YesBut its a load of . . .

Last week I attended a forum on "Framing Duration: Contemporary Photographic Art and the City". It was hosted by someone who was incapable of communicating other than in "academic speak".

You know the type of person, they get a Ph.D and then devote their life to proving to others how clever they are. The host spoke in strings of philosophic, psychological clichés "the primordial juxtaposition of images incongruously intones and dare I say contradicts Nietzsche's paradoxical supposition blarr blarr blarr blarr . . ." I could not take her observations of the work of the three artists participating, seriously.

She reminded me of a story told on the radio a couple of weeks ago by a artists' model who sat for many of Lucian Freud's nude studies. She was in a gallery looking at a painting of herself when an "expert" arrived with a group of art aficionados. He started to explain the profound philosophic meaning behind Freud's painting. Which was a load of drivel. As she said Freud's driving force was the desire to paint, his sole objective meeting the challenges arising while painting.

I go to the toilet to defecate, the host would go to contemplate the symbolic attributes of excrement.

For the analytically minded the image I posted on My Shared Images does not metamorphose the traumatic reaction to my first sexual experience. And I leave you ponder the deep meaning of the image posted above.