Dr. Charles Movalli was the official judge for this exhibition. Now Dr.

Movalli, as well as being a highly respected artist, also has a string of letters after his name. He has written numerous books, won dozens of awards and has presented lectures all over the world. In short he's a man who knows his onions.

It would therefore be reasonable to expect the standard of this exhibition to be high. I have to report that I left feeling disappointed.

Did Dr. Movalli put on a pair of rose tinted spectacles before he made his judgment? I don't know. Perhaps, in the spirit of Christmas, he was feeling particularly benevolent to what he would presume to be kindred spirits. Or he might just be a genuinely kind, warm-hearted soul who hates the thought of trampling over fragile, sensitive egos. The reasoning is not important or clear. What is clear is that the vast majority of painting here is absolutely dire.

I'll start with the good stuff. There are one or two excellent pieces but they sadly only serve to ram home the awfulness of the majority.

Sheilagh Head has produced two landscapes for the show which are wonderfully free, blustery pieces. I've a confession to make here. When it comes to landscapes Sheilagh can do no wrong in my eyes. I just love the way she paints. Her examples here, both views of South Shore, are a bit looser than normal and none the worse for that.

`Camouflage Onions' by Tracy Williams is also technically accomplished although not the sort of thing I would want hanging on a wall in my home.

But my favourite work is a small piece of bronze. I know absolutely nothing about sculpture and it rarely manages to provoke any reaction in me. But Elizabeth Trott's `Suitcases Out', a study of a worn-out old dog slumped before an imaginary fire is beautiful. I've never seen a piece of metal look so floppy.

That unfortunately, just about covers the good stuff. Now onto the dire.

`Yesterday' by Elyse Nierenberg is truly awful. A watercolour of an Edwardian woman sitting on a beach, it's badly drawn, badly composed, badly painted, dare I suggest badly copied.

The same can be said of Liz Richardson's `Cambridge Beaches'. To say a six-year-old could do better might be stretching the point but you get the picture. The whole thing just screams naivety without having any charm whatsoever.

`Heron's Nest' by Joy Bluck Waters falls into the same category as does `Homeward Bound' by Gillian Outerbridge while `Shooting Star' by Fred Franzen is just pretentious -- and ugly as a matter of fact.

I could go on but I have neither the space nor the stomach to recount the awfulness of what is on display. Now you might think I'm being a bit cruel, after all, we are talking mainly about amateurs here. I certainly don't want to discourage anyone, regardless of ability, from picking up a paint brush and having a stab, that's something that should be encouraged.

Nor do I see anything wrong in putting your painting on public display. I am not being deliberately belligerent or trying to court controversy. And yes, it is very easy to criticise. Could I do better myself? Well yes actually, in most cases I think I could but that's not the point. What is the point is the fact that these part-timers feel confident enough about their work to command the most ridiculous prices.

Would I pay $4,000 for Glen Wilks' `Dancing In The Mist'? You've got to be kidding. $500 for `Yesterday'? Come on. Or how about `Heron's Nest' -- a snip at just $3,000? Just who do these people think they are? They obviously take themselves very seriously. That's fine, but they can hardly expect to ask such prices and then cry foul, hiding behind the shield of amateur painter, the moment the flack starts flying. If they feel their scribbles justify these sort of price tags then, as far as I'm concerned, it's open season.

What I find disgusting is that these people are producing junk and then trying to pass it off as high art. It's patronising, it's insulting, it's a rip-off and it shouldn't be allowed.

There are other paintings in the exhibition which are a mixed bunch -- some are mediocre, some are bad. But I shall resist singling these out for criticism for the simple reason that the artists thankfully lacked the pretentiousness to slap a ridiculous price on their efforts.

Do go along to the City Hall to catch this exhibition, which runs throughout the Christmas period. Just be prepared to wade through a quagmire of utter bilge in order to get to the odd gem.

GARETH FINIGHAN