> I do not think anyone but flippant relativists and
> poseurs would in good faith take fart for art.
I think there's plenty of room in anyone's definition of "art" for criticism, especially the criticism of "what is Art" ... Any new movement relies on criticism to tell the story of what came before and what's next, or at least relies on someone else's criticism. The very fact that we are having this discussion proves that Martin Creed and the Tate Modern are in fact up to something called Art.
So: maybe I'm a flippant relativist or a poseur, but I don't see the problem. On purely aesthetic terms, I'm not a fan of the work.
But that's just one component of it, no?
/jordan