Seriously review – headstands, bananas and a dog watching porn reveal photography's silly side

A new exhibition at Sprüth Magers in London tackles the "silly side" of conceptual photography, featuring works that use humour to challenge societal norms and conventions. The show takes its title from a phrase coined by artist Louise Lawler, who has been using humorously subversive tactics to critique art world sexism.

Lawler's own work is represented in the exhibition, including her 1972-81 audio piece Birdcalls, which screams out the names of famous male artists in different bird call styles. This tongue-in-cheek gesture is both a scathing critique of the art world and an exercise in silliness. The use of absurdity to highlight social issues has been a hallmark of conceptual art since its inception.

Other artists featured in the exhibition, such as Sarah Lucas and Cindy Sherman, also used humor to challenge societal norms and expectations. Lucas's banana-wielding self-portrait and Sherman's playful takes on feminine stereotypes are just two examples of how artists have used humour to critique the way women are represented in the media.

However, not all of the works on display share this sense of playfulness. Thomas Ruff's L'Empereur series is a more sombre take on the artist's own persona, with Ruff posing as an emperor and then slumping into various armchairs and lamps. The use of slapstick in John Smith's 12-minute video The Girl Chewing Gum may initially seem like a joke, but it also has a darkly prescient tone that anticipates our current obsession with fake news.

The exhibition raises the question: can conceptual art ever truly be funny? While some works may elicit chuckles or giggles, others are more likely to leave viewers bewildered or uncomfortable. The show's reliance on humour as a tool for social commentary is evident, but whether it succeeds in making us laugh depends on individual taste and cultural context.

Overall, Seriously at Sprüth Magers is an exhibition that wears its heart on its sleeve – or rather, its sense of absurdity on its sleeve. While not all the works may raise a laugh, they are certainly thought-provoking and visually engaging, offering a unique perspective on conceptual photography's often-silky side.

Ugh I'm so over exhibitions at galleries in London... can't we just have something that doesn't make me want to roll my eyes? I mean, seriously, who thought it was a good idea to put Louise Lawler's "Birdcalls" audio piece on display? It's like she's trolling us all over again. And don't even get me started on the artwork itself – it's just so...try-hard.

I do love Sarah Lucas and Cindy Sherman, but can we please talk about why their work is being showcased alongside this other stuff? Is it really necessary to put Thomas Ruff's sombre piece next to Lucas's banana self-portrait? It's like they're trying to create some kind of emotional rollercoaster or something...

And what's with the video by John Smith? I mean, I get it, we need to talk about fake news and all that jazz, but can't he just make a decent joke for once? The exhibition is already feeling like a mess, and this piece just puts me off even more...

Wow - I love how this exhibition is using humor to tackle some heavy issues like sexism in the art world! It's so interesting to see how different artists use absurdity to critique societal norms and expectations. Like, who wouldn't chuckle at Sarah Lucas's banana-wielding self-portrait? But at the same time, it's thought-provoking to see how artists like John Smith are using humor to comment on our obsession with fake news .

omg i'm loving this exhibition so much it's like artists are using humor to tackle some super serious issues like sexism & representation in the art world. i love how lawler's work is all tongue-in-cheek, it's both funny & scathing at the same time and lucas & sherman's works are just soooo clever but then there's ruff's L'Empereur series which is like... not what you expect at all it's got this somber vibe that makes me feel all the feels and john smith's video? ugh i don't think it's funny at all but overall, seriously, it's an amazing show that's making me laugh & think

omg u guyz this exhibition at Sprüth Magers in London is literally giving me LIFE !! i mean, who wouldn't want to see a piece of art that screams out the names of famous male artists in bird call styles? lol lawler's work is EVERYTHING and it's so cool to see how other artists like lucas and sherman used humor to challenge societal norms. but at the same time, thomas ruff's l'empereur series is giving me major existential crisis vibes and john smith's video about fake news is like, totally relevant rn so yeah, i'm not sure if conceptual art can ever truly be funny, but this exhibition is def trying

The show is like when you're trying to make a point, but you keep getting interrupted by your own jokes . Can't say I disagree with the curator's attempt at having a laugh while still talking about some pretty heavy stuff – after all "the truth is rarely pure and never simple"

I'm low-key skeptical about this exhibition . Like, isn't using humor to critique societal norms just another way of trying to be "cool" or "edgy"? I mean, is it really that hard to just say what you want without resorting to silly bird calls or banana-wielding selfies? The fact that some artists are more serious and sombre than others just makes me think there's a lack of depth to the whole thing. And don't even get me started on the reliance on humor as a tool for social commentary – it feels like an attempt to be funny rather than actually saying something meaningful about the world we live in . Still, I guess if you're into that sorta thing, it might be entertaining... but not exactly the most intellectually stimulating exhibition

I dunno about this one... Like, I get what they're trying to do - use humor to challenge societal norms - but some of it just feels like, yeah, we get it, you're funny, now laugh at the absurdity of art world sexism . But is it really doing anything to make us think about these issues? Or is it just a bunch of artists playing around and calling it "art"? And what's with all the seriousness from Thomas Ruff? Like, dude, if you're gonna be an emperor, at least wear some decent accessories . I mean, I guess it's nice to see more women in art featured, but can't we just have a good laugh without it being so... earnest ?

I mean think about it ... Conceptual art has always been about pushing boundaries and making us question what's "normal". But when it comes to humor, can we really say that's not funny? I mean, some of the works on display are just ridiculous - like that birdcall piece by Louise Lawler. And don't even get me started on Sarah Lucas' banana-wielding self-portrait . It's like, yeah, she's making a point, but it's also kinda funny.

But at the same time, I think what's really interesting is how some of these works use humor to make us uncomfortable. Like John Smith's video about someone chewing gum... that's not laugh-out-loud funny, that's just weird and thought-provoking . So, can conceptual art ever be "funny"? I think it depends on how you look at it. If you're looking for a laugh, maybe not. But if you want to think about the world in a new way, then yeah, humor can definitely be a powerful tool .

I mean, can you imagine if we had exhibitions like this back in 2005? I remember seeing Cindy Sherman's work for the first time at the MoMA and being blown away by her self-portraits. But then again, that was also a time when social media wasn't even on everyone's phones . The way these artists are using humor to critique societal norms is just genius, but sometimes I feel like it's too cheeky? Like, I get it, we need to laugh at ourselves and our absurdities, but some of the stuff in this exhibition can be a bit cringeworthy . Still, you gotta respect the intention behind it all - making us think about what's funny and what's not .