If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MLive.com)   Kinda news: Grand Rapids orders artist to remove "disrespectful" ArtPrize installation. News: From existing giant metal sculpture. Fark: Flower magnets are now controversial   (mlive.com) divider line 59
    More: Strange, ArtPrize, Grand Rapids, Grand Rapids Press, installation arts  
•       •       •

5981 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Sep 2013 at 8:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-30 07:01:25 PM  
I guess that is better than the alternative of running your pickup truck into something you don't respect as art....  http://www.wane.com/news/crime/drunk-driver-crashes-into-downtown-art
 
2013-09-30 08:14:21 PM  
Kinda news: Grand Rapids orders artist to remove "disrespectful" ArtPrize installation. News: From existing giant metal sculpture. Fark: Flower magnets are now art. controversial
 
2013-09-30 08:15:32 PM  
Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work
 
2013-09-30 08:19:26 PM  
The curator of Calder Plaza for Artprize is a good friend. He's known the artist for almost 30 yrs and warned him some people would get their panties in a bunch. We didn't expect the mayor to cave the way he did. We we're also surprised that Calder's grandson would piss and moan........seeing as how his grandpa was once arrested(but never charged) for adding to someone's sculpture.

All that aside, if you ever get a chance come to GR for Artprize. It's really an amazing event.
 
2013-09-30 08:20:14 PM  
userserve-ak.last.fm

I made you an Xzibit, but you dizmantled it.

www.reactionface.info
 
2013-09-30 08:21:05 PM  

Hot Lunch: Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work


See my previous post. I like to think he would have approved.
 
2013-09-30 08:22:17 PM  

Tunk87: Hot Lunch: Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work

See my previous post. I like to think he would have approved.


the instant I finished reading your post, I immediately regretted mine.

not the part about the Ouija board however
 
2013-09-30 08:22:44 PM  
Well, no, the artist's estate (read: very likely the artist's widow or daughter) apparently made a stink. And because litigating it would mean taking the old lady to court, it was easier to remove the flowers.

And evidently the flower artist agreed.
 
2013-09-30 08:23:47 PM  
It's a temporary change. Everybody whining about it is  PA. THET. IC.

Get over yourselves, the lot of you.
 
2013-09-30 08:25:07 PM  
Who cares what the artist thinks. Who owns the art?  The city does.
 
2013-09-30 08:25:22 PM  
.... how. .. how do they work?
/am I doing it right?
 
2013-09-30 08:28:35 PM  
Well, I just don't understand why this couldn't have been a respectful, transgressive, online, virtual flowering.

Imagine scanning in and presenting on monitors Calder's piece and the artist virtually flowering the piece. No magnets necessary!

It could have been an interactive performance with the community allowing not just the artist but every member in that diverse community to take their hand (or limb if differently abled) in repurposing the Calder art.

I tear up over the loss!
 
2013-09-30 08:29:47 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Well, no, the artist's estate (read: very likely the artist's widow or daughter) apparently made a stink. And because litigating it would mean taking the old lady to court, it was easier to remove the flowers.

And evidently the flower artist agreed.


The grandson has not responded to several requests for comment about his grandfather's history. The flower artist had no choice

gweilo8888: It's a temporary change. Everybody whining about it is  PA. THET. IC.

Get over yourselves, the lot of you.


Yup. I know several and have probably lost a couple as friends for telling them just that.
 
2013-09-30 08:33:49 PM  
So vandalizing someone else's art is art? Well, I'm off to the met with a pack of cat stickers. Gonna make me some art.
 
2013-09-30 08:37:20 PM  
Denver has a five-year law for public art.  No matter what, art stays for a minimum of five years.
 
2013-09-30 08:38:43 PM  
Original sculpture: good art.

Modification: crap attempt at whimsy.

Art wins.
 
2013-09-30 08:43:12 PM  
Ugh.  Calder did a few really cool pieces and a bunch of crap.

This one is crap.

The flowers didn't help, though.
 
2013-09-30 08:45:51 PM  
Holy shiat, that's the best the stupid Calder ever looked. That ugly eyesore of a sculpture is Grand Rapids' signature piece. It's even on all their street signs. And the flowers make it look like something other than a big orange blob.

Normally, I'd biatch about vandalizing someone else's artwork or riding someone else's coattails, but I really think the Calder sculpture is crap, and anything is an improvement. I lived in that shiathole town long enough to loathe that stupid sculpture... But maybe that's just transference because Grand Rapids is the Christian Conservative butthole of Michigan, and my time there was unpleasant.
 
2013-09-30 08:46:23 PM  

RoyBatty: Well, I just don't understand why this couldn't have been a respectful, transgressive, online, virtual flowering.

Imagine scanning in and presenting on monitors Calder's piece and the artist virtually flowering the piece. No magnets necessary!


cdn.hitfix.com
Disapproves.
 
