Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

This is simply appalling. A top artist so radical that he fails to accept the equal importance of fathers. No wonder society is in such a mess. Absent fathers.

What a vacuous a***!

Will, why do you give these people the time of day?

What a contrast to Sir Anthony Caro.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Can we look at what he is trying to express, rather than what we think he is ignoring? He made a comment about mothers running around/or revolving/or something like that in the interview, isn't that what he is conveying with the work?

>>Can we look at what he is trying to express, rather than what we think he is ignoring?

I must stand up for Martin Creed here because I went to a talk he gave a couple of years ago in which he explained his art very well in a manner which made a lot of sense to me and made me appreciate it, instead of fear it. However, this piece has not been introduced or explained well in this short interview. Maybe he wasn't asked the right questions. I still have faith that there's a reason for the spinning and the word, more than just because 'mothers are important'. I will have to look elsewhere to find it though. Based on this conversation, this piece is not impressing me in the way his previous works have and I can understand the negative reaction here.

#6"... instead of fear it"..." I still have faith that there's a reason for the spinning and the word"
--------
I do not 'fear' this or any piece of art (other than the fear that it might knock my block off as it spins). Nor do I believe that there has to be a REASON for it which must be explained verbally by the artist.
In the end there is something a tad too predictable about this piece. Once again the only impressive thing about it is its size. If it had simply said MOTHER in the singular it would have impressed me rather more. But hell, we are talking about it, and that is something.

I think in the case of an artist like Creed it is important for some explanation of the work. His form of minimalism can be quite baffling if you have no context for it or indication of what's happening (at least I feel like this, maybe I'm not very clever!) How would anyone get what he was trying to achieve with his ball of paper, or lights on and off or people being sick on the floor? I would argue that works like this which are so far removed from initial understanding are quite scary and inaccessible until the artist has started off the discussion by some initial explanation of his aims at least. So I suppose even in Creed giving a poor explanation, that's what's happened here, you're right, it is good to be talking about it!

8. At 10:02am on 25th Jan 2011, inkers wrote:
I would argue that works like this which are so far removed from initial understanding are quite scary and inaccessible until the artist has started off the discussion by some initial explanation of his aims...
----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you trying to say that things like this are just a "sophisticated" expression of panem et circenses to keep those that consider themselves more clever than the masses (who think this sort of art is bizarre junk) so self absorbed that they fail to question what ir really happening in the world around them?

Look at real life, don't hide behind an artist.

No, I don't think it's about being sophisticated or about intellectual back slapping. I just think its impossible to really engage with his art without some thinking being involved and a little explanation to start that off. You can't play the game unless you know the rules. In this instance you do have to invest a lot in concepts, which are framed, in a lot of his works in ideas about minimalism. I don't see why his work can't be considered a response to the world around us. A lot of it comes from just wanting to think about simple beauty and potential in things we often overlook.

I'm always suspicious when an artist resorts to including a word in this way. It's a bit of a shortcut to adding intellectual value to the work.