Saturday

I went to the Tate Modern yesterday(it's Sunday today) and had most of my existing stigmas of modern "art" reinforced. I've decided that much of the modern "art" I saw at the Tate was best described as "neat." A lot just seemed to play little mind tricks and sometimes gave me a little chuckle, mind you once you read the little blurb about the artist/item it revealed a deeper meaning. Perhaps I'm just naive, maybe I'm simple, but I feel that something of art(I'm using the term broadly now) should be able to stand on it's own and not need someone to whisper to you what it's supposed to mean and how it's supposed to make you feel. In my mind art is a communication and if that communication has to be expanded upon by a little plastic plaque next to the object then that object isn't really an effective work. But then you say "You're right, you are simple. You're not the audience for this art if you can't understand it." that's all very good but then why do these paintings appear in public galleries if there's only a very small part of the population that will actually get what the artist is talking about(or at least pretend to), maybe it's just a tourist attraction that plays on the pseudo-intelligentsia. It's for those dates where he wants to show how much he can bullshit about the deep symbolism mirroring the anguish of our souls or the cultural deprivation resulting from the rise of the corporation corporally expressed in a Lobster Phone composed by a drugged-up mid-twentieth century Spanish painter. I don't know where I'm going with this... After we got past the first floor of the Tate Modern I was much relieved, the exhibit got much less neat and at points I did find myself moved. Whatever floats your boat I guess, if you get moved by a cigarbox on the wall with a map of the world at the back and ouzo glasses filled with assorted marbles and pieces of glass then that's just great, I'm happy for you, but it just doesn't do it for me.

We finished the gallery probably too quickly, I think we were both rather hungry, and found our way across the millennium bridge over the sparkling Thames(it was a beautiful day). We found food in an Italian chain that served your food in cups, which I found most peculiar but tasty. After that we decided that we would go take a look at St Paul's Cathedral only to find out that a student pass into the main cathedral was 7 pounds(approx. $14 Cnd). We saw all that we could see from behind the velvet rope and left quite satisfied. We then walked down fleet street where we got held up because of a movie being filmed(children of man?) and then continued on to the school library which is quite gorgeous. I then went home after quite a nice day. I followed the river along seeing families old and new out walking, people basking on the front lawn of the Tate, and children enjoying the last of the heat and sun before autumn's crisp hands fall fully upon us. I walked through the market now late in the day and closing up for the week but still bustling with those trying to get the last minute deals on whatever they can. I got home and promptly had a nap.

By now you're probably wondering who "we" were. I found a companion for my viewing the Tate in a fellow class mate who oddly enough fits most of the criteria mentioned in my last post. She's a very nice girl, and her English is getting better. I've been thinking maybe that I should take the advice of my friends and the next art gallery I do I should do solo, and that a buddy would be better suited for a museum. The Tate was very busy, I'm not used to going to art galleries that actually have people in them... Strange.