BP Portrait Award 2017

(The National Portrait Gallery, 2 and 3 July 2017)

Some are thrust into reality. Few are comfortable in it. The substitute is nigh. In the meantime, the exhibition honours those who bother with the expensive business of traditional existence by painting them and welcoming them in the heart of London, still a centre of modern civilisation. Not all succeed at existing, for not all succeed at connecting. "Carmel," "Carmen," "The Levinsons," and "Society" do. Some connect to seek in-group approval, out-group approval, the viewer approval, or self-approval. Each crafts his own narrative and style in order to be unique and, thus, not directly comparable to anyone else. Some incite the viewer to assert a narrative, as "Carmel" does.

There is something to be said for a random allotment of awards, which lately seems to have been the case with BP portrait awards. If one accepts progressive taxation, why not "tax" a better painter more by refusing him recognition? However, while progressive taxation does not flip the after-tax income ranking, BP awards may flip the post-award recognition. Two considerations may make such flipping palatable. First, before the award has been made, a better candidate may face a slightly higher probability of winning, so expected recognition will be aligned with merit. Second, even after the prize has been awarded to an arbitrary candidate, the authors of better work will gain greater recognition from the public, journalists, and gallery owners. The committee's choice of winners is a better indicator of the prevailing politics than of artistic merit.

As population grows mobile, and alternative forms of existence flourish, Living in London, NYC, Paris, San Francisco, and Los Angeles proper will become a form of traditional existence that only the best of the best will be able to afford and for ever shorter amounts of time.