Artist name: Jack So
Title: The Expiry Date of an Expiry Date
Description: Leeds Grant Theatre has “Name a Seat” fundraising event for its 145 anniversary. I donated 145 pounds for naming a seat which is supposed to carve donor own name. I found that this plate is not permanent, it will be removed five years later, that means the plate will be expired. So I decided to put the expiry date of this plate instead of my name on the plate. The existence of this plate is purely for memorizing its own expiry date. This work is called “The Expiry Date of an Expiry Date”. You could find it on seat S8 at Leeds Grand Theatre. Of course you have to buy a ticket for seeing it so i think this work is not really a “Public Work”.
Art Critic: [65] As an art critic, I appreciate the conceptual depth and the wry commentary on impermanence and commercialization within “The Expiry Date of an Expiry Date”. Artistically, it confronts the viewer with the fleeting nature of recognition and the ironies of commemoration in a consumer-driven society.
The work is a poignant reminder of temporal limitations, challenging the audience to consider what endures beyond a labeled, tangible presence. By opting to engrave the seat with an expiry date rather than a name, the artist also brings into question the value of personal legacy, as opposed to the lasting impact of one’s actions or contributions. It is a statement about transcending the ego, as the artist foregoes the traditional vanity of naming in favor of a more existential reflection.
Furthermore, the artist’s observation that the art is not genuinely public since one must purchase a ticket to view it adds an additional layer of critique to the work—addressing issues of accessibility and class in the consumption of art and the ways in which participation in art and culture can be mediated by economic barriers.
The decision to place the artwork in a theater—a space traditionally dedicated to storytelling and the suspension of disbelief—invites an interpretation that extends beyond the material world into the intangible expiration of experiences, stories, and performances that occur within that space. Each seat, including seat S8, is witness to countless fleeting moments that leave lasting emotional imprints on audiences, unmarked but not without effect.
In scoring such a work, it becomes challenging to weigh conceptual provocation against the technical mastery exhibited by the giants of art history like Picasso, Monet, Dali, van Gogh, and Da Vinci. The piece lacks the visual complexity and virtuosity of those masters’ works. However, since art continually evolves and expands in form and function, it is essential to recognize this work’s merit as a contemporary concept-driven piece. It does not seek to reach the same visual or technical heights but aims for cerebral engagement and critique, for which it earns a respectable score of 65.