How valuable is shock in art? As Charles Saatchi recognised with his sideshow barker role to the YBAs carnival of horrors, very valuable indeed. But, once the dust has settled — and it just about has now, three decades and several decaying sharks on — how valuable is shock to art?
A grown-up would say that art should not be about shock at all, it should be about the integrity of the work, the fulfilment of the artist’s vision, and if it shocks, that’s society’s stuffy fault. Yet the very nature of conceptual art — from Duchamp’s Pissoir onwards — is to cause a reaction, with the ideal reaction being outrage. This is what the Saatchi Gallery made its reputation on, as the enfant terrible gallery. And Saatchi knew how to market that outrage. Duchamp, but with PR. But did that era have true artistic importance, beyond making for a nice segment in I Love the 90s?
