[supercat]

So many times as I've walked through *modern* art exhibits and musuems, I've thought, "The emperor really does have no clothes". It was all nonsense, that evoked nothing but wonder reading the convulated critical praise of such....nothing. But like the emperor's crowd, we were all supposed to marvel at it, for fear of being called bourgeoise and anti-intellectual.

To the right is a copy (reproduced from memory) of one of the paintings at the Tate Modern in London. The painting, btw, is entitled "Gray". I hope the artist doesn't come after me for copyright violation, though I'd suggest that he first go after the manufacturers of photographic test cards.

While I'll admit that artistic merit need not always be apparent to the casual observer (random-dot stereograms are kitchy at best, but they have some artistic potential even though one needs to look at them 'just right' to see anything). The "Gray" painting, however, showed no such subtleties. It looked instead like someone had taken a canvas and slapped some gray paint on it (which is no doubt what the artist, in fact, did).

[exDemMom]

I have two published scientific papers which include figures, aka "art", according to the journal's instructions to authors. Yes, I was very surprised to learn that not only am I a scientist, I am also an artist.

The reason I bring this up is that the painting (ahem!) you reproduced here closely resembles some of my art. Imagine a row of 4 or 5 horizontal black lines of varying intensities evenly spaced, like dashes, across that painting. That is my art. Gallery opening TBA.