Thursday, October 04, 2007

Playing Silly Burgers

Heaven knows I'm open to Modern Art, but the I'm-an-artist-not-a-photographer Boo Ritson is surely taking the Mickey.

Asked to choose her favourite shot for the Guardian, her choice is a picture of nine cheeseburgers she covered in glue, painted and got someone else to photograph.

And as an example of suffering for her Art, she cites the fact that she is Vegetarian who loves cheeseburgers.

Is there anything here that Andy Warhol didn't do to death in 1960's ?

Still, anyone who wants a picture of painted, gluey junk-food should contact the Alan Cristea Gallery on

Or maybe you'd prefer Stan's contribution to this oeuvre, "Well-dressed Laptop III"

It represents the growing commercialisation of blogging, and full image rights can be yours for a £10 donation to the charity of your choice.

Other works are available from Stan's "Travelodge Period" :-

* Well-dressed Laptop IV
* Well-dressed Television XI
* Well-dressed Kettle LXIX
etc. etc. etc.

Not to mention my latest work, "Badly-dressed Laptop I", which is basically just a picture of a laptop.


ArcticFox said...

That's harsh....

You're right in what you're saying about some "art" being less involved or complex than other "art".....

The grey area of course, is that in trying to stress your point, you have merely reinforced the opposite!!

Your "well dressed laptop" is actually art!! It's your original concept, and you've managed to deliver some representation of it.

The only difference (in my humble opinion) between your stunning example and Boo Ritson's is that you haven't already made some sort of name for yourself in the art world. I am sure if you were already known or indeed had managed to put an enormous exhibition of your work together, then you'd be laughing all the way to the bank.

Just because it isn't good doesn't mean it isn't art!!


Stan said...

Given that it caused me to go off on one, it is probably good art indeed. By contrast, I dont think my picture is art because i took no care over it, it signifies nothing and i did not intend it to stir any emotion in the viewer. Bit like those paintings by zoo animals that often fool the critics. Give me science over art any day.