A stick is not always a stick

People often ask Ron, "what makes good art?" The majority of the general public can appreciate the skill and take pleasure in the photo realistic images of the great masters, but find it difficult to take the leap between this and any of the less obvious visual arts. It then depends on the degree of understanding, whether we can empathise with what is being communicated. Mostly we can appreciate the feeling shown in Lowry's  matchstick men and find acceptable the colour effects of Monet, but Picasso and Dahli now that's different. Even more so the Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst become harder to follow accept or rate.

When walking the randonee botanique, which passes Le Fresnay, one sunny shady summers day I bent to examine an unusual stick. Strange markings I thought and moved closer when to my absolute amazement, the said 'stick', reared up , inflated its head area in  menacing way and hissed loudly at me. Now you reaction to this depends on your attitude to snakes; from mild curiosity and surprise to distaste and phobia.

As our newest language guest, a doctorate student of French Law with research specialism in 'Proof', explained, its not about reality or even truth its about what constitutes a body of proof. Example: in UK law the evidence of a husband or wife is not considered 'proof' where as in France it is. Perhaps here the answer to 'what is great art',its the provable & sustainable and a bit like the snake that depends on your perception.

So when is a stick not a stick? When its a snake. And Ron's answer to the continual question as to what makes great art, is simple. His retort," I know a lot about art, but great art,well I know what I like"....