It's ahrt dahrling

To escape the paint fumes and mysterious knocking and hammering noises of our handyman's final final day's work in the flat, I went and did some research for my project (read: I went and sat in a cafe for a couple of hours surrounded by books and scribbled a lot in a notebook, then I went and bummed around some art galleries for the rest of the morning).

First I went to this place, which had some fancy art do on. The reception girls mistook my scruffy hoodie and jeans for arty chic and I almost got away with a goody bag, but my honesty won over my greed and I confessed that I was just there to have a look around. 'In that case' a snooty man who was obviously in charge of the Event said, 'please avoid the first floor.'

I had a look around the second and third floors, after peeking into the first floor and being quickly scared away by too many people in sharp suits and square glasses. There was quite an interesting thing on Russia, but the portrait series left me cold. I took in how they were framed and decided that for my exhibition I'll probably do them unframed, but on that photoboard material. (Making decisions like that allows me to justify visiting galleries when I'm supposed to be WORKING.)

I went to another gallery on Krakowskie Przedmiescie, which documented reactions to the demolition of the supersam supermarket, near our old Mokotów haunt. I went in there a couple of times when we lived in the neighbourhood, but never looked at it all misty eyed like the artists who are distraught about its demolition did. It was a 1960s building that was undoutedly exciting when it was first built, but I'm not totally convinced that they demolished a work of art...

Next up was the Zachęta gallery, which didn't impress me much, probably because most of it seemed to be closed and the surly elderly security men and women outnumbered the visitors. Still, there too there were examples of photography, some covered with glass, some even stuck straight on the wall like wallpaper. I liked some of the 1980s shots of Poland, but most of the rest was a little dull and uninspired. Also, the description of the collection was pure shite.

Sorry, but I studied art up until I went to university, and I have first hand experience of 'artists' coming up with the justifying blurb that accompanies the 'art'. This is classic:

Their productions are rooted in the topographic document tradition, but they mute the reality illusion, if only with their use of monochromatic material. But does this cause them to lose the credibility of probable images? The use of black-and-white photography seems to be a clear signal that we enter some kind of symbolic territory. Even though, reality is represented in all its detail, the selected fragment is clearly imparted a structure that does not exist autonomously.

Er, pardon? OK, let's just say the translation is a bad one... need a copy editor?