I have to agree, Bob. They don't like me when I say stuff like that, but you are absolutely correct, I think. We're the "me" nation. It's almost the antithesis of Christianity.

Gaijindabe, I'd agree that some of the most pure art, and some of the most effective, is the free stuff. There are places in Seattle where it looks as if the locals just could not contain their need for expression. Wherever you have a surface and some paint, you have potential for expression. And much of the "real" art out there is not commissioned. Commission, heck. Some of the best stuff didn't even get permission.

I think public art work is very important. It affects out attitde toward our communitys. By displaying art, we are making a statement that our citys are not merely utilitarian systems, but rather spaces that we all live in together. It makes us aware that we are not feral creatures racing through our rats maze.

Now I think art funding is another issue. I am a painter, and while I rather enjoy my own art (obviously I would not bother otherwise), I can easily imagine others thinking its crap. And I certainly would not expect the government to find my efforts.

As much as I enjoy art, and some of it extremely abstract work, I have to agree that 90% of it is utter ****. Self absorbed ass wipes sloping paint around after a few hits of lsd does not impress me. On the other hand neither does Thomas Kincade, the bible thumpers answer to Monet.

I do want my tax dollars going to public art. I would rather see my taxes going to art than the other nightmarish public services here in Seattle. I would not be suprised if there is an Animal Therapists department. Stinking hippies.....

Heck, Supe..

I have often wondered how many so-called Christians would consider Christ so much of a liberal and not conservative enough for their tastes? The more of the religious fundamentalists I meet over time convince me that the inclusive nature of Christ is something they simply do not "get".

What ever happened to the original message? Where did it become so distorted that one brand of Christian refers to another as unworthy of the title?

Tis a puzzlement.

"two camps comprised on one side of "me first" individuals "

There are artist on this board?

Island -- few who have studied the art of rhetoric, evidently.

Who said art was valueless? It has great value. It does not save lives (and I haven't seen anything that would even pass for an "argument" on these boards saying it does). Rather, the camp that has no principled argument and makes ad hominem attacks against the proponents of a contrary view for want of ability to attack the view itself has gone into "thermonuclear, preclude debate and smear the other side mode." Again.

We do not gape in awe at the rhetorical abilities of those who cannot discern between such finely differentiated statements "art is valueless" and "art survives just fine w/o the dole" and must, to make any feeble effort at all at a point, attribute the former statement to the proponent of the latter.

And it's all about Christianity. Again. That keeps Supe's record unblemished when ascribing anti-Christian pathologies to those with whom he disagrees. Kind of like a kinder, gentler Inquisition?

JP

Programming is art. I'm an artist. get off your high horses and pay me.

Well; I'm an atrist too - have been all my life but not always active. I enjoy art even the stuff I don't get - so I suppose you could say I'm tolerant.

I'm also supportive of the efforts within my local community (where I live and where I work - two different locals) to get the government to support art but we are in the midst of hard times - especially here in sunny socal.

Right now we have many a fiscal crisis and spending money on art is by and large *NOT* something I See that will serve the greatest public good. That means I can't see CA spending money on a mural over CA spending money fixing the pot holes in front of my office. If I have to choose - I can find someone to privately fund the mural likely with little difficulty. The potholes *ARE* supposed to be paid for from public funds much more clearly.

Art is subjective in every way, pot holes aren't subjective at all. Infrustructure is the backbone of our economy and if we treat it like crap it will turn to exactly that. Potholes are mearly an example however simple so try not to get hung up on them.

:D

Also for some perspective - I work in an government office, when things must get done to produce results the art hanging on the walk is of little consequence. It might make you feel good to come to the office but if you need THAT to go to work every day then you're quite clearly in the wrong job.

SmileWavy

Another thought:

Let's say a purely hypothetical municipality has a budget of $10. The only two projects proposed are fixing the pothole on the town's one street and paying the local artist to paint a mural on the side of the town hall. Both cost $10. If they fix the pothole now, they can pay the artist to do the mural next year. If they pay for the mural now, it will cost $12 next year to fix the pothole as it will have gotten bigger.

Grammar, too.



You know the truth, and don't follow it? When the question is "Public art.....is it good for us?" the answer clearly cannot be "public art is gubmint subsidy for artists." I mean, if someone responded "No, public art is not useful to us, and it only is gubmint subsidy for artists," then that person would have answered the question AND hurled hatred at a group to which they don't belong.....a double-score.

At any rate, I was hoping to get a sense for who is so myopic in their thinking that they believe art is always just a useless waste of money. Of course, I knew I would be reminded of who is blinded by hate and selfishness but will not offer solutions, nor even comment on the actual issues. And no, I'm not thinking of anyone in particular, whoever you are that feels a personal insult there. It's just so obvious that some folks consider these questions with some chin-scratching, going "hmmmmm" and gazing in thought at the ceiling (those would be the libs) and there are those whose answer is ready even before the question is laid out.

"Gubmint is a WITCH. BURN IT. BURN IT!"

In Houston, we don't fix potholes; we place huge metal plates over the holes, which eventually travel a few feet away from the hole and sit unlevel so that the edge of the plate is directed like a knife blade at your tires. I wonder if our city does this so they can funnel more funds to public art.