2013-09-30 08:47:51 PM  

DarkVader: Ugh.  Calder did a few really cool pieces and a bunch of crap.

This one is crap.

The flowers didn't help, though.


I disagree about the flowers. I think ANYTHING would make it look less bland.

However, we're agreed that this sculpture is crap. That Grand Rapids considers it the symbol of their city is not surprising. Crap describing crap.
 
2013-09-30 08:50:20 PM  
FTFCS: "At this moment La Grande Vitesse has gone from being a symbol representing freedom, whimsy and creativity, to one of oppression by an elite group of art curators and critics."

The American people must step up and fight back against the jackboots of fascist Nazi art snobs, especially that guy who said those things about Andy Warhol at that dinner party, and laughed when I suggested my knit prints of my cats would make for an excellent exhibit. Viv la Mittens
 
2013-09-30 08:50:42 PM  
Grew up in GR, the Calder (as everyone called it) has always been equal parts impressive, iconic, and baffling to me.

I like the flowers. They were temporary anyway, making a stink over it seems like political bullfeathers.

/moved out of town just before ArtPrize got going
 
2013-09-30 08:52:49 PM  
i.imgur.com

made me think of this
 
2013-09-30 08:53:14 PM  

Tunk87: Gyrfalcon: Well, no, the artist's estate (read: very likely the artist's widow or daughter) apparently made a stink. And because litigating it would mean taking the old lady to court, it was easier to remove the flowers.

And evidently the flower artist agreed.

The grandson has not responded to several requests for comment about his grandfather's history. The flower artist had no choice

gweilo8888: It's a temporary change. Everybody whining about it is  PA. THET. IC.

Get over yourselves, the lot of you.

Yup. I know several and have probably lost a couple as friends for telling them just that.


Wow, that was pretty good....I was just guessing.
 
2013-09-30 08:59:27 PM  

Hot Lunch: Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work


That's kind of what they did - the foundation that manages the original artist's work objected, because, as you indicated, it really does change the nature of the original work.

What really bugs me is that at least two artists felt it was valid to stand on the (deceased) back of another artist when designing their contest entries. I'm not sure I agree that their work should even be entered, honestly, as it really isn't "theirs" - "I put a fedora and a bow tie on the Mona Lisa - that counts, right?"
 
2013-09-30 09:00:07 PM  
Chicagoans love their Picasso sculpture, which is coming up on a big anniversary, yet they will put stupid Cubs, Sox, Bears, Bulls, Hawks hats or whatever on it if the teams get into or win a championship.  I get it that on one level, it's a kind of of a playful way of making a statement of collective admiration and inclusion, like the sculpture is part of the citizens... the way you might dress up your dog in a Christmas sweater or something.

But I personally kind of cringe at doing things like this, or the Calder thing.  Partly, because i'm also a huge Calder fan. But also, because I think there's a double standard happening here. Just because the sculpture is large, outdoors, and relatively impervious, people seem to think it's okay to mess with it in this playful way, when they would never consider doing that to a sculpture inside a museum. If you wouldn't fark around with a real Michelangelo, Rodin, Bernini, what-have-you, why is the Calder or the Picasso thus free to be "abused"?  I'm just asking.
 
2013-09-30 09:00:56 PM  
That sculpture is just kinda... ugh. The flowers definitely improved it.
 
2013-09-30 09:06:32 PM  
Meanwhile, in Chicago...

farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2013-09-30 09:07:07 PM  
The original piece sucks. Altering it is nothing like altering good art.
 
2013-09-30 09:11:19 PM  
lh4.googleusercontent.com

Would you calm these seas?

1.bp.blogspot.com

Would you dry these tears?

cache2.allpostersimages.com

Would you put them outside where they belong?


Would you?
 
2013-09-30 09:14:07 PM  
I thought annoying modern artists was a Constitutional right.
 
2013-09-30 09:18:05 PM  
Yeah that sounds like Grand Rapids, all right.
 
2013-09-30 09:19:53 PM  

DrMcNinja: [i.imgur.com image 639x480]

made me think of this


images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-09-30 09:25:37 PM  

Hot Lunch: Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work


? does the city own the art or not   if yes then they can do what they like
if the art is on loan then no
 
2013-09-30 09:29:13 PM  
Could someone 'shop Xhibit/Shaggy 2 dope? farking magnets in your magnets, how do they work?
 
2013-09-30 09:39:05 PM  

FormlessOne: Hot Lunch: Now, I'm no artist, art critic, or art enthusiast, but the flowers definitely change the sculpture, so I think the original artist ought to have been consulted by Ouija board for approval before they defaced his work

That's kind of what they did - the foundation that manages the original artist's work objected, because, as you indicated, it really does change the nature of the original work.

