Whether you agree with competitions for artists or not there is no doubt that they play a large role on our contemporary art scene. Last week was definitely a week for the competitions; Ruth Sacks won the Absa Atelier and submissions closed for Sasol New Signatures.

Every year I have to give myself a little kick for being such a dreadful snob about these competition entries. One of the great things about the Sasol New Signatures is that they have an option to post one’s work online and this means that, at a certain point in time, the general public can go view, not only the entries that will be exhibited, but also all the online entries (including those that were not selected) and form their own opinions.

Over the years, Sasol seems to have been weaned of the usual entries of oil painted kudu on brass and water colours of garden flowers, but there are still some which make me cringe. The entries I find most problematic are not the very traditional media or the passé subject matter which combine to form work that has not been cutting edge since 1900 – at least these are sometimes well constructed.

What I find most objectionable, is work that is technically badly executed or whose rational is the artist’s limp grip on some fashionable theory with which they are only vaguely acquainted. Popular on this front is the found object, installations of hordes of plastic crap and anything to do with abjection, feminism/gender and identity politics.

Now I feel a bit of a hypocrite about the bad execution bit. I know from my own work that a lack of funds, time, experience or just plain laziness can lead to a work which is sound in concept but tacky on the presentation. I’m all for bad art if it leads to the artist making better art. Every successful artist has made things that make them wince later in their career – if they haven’t it’s probably because they still making kak.

But I still haven’t figured out how some of these things are selected. I can’t begin to judge someone else’s opinion. Some of my friends have theories about the formulas that each competition adopts: Absa is usually won by Afrikaans white males (Ruth having disproved that theory. Ah well, we’ll have one for next year.) MTN New Contemporaries is never a white person (which undermines any black artist who wins when they actually were the best) and well Kebble wasn’t around long enough to have a formula. So what is Sasol’s formula? Any suggestions?

Looking at last year’s show, it seems that they are shrewd in a business sense. They do not award any one good work but rather look at the CV of the candidate. Now this makes business sense, I suppose, if one considers that if one is to invest in an artwork it had better be the work of an artist who is continually practising and whose work will appreciate in value as their career soars – hence the title New Signatures. But still, in the context of the exhibition, last year’s winners were some empty speech bubbles and a maquette for an absent and much more conceptually sound body of work.

So we will see on the 16 August 2006 when the show opens at Pretoria Art Museum who the winners are, so make your bets.

Actually, bugger any integrity/snobbery, for an overall first prize of R60 000,00, a runner-up award of R15 000,00 and five merit awards of R5 000,00 each, submit something next year, you never know your luck.

I found these entries intriguing. I’m disappointed they didn’t cut it. They are in respective order - Man by Jennifer McKay (Fox)- (probably that inspired title that nailed her in the end); Security Guards and Stagnant Water by Cobi Labuscagne (another gem in the title department) and Africa Parting by Robyn Yannoukos.