Posted on 02/12/2005 9:05:35 AM PST by Vision
...and in turn the private collectors get invited to nifty parties with free liquor.
Yeah, right. You sure pegged us there! Good comparison of talent, too. Orange curtains require as much, if not more, artistic skill as the sculpture of David. [/sarcasm]
"Oh, naked body! Blasphemy! And for what purpose? There are people everywhere, why do we need this crap?"
Part of the money is coming from the sale of Christo's preliminary drawings for this incursion--sort of as if he were Leonardo.
Christo thinks that's okay, because he has very expensive liability insurance. That's how much he cares about New Yorkers.
Those gates look just like the washing devices that were part of the local automatic car wash until it went brushless. (Same color, too) I wonder if this "artist" is paying royalties to the engineer that designed it?
Here is a work by Christo that was commissioned for the Bicentennial in 1976Looks like an AN/FPS-108 Cobra Dane ICBM phased array RADAR missile building ... maybe that *was* his inspiration ...
HIS HAPPY ART WILL KILL US ALL!
WE'RE DOOMED, DOOMED I TELL YOU!
I spent several hours in the park today and was imrpessed with this installation. Clearly hundreds of thousands. Thousands of people taking pictures everwhere. This was a NY event and will provide the stimulus for visitors to take a new look at art everywhere.
I have to say, seeing the gates blowing in the wind, it looks better than I thought it would.
...will provide the stimulus for visitors to take a new look at art everywhere.
No it won't. People generally hate art. And they really hate art that crosses over into the realm of the abstract. And they despise art with a price tag of more than $8.00
I'm wondering, how do you get into this kind of business? I can draw something that looks better than that, and they are making (and spending) million$.
Im going to post Gate pics later that I took today. Very cool, I wish there was more wind today, but I have 16 days to go back and take more pics.
I guarantee that the crowd in the Park today that was snapping away with their cameras represented a broad cross section of backgrounds and that almost all might think differently after seeing the installation today.
I also guarantee that in our 21st century techno society a majority relate to abstract art more than pre-1900 fine art.
What you saw in Central Park were New Yorkers and tourists and people with enough money to travel to NYC. That's a relatively small percentage of the population. You'd see the same people in the Met on a Sunday afternoon.
The idea of something without utility that is also costly is offensive to most people. They view it as either a scam or a waste of money. The idea of spending $10,000 on a piece of art for themselves -- a relatively modest sum -- is offensive to most people, unless that piece of art increases in value.
Slalom!
I saw a lot of people who did not look wealthy to me, plus how much does it really cost to come visit NYC. I think it's in the reach of most Americans.
The idea of something without utility that is also costly is offensive to most people. They view it as either a scam or a waste of money. The idea of spending $10,000 on a piece of art for themselves -- a relatively modest sum -- is offensive to most people, unless that piece of art increases in value.
They spent 10 times the amount of money on the inaguration which lasted only a few hours. Were you or most Americans offended by that also? I would bet that the Freeper who bought the Christo sketch in the thread above knows how much his sketch has appreciated in value. That being said, who ever said most art that you can buy costs $10,000?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.