From: IN%"[email protected]" "Art Criticism Discussion Forum" 20-SEP-1993
23:16:31.61
To: IN%"HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx" "Howard Lawrence"
CC:
Subj: public art
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Return-path: ARTCRIT <@PSUVM.PSU.EDU:[email protected]>
Received: from Jnet-DAEMON by ARCH.PSU.EDU (PMDF #12866) id
<01H36T537BOO95MLUG@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 20 Sep 1993 23:16 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 2429 for HRL@PSUARCH; Mon,
20 Sep 1993 23:16 EST
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@PSUVM) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU
(LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3130; Mon, 20 Sep 1993 23:09:10 -0400
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1993 22:04:00 CDT
From: [email protected]
Subject: public art
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
Message-id: <01H36T537BOO95MLUG@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ray, re public art...like everything elese public art seems to come in several
flavors. There seems to be (using one of Neil Jenny's catagorizations) good
good public art; bad good public art; good bad public art; and bad bad public
art. In Chicago we have some examples of each flavor. Let's call the
Picasso, the Calder, the Miro, the Chagall, etc. examples of good good public
art. Then there are the "statues" in the Imperial Roman style in Grant
Park depicting symbols of the American Indian...that seems to be bad good publi
c art. Then, there are the better artifacts ala Keith Harring that are good
bad public art. Finally, there are the "paintings" under the viaducts that
have been produced by one mural group or another as a neighborhood project.
This is bad bad public art. Still, I would rather have the bad bad art than
none at all. And, finally, I think, to the case in hand: what are the
political structures that these works represent? Let's see what the list
has to offer on this! Good to hear from you again, Ray... I am wondering
about Andy. Where has he gone to?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B e n M a h m o u d : U 2 0 B X M 1 @ N I U . B I T N E T
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23:16:31.61
To: IN%"HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx" "Howard Lawrence"
CC:
Subj: public art
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Return-path: ARTCRIT <@PSUVM.PSU.EDU:[email protected]>
Received: from Jnet-DAEMON by ARCH.PSU.EDU (PMDF #12866) id
<01H36T537BOO95MLUG@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 20 Sep 1993 23:16 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 2429 for HRL@PSUARCH; Mon,
20 Sep 1993 23:16 EST
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@PSUVM) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU
(LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3130; Mon, 20 Sep 1993 23:09:10 -0400
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1993 22:04:00 CDT
From: [email protected]
Subject: public art
Sender: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Art Criticism Discussion Forum <[email protected]>
Message-id: <01H36T537BOO95MLUG@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ray, re public art...like everything elese public art seems to come in several
flavors. There seems to be (using one of Neil Jenny's catagorizations) good
good public art; bad good public art; good bad public art; and bad bad public
art. In Chicago we have some examples of each flavor. Let's call the
Picasso, the Calder, the Miro, the Chagall, etc. examples of good good public
art. Then there are the "statues" in the Imperial Roman style in Grant
Park depicting symbols of the American Indian...that seems to be bad good publi
c art. Then, there are the better artifacts ala Keith Harring that are good
bad public art. Finally, there are the "paintings" under the viaducts that
have been produced by one mural group or another as a neighborhood project.
This is bad bad public art. Still, I would rather have the bad bad art than
none at all. And, finally, I think, to the case in hand: what are the
political structures that these works represent? Let's see what the list
has to offer on this! Good to hear from you again, Ray... I am wondering
about Andy. Where has he gone to?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B e n M a h m o u d : U 2 0 B X M 1 @ N I U . B I T N E T
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------