I was following you just fine until you got to this part. This is where you are not correct. Ask Island. Infrastructure is not the problem. Gubmint is the problem. No need for effective, working infrastructure. And it's free anyway, as long as we keep voting tax breaks for ourselves.

I don't no if you're comments r directed @ mee or knot but I digress...

The question simply should not be "Is art a useless waste of money?" because I don't think anyone of true intelligence would say it was.

My point is simply that I pay my taxes; I expect my infrustructure to stay sound, my schools to have money, my cops to have guns and my illegal immigrants to clog up emergency rooms well before I expect MY taxes that *I* paid to be spent on a mural or what have you. Sure it looks nice but my all those other problems still exist. It's like trying to hide from problems by making ourselves feel good. Frankly - we can do that with alcohol and drugs.

Now, qualifying that further this isn't something that I'm holding against art - it is something that is plaguing us now. Our cities and townships are low on cash (especially in CA) so if I were to approve a new building I would ask the engineers and investors pitching it to pitch into infrustructure more than art at this time or for a least a period of time after construction.

So; what should the question be?

"When can we start funding art again."

monorail.

supe; "problem" is a relative term. And yes; our state 'gubmint' is a bigger problem than our infrastucture right now.

Have a look for yourselves. Maintainence looks to me minimal.

http://outdoorsculpture.wwu.edu/index.htm

The problem with Gov't and Art is that Art is very subjective. The taxpayer with the Thomas Kincade or "Painting on Velvet" hanging in their house could probably give a rat's a$$ about the "intentions" that the Artist was trying to convey when he came up with the design for the abstract metal sculpture in front of City Hall. I say, stick to statues and fountains,and if you want to please the majority of the publics "eyes", spend the extra money on interesting architecture to beautify the City.,

You're fine, Mike. I was poking fun at Island, as usual.

I don't disagree, Island, that there are problems with gubmint. No doubt. Some of them are disgusting problems that underscore the selfishness and vanity of the human animal. On the other hand, one of the notions that I would appreciate folks of your ilk considering is the notion that problems look very different on the inside, compared to the 'street appraisal' view. And the media does not help. They deliberately forget to include the few facts that explain much of what initially, without those facts, makes the problems and proposed solutions seem silly. Truly, there are actual degreed engineers working to solve some of these problems. And they often truly believe they are doing their best to address the problems in the most responsible and cost effective fashion. And WSDOT has truly been audited to death over the last 15 years and any legislator on either side of the aisle will report to you that additional internal "efficiencies" is now a dry hole to continue drilling. Believe it and become part of the group working to solve the problem or at least supporting that group.....or dismiss these notions, gather no more information and continue havign fun pretending that everyone is too dense to see the obvious solution. My 13 year-old daughter has this exact same attitude.

Gaijindabe, I dunno about the costs and maintenance. It was a story, and that is the word in the story. And they say it is reflective of art reductions across the country for similar reasons.

Craig, I'd largely agree. Everything we do is art, whether we recognize it or not. It makes us feel a certain way. Good architecture goes a long way toward uplifting our spirits. Which I think is important. Separate art pieces are nice, but right now we have a crisis in government. Lots of expectations, and voters' self-induced tax breaks.

The initiative and referendum process would be really sweet if there were no connection between funding and gubmint services. Those processes result in just one outcome. Services are increased while taxes are eliminated. Any math PhD's out there who can help us understand why that's a problem?

It is interesting that urban areas seem to go from slums, to artist havens, to yuppie sanctuaries. I get the sense that many people who moved to my part of Houston precisely for the public art and architecture are fervently against the public funding that put it there. It's weird. I think too many of the middle class harbor illusions that they are in the upper class and able to afford great art, when truthfully, they wouldn't normally be able to access it without public funding or private benefactors.

Or, perhaps, I see you down in the thick of the forest, telling me aaaalllll about the forest based on your view of a few tree's.

....perhaps.

supe . . you seem to be lost. :cool:

I'd have had this same emotional reaction if I were in your shoes.

I'm not entirely sure what you do, Island, but I'd bet that there are concepts and practices in your profession that look curious to outsiders. "Hey, why don't you just do it this way?" When you receive these questions, you smile. Because you know the answers. What if those outsiders just went around pointing out how stupid you are? I am absolutely certain that if you spent a month inside WSDOT, and were privy to mid-to-high level planning and design discussions......well......I'm just pretty sure of what would NOT happen. I'm pretty sure you would not come away from that experience telling everyone what idiots they are at WSDOT. I'm certain you would have some additional appreciation for the considerations they have to deal with, and the care with which they make those decisions. I've heard those discussions. Engineers solving problems is very cool. I'd agree that there are severe problems with gubmint, but as you know I place those in the elected branch much more than the administration branch.

But perhaps, as you say, perhaps my inside vantage point is twisted. It's just that this principle works everywhere, whether I am an insider or an outsider. Looking from the outside, stuff looks silly. Decisions are real head-scratchers. Until I start asking questions. Then comes the "Ah hah" moments that place my silly assumptions in perspective.