Martin Boyce, the day after winning the Turner Prize, the £25,000 award for the best in British contemporary art, said simply: "Glasgow is a good place to live if you are an artist."
And so it seems. The "excited and delighted" Boyce, 43, is the third Scot in a row to win the prestigious, controversial prize, and the second of those to live and work in the city.
Boyce's award, making it a hat-trick for Scotland after wins by Richard Wright in 2009 and 2010's Susan Philipsz (from Maryhill, but who lives in Berlin), confirms – if it had been in any doubt – that Glasgow and Scotland more than punch above their weight in the febrile world of contemporary art.
Other cities must be wondering what is in the water in Glasgow. Since Douglas Gordon won the Turner Prize in 1996, it has become the second city of visual art in the UK behind London, and perhaps the third most important arts centre in Europe beyond Berlin and the English capital.
There have already been calls for the Turner Prize show to be staged in the city.
Wags have suggested that, like the World Cup, the Turner Prize should stay in Glasgow because it has been won three times in a row.
When asked whether his award success will lead to a move to Berlin or London, Boyce laughed and uttered a swift 'no' – he has two children entering secondary school, he has lived in Berlin before, and he is busy on new projects for the Tramway and Scottish Ballet.
The artist is baffled when asked to explain Scotland's new Golden Age of art, with six winners of the Turner Prize since 1996, and many more artists shortlisted.
"That question comes up all the time: it is just good artists, they could live anywhere but they choose to live in Glasgow because it is a good place to be as an artist –you may travel for work, but you always come home," he said.
Academics, artists, and gallery curators have all pondered the question in recent years.
They point to an unusual but beneficial confluence of factors in Glasgow's favour: the key presence of the Glasgow School of Art (GSA), supportive and innovative galleries, a population of artists of all kinds who provide support, work and mutual encouragement, cheaper rents than London providing affordable spaces for living and working, direct flights to Europe, and, over the years, some judicious public funding, from the Scottish Arts Council and Creative Scotland, and Glasgow City Council.
In his acceptance speech, Boyce noted the contributions of teachers in his success, and yesterday he pinpointed two at the GSA: David Harding, former head of sculpture, and Sam Ainsley, former head of fine art. But he added: "You could also mention my school teacher, Ann Cramond, who saw I was interested in art. I learned so much from all of them.
"But I also learned from other artists and that is very important."
Professor Roger Wilson, head of the school of fine art at GSA, said the now historically significant success of Glasgow artists is "quite extraordinary".
"You have to remember, too, that for every Turner Prize winner that comes from GSA, there are 50 graduates who themselves become the audience for contemporary art," he said. "And that is a very educated and demanding audience, and the influence of that cannot be overlooked."
Sarah Lowndes, an academic at the GSA whose book Social Sculpture tries to explain Glasgow's contemporary renaissance, added: "Of course the success can continue. There are artists here who could win, such as David Shrigley who hasn't been nominated yet, neither has Victoria Morton. I cannot see why it won't continue, there are still artists moving here and wanting to live and work here.
"It would be naive to say there are no problems with funding, but the cuts in Scotland have not been as severe as in England. It's not a flash in the pan – artists could choose to live in New York or London, but they are living here."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article