Portrait of a dickhead - Andy Wear

I am not here to batter and fry artist Andy Wear for his poor tasting (no pun intended) attempt at a good hearted act.

If you have been sitting too long on the beach you might have missed the recent story of artist Andy Wear who had taken it upon himself to batter and fry up an average portrait of Andy’s grandfather by the iconic artist Sidney Nolan. He then listed it on eBay hoping to raise some money for a Brunswick Gallery whose bar had been robbed.

Now, to get things straight, to compare this idle sketch of Wear’s grandfather to Nolan’s ‘First Class Marksman’ that recently sold for $5.4M is a bit of a stretch. However, I would argue that what Andy did was not in the interest of art at all, or even selfless, but instead was nihilist, fascist and at its core, fundamentally cruel.

The act has rightly caused outrage, not just because the artwork was destroyed and along with it, the monetary value, but I can’t help but think that this was more than just a dickhead stunt.

Andy remarks that it came to him in a dream – dreams are one thing and reality is usually more sobering. Perhaps we can all rest a little more comfortably knowing that at least Andy wasn’t told to burn down the NGV in his dream.

The great artist Rover Thomas began to paint because he was visited in a dream, and he acted on this dream and we as a nation are all the better for it. Andy Wear’s shallow hallucination however seems more like a boganic nightmare made up of minimum chips and chiko rolls.

It’s a pity that in Andy’s dream he didn’t have to batter and fry his own testicles, as it certainly would’ve made for more interesting viewing on the subsequent DVD he created.

The reason why I’m outraged is I don’t think an artist has any right to alter another artist’s original piece - without their permission. Sure one can copy it, appropriate it, give it away, but the work itself, is not anyone’s to tamper with, no matter how much one would like to or however long it’s been in the family.

I am a believer that we are custodians of artwork. They outlive all of us. As someone who deals in art, I see this all of the time. Collections are built, donated or sold on, but the work remains intact, sans breadcrumbs – importantly – because down the track - and I’m talking generations – there are reasons that might reveal itself for the work to exist.

We can learn as much from the best works of Nolan as we can by looking at the worst ones too. Andy Wear has no right to censor and destroy this work because he believes his opinion is more important than anyone else’s. That is why his act is fascist.

I was recently in New York and went for a visit to MOMA. A really wonderful experience. In one of the crowded galleries there were some early Jackson Pollock works, small pieces and great to see in the flesh. Out of the corner of my eye I suddenly see this young woman lean in and touch the painting, not touch lightly (as if that’s excusable) but she prodded it. At first I thought my eyes were playing tricks but then she moved to the next work and did exactly the same thing. No alarms, no guards throwing her to the ground. My blood boiled. So I spoke up. ‘Don’t do that’ I said. She flinched, then turned and smiled sweetly. So I didn’t stop there, ‘This has to last generations,’ I was fuming.

I couldn’t help but think if everyone did this there’d be nothing to see at MOMA but smudgy, dirty, vandalised pieces. This young woman wasn’t doing it for art’s sake, as was the case of Andy Wear, she was obviously curious and didn’t understand the protocol of what looking at a painting actually means. The two cases are different but they are two selfish acts that point to ruining artworks for future generations.

I am well aware that there are no rules when it comes to art, but surely another’s artwork is sacred, regardless of what you think of it personally. Yes, Nolan was prolific and could have learnt the art of editing and there is probably enough of his work to go around. But I think this type of cultural vandalism is unfair to the original artist, his fans, the subject of the drawing (Andy’s grandfather) and even Andy’s family, which is why the act is cruel.

I suppose the best we can hope for is for the DVD that was created by Andy can now be turned into a potato cake and we can watch the artist ingest his own pointlessness on a public stage all in the name of art of course. Next time Andy dream big!

Read the artsHub news story here.