No ranking, no winners, no losers

Hi there, I thought I share with you this BBC article on this year's Turner prize, which has been awarded to all four nominated artists after the artists had written to the jury and asked for sharing the prize and not picking a single winner.

This is obviously meant as a statement against comparing, ranking, winning and losing in arts (and, by extension, in music), besides going against division and isolation in society. I like this. I may be a bit schizophrenic because I actually take part in the kind of discussions about who are the "big six" the "second tier", I rate albums, I select favourites in polls, I have produced a ranking of my 250 favourite albums, and occasionally I create polls asking "who's best".

However for me this is all a game, not to be taken too seriously. I somehow find it fun, and occasionally it leads me to re-listening and re-"evaluation" of albums out of which I then sometimes get more than before. But ultimately I agree with those who find it pointless and don't take part in these exercises. Except that I do.

The linked article also cites a number of critical voices such as

"The four nominees asked to share this year's prize - but robbing the judges and the public of the opportunity to scrutinise and compare their work hurts the artists too," wrote Mark Hudson (for the Independent, it seems).

Feel free to discuss...

PS: I do realise this belongs in "General Discussions". Sorry!