Have most of you supporting this as art or tasteful seen actual statue or a
just picture? And, yes, there are bad images of war that are imbedded into
our minds and memories. Frankly, perhaps because I'm an idealist, I expect
more from art than from the media. The media people have nothing better to
do but sustain themselves.
I'm sure all the people who have lost family members have rushed or will
rush down to pray at Rockefeller Center. Perhaps, part of the public outrage
against this is that the only record of most of the people who jumped is in
photographs of them, clinging to the towers, in air or in a pile on the
ground. Most of the jumpers were pulverized when the towers fell on top of
them. Oh, maybe this would be more acceptable with some bronze rubble around
or on top of it.
As for media frenzy, this statue and its sponsors are getting what they
probably planned. They probably thought all the GREAT museums would rush out
and order an edition (it's bronze) since it's the first memorial. They may
even have anticipated a good market in miniatures of it. I'm sure many
people would buy one for the coffee table or mantle. And, now, this one
particular sculpture is worth more because of the interest it generated. Not
a bad business strategy.
As for censorship, who began the petition to get it covered and removed? The
NYC or NYS government on its own or in response to requests? (Sensations is
a completely different issue since that was personally started by the now
much beloved mayor Giuliani) The general public? Is the sponsor really a
wuss for protecting (by covering it and or removing it) their investment? If
this sculpture hits the wrong nerve in some people, I'm sure it will
disappear anyway, or the owners will wished they had removed it.
Finally, is public art really something that is above public opinion? This
is intended as a memorial and not a private one. Arguing that this is art
and is therefore above the force of opinion against it, or perhaps above the
understanding of the general public because the general public doesn't know
what is good for it or what good art is, is a well-entrenched but flawed
argument. Is removing a work of art that is offensive to many much different
than recalling a flawed product? Who is to say emotional damage is less
painful than physical?
Art is not something that is involiable nor should it be automatically
accepted and defended because it is art, just like sports heroes, CEOs and
politicians should go to jail when they break the law. People have the right
to create whatever they want, but they don't have the right to force others
to look at it. In this case, pedestrians have been forced because of its
conspicuous placement.
Sorry for the length but this is in response to many messages.
Loretta Lorance
-------------------------------------------
Introducing NetZero Long Distance
Unlimited Long Distance only $29.95/ month!
Sign Up Today! www.netzerolongdistance.com
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
