give an explanation showing their views on the art’s merit. After the Turbine hall we immediately move through into the art halls for a debate on the merit of a famous Francis Bacon piece and the symbolism within it.

The three "art students" each give their own view, one wearing a blue scarf and checkered jumper, one wearing two belts, and one wearing a beret. The Sixth Form students pass the explanation of the piece from one to another concurring that it is a piece of high standard, but not without provoking debate. Enter Sixth former Lawrence de Leeuw, curator of a scientific and often cynical mind. Through much pointing and waving he explains that it would take more skill and would be more "artistic" to paint a person like a person. Mr Clarke, one half of the teachers on the trip, explains that his purpose here is to stimulate debate.

After this, we make a short trip to the local cafe Eat; just a stone’s throw from the gallery. There we order our meals and discuss the art over metropolitan lunches (and it's not as clichéd as it sounds); the Turbine hall piece TH2058 becoming a clear topic of conversation. Theories on its subject include the apple being representative of a spent world, the giant arachnid-like centre piece being a tree that grows towards light, and it all just being an Armageddon with the pieces literally meaning what they looked like (the ideas of the apple and the tree seem unlikely given the essay published by Dominique Gonzales-Foerster about the collection, yet unprovable as each of the pieces were made individually separate from the said artist.)

After a few more pieces of art and much heated discussion later (thirty pieces of silver anyone?) and we start getting some seriously controversial pieces. Without going into the graphic violence of these pieces, it must be said that it touched on the crux of the matter we were made to debate: What is and what constitutes art? Some immediately hit out at the insult button with, "Whoever made this and anyone who thinks it is good is emotionally and psychologically dysfunctional" becoming a buzz phrase.

And so the trip grinds to a halt, and we make our exit still no closer to knowing what constitutes art all in all. But I for one have come to think that maybe the whole idea of art is flawed, because if something provokes emotion, then surely it is art, but at the same time, I know that there is more than that which gives a piece of art merit. The reality is that if an entire history of mankind cannot put its finger on what makes art good or even what makes it art, then maybe it is that which makes it beautiful, but at the same time the search for that attraction will always bring more admirers.

And that would be all to be said about the Tate, but there is one last twist. One of the Sixth formers, Dylan Liew, who guided us through the Tate pointing out art and debating its worth is not really an art student, but a drama student; a "joker in the pack" to quote Mr. Clarke. Still, not one person on the trip spotted this, raising one last point, possibly more intriguing than any other: if we can't tell who knows about art and who doesn't, then how do we know the art around us was done by merit and not chance? How do we know there are hidden meanings and clever subtleties within the works that hang in the Tate?