Damien Hirst, The Tate Modern, and the kids.

[Stat Brother]

I'm luddite, I know I'm a luddite, I'm quite happy being one.

Art is a painting of a landscape, or a person with ears on either side of their head.
Sculpture is a head, not a graffitied tent.
And all poetry should rhyme.

Basically you can stick the Turner Prize up your arse.

Anyway, the exception that proves the rule is Damien Hirst's Diamond Skull.
I think it's stunning, and will go to The Tate Modern, just to see that.

The question is, do I take my very sheltered kids (6 & 8).
On the one hand a trip up north, to an art gallery, isn't going to happen too often.
But obviously some of the exhibition seems like it might be less than savoury, for the very young.
And finally I wouldn't want my two, behaving like 6 & 8 year olds, to spoil the exhibit for any connoisseur who happens to be there as well.

Thoughts, please.

 

[mune ni kamome]

Your two sheltered kids 6 and 8 could probably do better than Damien Hirst

 

[16bha]

Take the chance while they are young. There's plenty more for hem to see there too.

I took my 5 & 9 year old girls to the Louvre. They loved every minute and soaked it all in.

 

[pasty]

Mrs P and I went a couple of years ago. I don't generally like (or "get" I suppose if you are a lover of it) modern art, but we went with open minds and tried, and I mean really tried to appreciate it.

We didn't. It's the biggest load of arty-farty bollocks I have ever had the misfortune to see.

A couple of particularly "memorable" examples:

2 basketballs in a fish tank - WTF?

A rolling loop video of a man punching himself in the face - WFT?

I long for the day Damien Hurst, or Tracey Emin turn round and say "Oh by the way, we just produce a load of old shit and all you lot that give us stupid amounts of money for it are gullible fuckwits"

The actual building is quite impressive though

 

[skipper734]

Are you serious Brother?
It's a skull covered in Diamonds or shiny things. It hasn't even got any ears.

 

[brakespear]

I dunno - it all depends First time I went to the Tate in St Ives they had a painting in the main entrance that was a canvas split in two, one half black, one half red which was probably valued in the MILLIONS - I don't get that. The last time I went however, there was a big room filled eight foot deep in white balloons you had to find your way around and that was great

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Went there t'other day and first up, the diamond skull isn't actually on the Level 3 pay-for exhibition, it's a Level 1 free viewing. Most people don't seem to even know its there. If your kids are of the sensitive kind I'd maybe steer them away from certain rooms of the pay-for-exhibition, actually most of them. The room with the cows severed head and maggots and flies is maybe not kids ideal viewing (tho the school parties seem to love it!), ditto the cow cut in half lengthways and the various creatures in formaldehyde. But the live butterflies are magical and the spot and spin paintings are non-scary to kids. Not that intersting to kids also.

On the whole I'd say the pay-for exhibition is probably not for very sheltered kids. Though, like I say, the diamond skull is free, and they'd love the wobbly bridge and maybe the replica of the Golden Hinde just up the road

 

[Stat Brother]

I totally agree with you Pasty but the diamond skull, always stops me in my tracks when it's on telly.
Just like proper art is supposed to.

 

[severnside gull]

Let the kids run riot and if anyone complains just tell them it's performance art and ask them for a fee for being fortunate to have the chance to "appreciate" it.



...................... and no, I wouldn't describe myself as a Luddite. I would, however, describe much of their "art" as a load of pretentious bollocks!

 

[Stat Brother]

Are you serious Brother?
It's a skull covered in Diamonds or shiny things. It hasn't even got any ears.

Very serious, I think it's a light thing.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

I'm luddite, I know I'm a luddite, I'm quite happy being one.

Thoughts, please.

I think you'll find, that in this case, you are a philistine not a Luddite.

 

[Stat Brother]

I think you'll find, that in this case, you are a philistine not a Luddite.

I couldn't spell that

 

[nomoremithras4me]

What about taking them to Chessington World of Adventures or Alton Towers?

 

[Stat Brother]

What about taking them to Chessington World of Adventures or Alton Towers?

I don't want to go there, and they don't know such places exist!

 

[Blazing Apostle]

I took mine to Tate Modern when they were 8 or 10 years old and got them little sketch pads and they happily sat on the floor of the galleries doing their own sketches - must have worked as they all keep going back now they are in their 20's

 

[desprateseagull]

His name is Hirst.
Damian Hirst.
Not Geoff Hurst.

One's a genius. the other one mucks about with 'art'.

 

[nomoremithras4me]

I don't want to go there, and they don't know such places exist!

Tate Modern it is then, just stick £2 in the jar, cheap day out with plenty of culture

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

They'll love it, then pop on a tube afterwards and go to the science museum

 

[Art Vs Science]

The Saatchi Gallery is better IMO, it has moved away from it's old location by the London Eye now though

Video Tours of The Saatchi Gallery exhibitions

 

[Gwylan]

My kids went to the Tate when they were younger than that and they loved it. We've been back since and are going back again this summer.

Kids are often far more open about art as they don't have any pre-conceived ideas about what art should be (It works in other areas too, I read an article the other day about how kids are often more appreciative of modern classical music than adults are), so I'm sure yours will love it.