Henry Moore Institute exhibition

I had always been intrigued by the work of Sarah Lucas, I'd never fully grasped what her message was, but after visiting the exhibition i think i could start to begin to understand what she was trying to achieve to an extent. There's a lot you could read into her work, or assume about it but because it comes across so vague I feel it doesn't work. I feel as though she's just trying to objectify everything. Though I don't think much of her spare mattress, her hosiery figures I found actually portrayed emotions of humiliation, sexuality and lust.

There was one sculpture in the institute that I really despised, it epitomises the kind of pretentious bullshit that you can find in galleries sometimes. It was a piece by Sturtevant, a very old lady that thought if she copied Duchamps bicycle wheel she could make some sort of point that anything can be made into art, you can excuse anything by saying its art... Though that being Duchamps original point in his creation of a bicycle wheel screwed onto a stool, it seemed kind of pointless. And is think its drawn away the original point Duchamp was trying to make when he first made it... For someone to then go and copy it surely though just proved his point. Even plagiarism sells now, providing you come up with some reason as to why you've done it.