lost wonderland...

How many people, art galleries and museums visitors have an art education?

I have no idea...

less 10%? maybe...

I visited the exhibition on Thursday and had the complicated impression. I enjoyed the displays directly associated with the book, then I felt some of the other exhibits had a fairly tenuous connection. It was boring.
I expected this exhibition to take me on a journey through the rabbit hole and enter a fantastical world of Wonderland, exhibiting work that felt fresh and inspired. I hoped for mysterious and fantasy show...
 A show with the theme of Alice in Wonderland the possibilities are endless! Sadly, but a lot of the art work is not engaging.

philipphilip99 wrote:

"Adrian Searle's review is a good review and yet also a bad review.

He liked this show and he didn't like it.

He found some things nice and others not nice - but equally that the not nice things are also in many ways nice and the nice things not nice at all.

He decided that Alice is an unbesmirched classical virgin and yet at the very same time a besmirched sci-fi whore. Alice is, in fact, he tells us, everything and nothing at all to all of the people all of the time.

As usual, this was a show that left Adrian feeling ambivalent.

After writing, Adrian spent 45 minutes trying to choose a sandwich. In the end, he had soup. How true, in so many ways..."

Mad about the girl: Tate Liverpool's Alice in Wonderland showAlice Liddell inspired Lewis Carroll, whose books inspired a thousand art works. But are they any good? Adrian Searle heads down the rabbit hole at Tate Liverpool's new show

guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 2 November 2011 21.31 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/nov/02/alice-wonderland-tate-liverpool-review?newsfeed=true