The Chapman Brothers

After a visit to Tate Britain I became interested in the controversial work of the Chapman Brothers: Jake and Dinos Chapman. I feel I can draw a lot of inspiration from their work for my current project as both mine and their work has links with intervention and merging old with new. Therefore I decided to research their work in more depth.

The Chapman Brother Family Collection (Tate Britain)...

 My own photos of two particular pieces that I liked...

I found their work fascinating as when I first entered the dark room, I was met by an assemblage of illuminated pseudo-African totems, masks and carvings. However upon closer inspection the inauthenticity of the objects gradually became apparent, with the distinct identity of the fast food chain McDonalds emerging as a key theme among the work. 
The brothers have reconciled ethnographic art and fused it with modernism, the result being a timeless collection of work that speaks a universal language, bringing global culture together.
The juxtaposition between the ancient aesthetic of the sculptures yet the modern fast food brand really drew me in and has influenced my work on this project, inspiring me to explore mixing historical work with contemporary themes, which can be seen in my cave drawing experiments in which I converted modern scenes and brands into cave drawings.
This style of juxtaposition can communicate different messages to different people, which is something I have found intriguing throughout every project I have completed. However what I find most intriguing about the work is how it willfully resists straightforward interpretation, fooling the viewer to begin with before forcing them to reconsider their first interpretation and judgement of the work. However a straightforward explanation is very hard to find.

Even the sources of these supposed treasures are in place to fool the viewer, with the named sources Cambig, Seirf, and Ekoc revealing much more when read backwards! 

However despite all of the simplistic Mcdonalds references, the brothers have skillfully made cultural trespass the broader issue addressed here, making overt references to the history of modern art ( e.g. minature version of Endless Column by Constantin Brancusi with a red haired mask). The work also comments on how museums drain the sociological and religious meanings from ethnographic artifacts, instead focusing on presenting them as aesthetic objects. This makes me wonder whether the main focus of museums/galleries has become the aesthetic of a piece of work? Have the brothers placed an extremely popular brand on traditionally meaningful objects just to satisfy the public? Or by doing this are they proving that people are mainly drawn in by aesthetic at this current time, which makes the meaning behind these ethnographic objects pointless?

Once I had viewed a couple of the figures, I found that I wanted to explore the whole collection, searching for the clever trickery and hidden Mcdonalds references. The technique of creating discrete references for viewers to search for is very effective as it encourages the viewer to really engage with the work and explore it in much more detail. I would like to explore using this technique in the Church with my own work, maybe by presenting the viewers with a map instructing them to find my work and explore what it portrays/connotes for themselves. This will make the work interactive and engaging for the viewers, like the Chapman brothers' work.


I particularly like this piece of work due to the juxtaposition between the pseudo African sculpture and the very modern items it is holding. I feel it portrays how the extremely popular fast food chain has now infiltrated the most remote corners of the Earth, and so it could be suggesting how this is ruining traditional cultures and damaging these places (through deforestation, colonialism, capitalism etc.) This led me to think about how we overlook these problems when we think about the fast food chain. The common negative thought is on the subject of health: how bad the food is for us. Yet many of us never spare a thought for the real problems caused by the chain, we simply overlook these problems. Maybe the work was made to encourage us to think about this?
Yet despite all of this the beauty of the work remains intact and infectious, which is what appeals to people. 


No critique or political statement is offered by the brothers, however it has been said that their aim is to unearth the contradictions and hypocrisies present in contemporary culture, posing questions but providing no answers (source can be found in my research folder). This sense of mystery that leaves the viewer to interpret the work in their own way is very interesting to me, and is also what Antony Gormley aimed to do in some of his work, although he achieved this by creating work that could be viewed differently depending on a range of factors. I am hoping to create work that achieves this effect as I feel it helps the viewer engage with the work and make personal links with it.

The brothers mentioned in an interview (found in my research folder) that 'The effect is more interesting than the object'. This suggests they aim to provoke a reaction, which could actually be more important than the artwork itself. This is something I am going to explore with my intervention work. With some pieces I may aim to create something that provokes a reaction from the viewers, maybe just the shock that the item isn't first what it appeared to be, or possibly something more shocking. This will hopefully make my work a lot more engaging.
This effect also makes the Chapman Brothers' work similar to the work of Charles Bronson, as he also aimed to provoke a reaction with his work. However the methods used are very contrasting; Bronson opted for a very straightforward, brutally honest approach; whereas the Chapman brothers provoke a reaction through confusion, and the possible suggestions of their work, but nothing is certain like it is in Bronson's work. I feel the discrete method of the Chapman brothers will be most effective in my work as I need to consider the environment in which I will be displaying my work- The church, and so I feel that shocking and controversial work like Bronson's may not be appropriate here.


Leading on from this I aim to create site specific work for the Church (in which our exhibition is being held) that will hopefully deceive viewers when they first view the work, with the intervention/manipulation gradually becoming clear under further inspection. I am also going to explore giving my interventions more modern twists like the Chapman brothers do as this causes controversy and excitement.
I may also consider displaying some of my work on shelves or plinths as the Chapman brothers have, as it highlights the objects as pieces of art without revealing their inauthenticity right away, and so this is something I will need to explore.