Ron Mueck

by deborah on November 25, 2007

You may find his sculptures disturbing. I first saw his work at the Brooklyn Museum and the Hirshhorn Museum. Take a look at this gallery at The Washington Post.

Share and Enjoy:
  • del.icio.us
  • Netscape
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Facebook

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

Valerie Loveland November 25, 2007 at 8:13 pm

I like these. I remember a few years ago there was a debate as to whether these should be considered “art” or not. (Most people involved were leaning towards “no”).

Allen Taylor November 25, 2007 at 9:29 pm

Of course it is art. What else would it be? :-)

I really like these. They are very striking and I am continually amazed at all the ways contemporary artists go about their work, no matter what medium they exercise in.

Jim Murdoch November 26, 2007 at 8:40 am

Surely the context has a lot to do with it. If it’s not art then what is it, decoration? All you have to consider if the effect the work has on viewers. I do sometimes wonder at people.

I’ve only ever seen his work secondhand, but I imagine the effect must be similar to seeing Jenny Saville’s enormous nudes. Now that was art.

adt November 28, 2007 at 1:41 pm

Incredible. Definitely art. :-D

deborah November 28, 2007 at 8:42 pm

@ Allen and Adt — I’m with you. Definitely art.

@Valerie — I used to have that argument in college. What makes this white toilet not art and this purple toilet with polka dots a piece of art? That’s a nutty example. We had fun discussing those kinds of topics.

Leave a Comment