left a school thing to the last minute again.

can anyone think of some art topics or questions that are worthy of discussion?

controversial art headlines?

it needs to hold attention for about 5 minutes.

http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/home.asp

It's an exhibition of corpses, human and other...caused a bit of a stir.
These are also quite interesting, but would probably need more research on your part.

http://www.brightbytes.com//cosite/cohome.html (a site about the camera obscura)

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~agrxray/index.html (Floral radiographs...beautiful.)

In case you hadn't guessed, things at the boundaries of art and science are something of an interest of mine. Actually, where one ends and the other begins is a topic in itself, but you'd need more than five minutes...

Art Brute : excellent topic, and has a fascinating story behind .. that its suited for all type of audiences … I would take that subject with eyes closed … here’s a peak to get you on track but feel free to research .. its worth it also know as Outsider Art .

Roughly, though, a working definition of outsider art could go like this:
Works of art paintings, drawings, sculptures, assemblages, and idiosyncratic gardens and other outdoor constructions produced by people who have had little or no formal training in art and who produce (or at least began by producing) art without regard to the mainstream art world's recognition or marketplace.
These are people who make art for themselves or their immediate community, usually without recognizing themselves as artists, at least until some collector or expert comes along to inform that they are making art.
There are a number of problems with the concept, however. There is implied elitism, for one, since outsider art implies there is someone inside designating these others as outside. And just what are they outside of? Art schools? Museums? The gallery world? Culture altogether (which some see in the extremes of insane art the original paradigm for outsider art)?
How outside must someone be to qualify, and what happens when they are discovered by art aficionados and start being influenced by them? Finally, why not call their work just plain art? Why segregate it?
These questions have been debated at length in any number of books and articles, but as a matter of convenience the term remains in wide use. Partly it seems to persist for commercial reasons demarcating a particular sector of the art market but it also remains a handy shorthand for work that is seen to have different motivations, histories and concerns than that generally produced by art school graduates.
Its visionary quality, putative naivete or innocence, unpretentiousness, freedom from formal constraints, ingenious use of materials, left-field creativity, wild subject matter or some combination of those qualities are not exclusive to outsider art, of course, but they are to some extent typical of it.
Now the story behind it well basically art brute was born from a mental institution , discovered by a doctor.. but you better read it yourself .. very very cool stuff

I started this topic a few months back on the art forum ..btw..and posted some links and examples ..if you can find it .. it’d probably help you …

thanks for your input

i ended up using 'is art school neccessary?' which worked out ok. wasn't assessed or anything. i suppose it kinda tied in with the one you suggested damien.

yeah, last minute as in i only had about 10 hours to go and the majority of that was spent sleeping and then at work.

thanks again.

i think i'll look into that stuff to store in my noggin anyhow

How art thou?

thou art well