What really bugs me is that at least two artists felt it was valid to stand on the (deceased) back of another artist when designing their contest entries. I'm not sure I agree that their work should even be entered, honestly, as it really isn't "theirs" - "I put a fedora and a bow tie on the Mona Lisa - that counts, right?"


The installation is a great success in my eyes for the discussion on the nature of art that is created.  Once the work is in the public domain it takes meaning from the interaction with the folks who experience the piece.  The original sculpture and this temporary display are arguably both thought provoking and successful works of art.

As for The Mona Lisa in a fedora and bow tie, right time, right place, it could be a powerful statement.  Without permission though is pretty much a trip to jail.  Hope you believe in your art!
 
2013-09-30 09:46:22 PM  
R. Mutt leaves w/ no comment....


img.fark.netno comment
 
2013-09-30 09:49:28 PM  
It looks really good, is tastefully executed, and is temporary... So it's a desecration?

Seriously, do people not like flowers or something? Isn't that like not liking rainbows and kittens? I guess the Calder estate dudes figured that he always wanted to be hardcore and they can't break the image.
 
2013-09-30 09:52:39 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org
L.H.O.O.Q. (1919). Marcel Duchamp
 
2013-09-30 09:53:41 PM  

oldtaku: That sculpture is just kinda... ugh. The flowers definitely improved it.


Yeah, I'm a fan of the flowers, too. It's not like they're painted on. And it's not like the magnet artist didn't get permission of some sort before putting them up to begin with.

But then, I'm not from around here. Just kinda visiting. I hope.

Planning on visiting ArtPrize this weekend, though!

/GR and art controversy
//First the wrecking ball, now this...
///Subbie slashies
 
2013-09-30 09:57:35 PM  

Sgygus: Denver has a five-year law for public art.  No matter what, art stays for a minimum of five years.


Hopefully they'll re-paint that blue bear looking into the convention center next year then.  And do something about that big horse near the airport.

/I'm all for public art, but really
 
2013-09-30 10:00:10 PM  

jaytkay: [upload.wikimedia.org image 250x395]
L.H.O.O.Q. (1919). Marcel Duchamp


great minds.... etc....
 
2013-09-30 10:12:28 PM  

Tunk87: The curator of Calder Plaza for Artprize is a good friend. He's known the artist for almost 30 yrs and warned him some people would get their panties in a bunch. We didn't expect the mayor to cave the way he did. We we're also surprised that Calder's grandson would piss and moan........seeing as how his grandpa was once arrested(but never charged) for adding to someone's sculpture.

All that aside, if you ever get a chance come to GR for Artprize. It's really an amazing event.


The article is pretty squirrelly about whether or not the Calder Foundation actually complained or if the Art Commission just freaked out and decided to cancel the artwork.

That said:

1) Calder wouldn't have cared.

2) There's a Stablie on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania that was painted all sorts of different colors during Calder's lifetime.  He even saw in after it had been painted the school colors and he said nothing.  It was restored a couple decades ago and is now painted International Red.
 
2013-09-30 10:32:49 PM  

Greylight: The installation is a great success in my eyes for the discussion on the nature of art that is created. Once the work is in the public domain it takes meaning from the interaction with the folks who experience the piece. The original sculpture and this temporary display are arguably both thought provoking and successful works of art.


Calder only died in 1976, so all his work is still under copyright, which is controlled by his family, who run his estate.  They're generally considered pretty cool as estates go, happily willing to authenticate all sorts of ephemeral or off-hand things that Calder made, but they do still control things.
 
2013-09-30 11:35:08 PM  
Boy, you think the estate was pissed off when he put on the flowers, just wait until he  deflowers the statue!

/get it, deflowering the statue...
//you'll about it some day, just you wait
 
2013-09-30 11:55:20 PM  
The Calder family/estate needs to get off their high horse -- the original "art" is crap.   At least the new guy's trying to improve things a bit.   I don't think what he did was disrespectful at all.
 
2013-10-01 12:07:37 AM  

Sean M: the original "art" is crap.


Your opinion, but can you back it up?
 
2013-10-01 05:05:36 AM  

twomutts: Boy, you think the estate was pissed off when he put on the flowers, just wait until he  deflowers the statue!

/get it, deflowering the statue...
//you'll about it some day, just you wait


Now THAT would be art! Thinking like Hermann Nitsch...and the ABYSMAL public art park in Seattle..."Yes kids, they are made of rusted iron, stories tall, but don't TOUCH THEM!!! Oh, and the rock formations? NO jumping!" Fark all that...
 
2013-10-01 05:58:13 AM  
typical grand rapids stuffed shirts.
another reason not to do business there.
'we can't have whimsical art insult serious art'
I guess they forgot the 'garter' and other 'art' of the seventies that opened the eyes to grand rapids...
 
2013-10-01 06:57:18 AM  
Vandalizing other peoples work is art now?
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report