from an exhibit review in Embroidery magazine (published in the UK), September/October 2004, by Angela Hesketh:
"While some of the work in (the show) is irreverent, the search for 'content' often upstages the medium and some of the work could have been better executed. When content is championed over the handling of the chosen medium, it raises a further debate -- that of the value and status of textiles as an art form."
Do we agree?
Suppose the works had been paintings -- would the critic say that emphasis on content and possible poor execution call the value and status of painting as an art form into question?
Suppose the works had been paintings -- would a critic even bring up the issue of execution?
The whole thrust of contemporary art is to value content over technique -- does textile art deliberately want to distance itself from this historical development?