Stephen Kukureka (a lecturer from the School of Metallurgy and Materials and a general watchdog of semantics) voices his objections to the weatherproject...

Have your say:
weather@npugh.co.uk

Nikki

I'm afraid that I find myself unwilling to contribute some
Massachusetts 'weather' (sic) to the project on
philosophical, not to mention linguistic grounds! I'm sorry
if I sound churlish but I think it needs to be said!

In what sense is this art? What is its purpose and why are
you doing it? The only 'explanation' seems buried in the
kids section of the web-site under advice to parents! How
can it be conceptual art without the concept being
articulated? To say that the 'weather' samples are
sufficient articulation seems a bit of a 'cop-out'! (If we
can all take from it what we like then we could all do
anything and say that it was 'art' or that it was up to the
observer to decide what it meant!)

So why are you doing it? What is it for? What does it mean
to you? What do you expect your viewing or particpating
public to get from it?

On linguistic grounds then I question whether it is
'weather' and not mere gas samples. Surely weather is a
system and a pattern of behaviour rather than particular
gases? If so then it cannot be captured just as music,
scientific theories or philosophical explanations cannot
be.

If you like then I can print out these thoughts, roll them
up and put them in the jar as my contribution - otherwise
the jar is available for collection! Hope I don't sound too
aggressive but as one of the muttering public who questions
Turner prizes and bricks in the Tate then I feel I should
stand up for pragmatism - or more particularly for
articulation, verbalisation and rationalisation!

Stephen

the response (parental guidance - contains some swearing!)