"so many questions"

This time, she has placed a mannequin on a lavatory next to two supermarket check-out counters. Four horse-shoes and bits of discarded wood dangle from wires attached to the mannequin's head. They appear to bear no relevance to the check-out counters on which the artist has arranged bowls and spoons, as well as empty jars with the remnants of food. Scattered across the floor are piles of tiles and broken pottery in a plastic bag.

Sophie O'Brien, one of three Turner Prize curators, saw deep meaning in the installation, explaining that the artist was “searching out the language of objects - things we overlook in our daily life” - and making us look at them with “fresh eyes”. She claimed that the artist had placed each found object with extreme precision.

Her colleague, Judith Nesbitt, the Tate's chief curator, added: “It's as if the narrative has been stripped away. You're left trying to make sense of the objects to each other and to ourselves.”

She applauded the artist for prompting “so many questions” from the viewer.

Times of London, regarding a new exhibit at the Tate for the artists nominated for this year's Turner Prize.

Somehow I suspect that JMW Turner might not be in accordance with the curators had it been possible to give him a voice in choosing the recipient of the prize named for him.

That whirring sound you hear coming from a certain crypt at St. Paul's Cathedral?

You guessed it, Turner, turning in his grave.

(note, while I still think Marcel Duchamp was one of the premier artists of the 20th century, and his Fountain one of the seminal works, that was then and groundbreaking, this is now, and this kind of crap has become tedious and conventional)

Who Knew?

Back in the late 70s, and early 80s, when you were listening to your Cheech & Chong records and smoking from your bong, or heading out to the recently built multiplex to see their latest film and hotboxing in your "love" van in the parking lot just before stumbling to your seat in the movie house . . .

You weren't being a stoner-loser, you were contributing to a burgeoning art scene and joining a long line of art patrons by helping Cheech Marin get rich.

(and for those of you too young to have experienced it first hand, I'm sure you got some second hand "Up in Smoke" sent your way, either through Cable, VHS, or DVD, and I'm sure a certain percentage of you even inhaled)

Given the Positioning, I'm Thinking It's More of a Really Nasty Tumor on His Thigh . . .

Ohhh, "Transgressive Art".

Artist creates statue depicting Jesus in all his glory, and a much, much firmer glory than we are accustomed to seeing.

Yawn.

When he sculpts an explicit portrayal of Mohammed's first carnally connubial night with 9 year old Aisha, then I'll believe this twerp is really 'transgressive'.

He'd hit two taboos in one go with that one, the line between art and kiddie-porn, and the undue respect artists (at least comparatively with Christianity, Judaism, and other creeds) seem to accord Islam given the violent reaction of a certain subset of its adherents.

Instead Mr. Koh goes after Mickey Mouse, E.T., and Jesus and shows them in a more 'excited state' than we're used to.

Also, if you follow the link, the Daily Mail chooses to show the Jesus statue, with a little bit of pixelation, I guess to obscure the offending member, but they do so in the least obscuring manner possible, so rather than obfuscating, it more or less highlights the offense.

Way to go.

Somehow if there had been an explicit statue of Mohammed with an obviously under-age Aisha engaged in marital sex, I don't think it would have been presented with the barest of pixelated cover-ups by the Daily Mail. But, I could be wrong.

Other possible projects for Mr. Koh would be to go art-historical with this crap, a recreation of Michelangelo's David, but with a more impressive (and tumescent) twig and berries than he now sports, Rodin's Thinker, but engaged in an activity other than thinking, retitled Rodin's Wanker, and finally, a 100% accurate reproduction of Bernini's The Ecstasy of St. Teresa, cause that's already pretty damn explicit as originally realized.

I really should get the commissions to do this crap, I've got much better ideas, I can always hire a crew of real artists to do the actual work.

It Sounds Like an Educational Excursion, but Internet Porn is A LOT Cheaper . . .

After posting the pic of Fragonard's The Swing, I swore I've seen this in person, but upon learning that it's part of the Wallace Collection, I doubt this is true (I've never been to London, unlike Puss n' Boots).

Visiting the website for The Wallace Collection, I happened upon today's event:

Price: £22.00
Ages: All Ages
Lecturer: Alison Kusner
Spend the day studying the human form and how it has been portrayed by artists such as Titian and Boucher in the Renaissance and the Rococo periods. Sketch in the galleries in the morning looking at how different artists have tackled the naked human form, then draw from life in the afternoon. With artist and lecturer Alison Kusner.

For over $40, I'd expect more than a bit of 'life drawing' if you know what I mean . . .

Could you push this as an "All Ages" event in the USA?

Will Alison be lecturing in the nude?

I'm going high-brow with this site, can you tell?

(trying to keep the riff raff out)