The most archetypal author for British literature is Charles Dickens whose artistic counterpart in sculpture is Henry Moore. The Brits, I have found so far are quite nationalistic. From the Union Jack, the BNP and toad in-a-whole, Brits love Britishness. This seems to be the reason why Henry Moore is an artistic icon, because he is British. By the 1930’s Moore was a celebrity. His works of geometrical figures are beautiful and monumental in size. He clearly has talent in a variety of materials and an eye for the bodies nooks, crannies and weight. However, he does not leave much room for interpretation. Curators have hailed his work for showing the anguish of the body and most importantly a reflection of the issues of his time; the onset of war, “primitive” art and the advent of psychoanalysis. The question I ask is isn’t that what art should be doing? An artists work can’t help but reflect they times it’s produced in so shouldn’t we challenged further? Regardless of my personal opinion of his work, he is a part of art history. This is undeniable. Seeing this exhibit put another page in my sketchbook but, I can’t help wanting more.