Shit Rock 2001

Editor: We’re looking at Odd Nerdrum's "Shit Rock" from 2001, painted in oil. My initial thought is, wow, it's pretty provocative! The figures, the palette... It’s quite striking. How do you interpret this work? Curator: This piece is fascinating because it throws the idea of high art on its head. Let's think about the materiality here: oil paint, traditionally associated with fine art, used to depict… well, a very bodily function. What does it mean to elevate this act, to give it the same weight and consideration usually reserved for historical narratives or portraits of the elite? Editor: So, it’s about more than just shocking the viewer? Curator: Absolutely. Consider Nerdrum’s artistic stance. He calls himself a kitsch painter, rejecting modernism’s emphasis on originality and embracing traditional techniques. The labor-intensive process of creating such a realistically rendered image, especially with such a subject, highlights the tension between skill, artistic intent, and the perceived value of the artwork itself. Think about the social context – the art world’s obsession with the new versus Nerdrum's deliberate return to the old masters’ methods. It's a direct challenge to the established power structures within the art market. What statement is he making about artistic labour? Editor: I see… the act of painting becomes almost a rebellion against what's considered “important” or “worthwhile” in art. Curator: Precisely. The value is shifted from subject matter to the execution and the underlying critique of the art world’s value system itself. The materials are rendered meticulously to show us their worth in his eyes. What we're consuming as an audience and what he’s consumed making it. Editor: I hadn’t considered the social commentary so explicitly before. This piece suddenly feels much more complex. Thanks! Curator: It’s a perfect example of how examining materials and context can reveal layers of meaning within an artwork!