By popular request (no one actually requested it, as such, but I could sense you all wanted it), the artwork Variation in Apricot by Meg Gibbs, donated to Parliament by the National Caucus Wives in 1981, critiqued by Chris Finlayson in a recent Herald piece.
Dear God! How many ferrets did they Frankenstein to get that effect.
Comment by TransportationDevice A7-98.1 — January 14, 2013 @ 9:39 am
Thanks dude I actually went searching for this after reading the article but couldn’t find an image of it
Comment by Rob — January 14, 2013 @ 9:48 am
But does that mean there are other variations in different colours? Could we do the world a favour and round the whole lot up and bury them?
Comment by Mark D — January 14, 2013 @ 9:54 am
The best thing about this “art work’ is probably how it reflects both the 80′s and its donors.
Comment by Ross Marwick — January 14, 2013 @ 9:56 am
It is hard not to conclude that Mr Finlayson is an astute judge of art
Comment by dpf — January 14, 2013 @ 9:57 am
It looks like the old carpet they used to have in the Beehive
Comment by max — January 14, 2013 @ 10:01 am
By popular request (no one actually requested it, as such, but I could sense you all wanted it)
Very astute. Am disappointed. Expected more apricot.
Comment by Graeme Edgeler — January 14, 2013 @ 10:26 am
I can totally see the Madonna and child in that pattern.
Comment by Sanctuary — January 14, 2013 @ 10:32 am
What the fuck is $12m in ‘art’ doing hidden away in Parliament?
That money could be used to pay part of the asset sales IPO fees!
Comment by Gregor W — January 14, 2013 @ 10:33 am
Maybe a good shampoo and vacuum would perk it up a bit?
Comment by Marion — January 14, 2013 @ 10:47 am
I know! I know!
It’s a butterfly. Or a dead swan with its guts hanging out.
Did I pass the Rorschach test?
Comment by Andrew Geddis — January 14, 2013 @ 10:49 am
Barry Zuckerkorn: This close, they always look like landscape. But nope, you’re looking at balls…
Comment by garethw — January 14, 2013 @ 11:00 am
even better – my new screensaver
http://presspix.nzherald.co.nz/detail?productId=191212NZHMMFINLAYSON4.JPG
Comment by Cnr Joe — January 14, 2013 @ 11:10 am
I like it but I am sure it has been hung upside down ( or possibly inside out).
Comment by PPCM — January 14, 2013 @ 11:57 am
How astute of the wives: the variation is apricot/illicit sex, the drudgery of everyday life married to a national Mp is… grey.
“( or possibly inside out)” gold
Comment by Clunking Fist — January 14, 2013 @ 2:05 pm
This art isn’t a 19th century depiction of an English landscape or a pop-culture famous painting so I’m going to sneer at its artistic merit in a public fora.
Comment by Hugh — January 14, 2013 @ 5:38 pm
You know when wolves have finished mating but they can’t disengage…
Comment by Aztec — January 14, 2013 @ 5:46 pm
Hugh, is Meg Gibbs related?
Comment by Clunking Fist — January 14, 2013 @ 6:02 pm
@Clunking:
http://www.google.co.nz/#hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&site=&source=hp&q=meg+gibbs&oq=meg+gibbs&gs_l=hp.3..0l5j0i10j0l4.500.1436.0.1574.9.8.0.0.0.0.209.746.1j3j1.5.0.les%3B..0.0…1c.1.w6DbaAxmK3s&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.bGE&fp=22f806b7086d8c0a&biw=1366&bih=664
Comment by Hugh — January 14, 2013 @ 7:34 pm
What plans? What secret mission?
Comment by Clunking Fist — January 14, 2013 @ 8:16 pm
Actually I don’t think it’s all that bad. I have seen far worse. Very 80s
Comment by eszett — January 14, 2013 @ 9:37 pm
I think it’s gone off.
Comment by Grant Buist — January 15, 2013 @ 9:46 am
I’m with eszett, I’ve seen far worse in galleries. Good on Finlayson for being honest with his opnions though – I too find McCahon a bit bleak.
Comment by Conrad — January 21, 2013 @ 9:34 am