We love artspeak. Not because it's particularly enlightening (more the opposite), but becuase it's so easilly satirised – you don't even have to change the words.

And if there was an Artspeak Olympics, the medalwinner table would surely be topped by German critics.

Take this golden nugget from Alexander Menden in Süddeutsche Zeitung, writing about American artist Hannah Wilke's work:

The largest image from her S.O.S. Starification Object Series shows Wilke stripped to the waist, her head covered in a Lawrence-of-Arabia-headscarf, her skin mounted with fingertip-sized chewing gum sculptures, which are reminiscent of vaginas but also can be interpreted as buds, jewellery or even lesions ...
Another extraordinary piece‚ Pink Champagne from 1975 ... is the ideal combination for a Wilke work: Here the "metaphysical sense of orgasmic ecstasy" that she ascribed the material, meets its apparent transcience.

Blimey. If that whets the appetite, you can see Wilkes same work at the Alison Jacques Gallery in London until 18 August.

We rather prefer the approach of the BBC's new arts editor, Will Gompertz, who in an interview with last weekend's Observer had this to say:

I think we are intimidated unnecessarily by art and we're brought up to be intimidated. I think a lot of people write about art in a specific way – particularly curators; they use quasi-academic speech in order to explain something which is actually simple, or is so difficult it defies being described so don't bother. And so I quite like the minimalist approach really: there it is, it's nothing but itself, just get on with it.

Techspeak is often equally unfathomable. And so by way of rounding this post off with a self-serving segue, we'd like to recommend you to Computer Active, who sit next to us at our Soho offices, and whose tagline reads, "Simple Clear Advice in Plain English". It does what it says on the tin.