Flutterby™! : Sept 11 madness

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Sept 11 madness

2002-09-20 18:58:36+00 by Dan Lyke 3 comments

It's one of those days. I'm trying to get stuff installed on my laptop so I can escape the horrible noises of construction across the street, so a post I otherwise wouldn't make. Columbine thought the uproar over Eric Fischl's "Tumbling Woman" sculpture might be up my alley. I thought it was good that we had some transgressive reminders that we're angry because people died in horrible ways, rather than this lovey-dovey towers of light crap that sanitizes everything, but I've been trying to stay clear of the media hype and the public hysteria in general. Then, a few hours later, I come across this: NY 9/11 parade organizers couldn't get doves, so they bought squabs at a Newark market in the hopes that they could do one of those "uplifting dove releases":

Many of the birds plunged into the Hudson River, smacked into plate-glass windows on office buildings or careened into the crowd. One perched atop the hard hat of a construction worker whose company had helped clear ground zero.

Great, more manufactured sentiment by people way out of touch with reality.

[ related topics: Current Events Art & Culture WTC/Pentagon attacks ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment made: 2002-09-21 02:13:15+00 by: meuon

Dan, You once said good art had to offend, but later conceded that that is not really true. It's hard to be offended by the poor image on the site, but if others found it disturbing, then I would say the artist communicated SOMETHING very well. Was it what was intended? I don't know. But does not that it communicates or evokes a feeling well, make it good art?

#Comment made: 2002-09-21 03:56:31+00 by: other_todd

Meuon, I don't speak for Dan, but the problem I had with the sculpture (Columbine = me) is not the nature of the art itself; it's the place (Rockefeller Center) where it was displayed.

I think art should provoke a strong reaction in the viewer, and in the case of art about a nasty event, it's likely to be a pretty nasty reaction. No problem there. But if it were in a gallery or a museum, those who were not ready to confront that reaction in themselves could avoid it. In a public place it is an "intrusive medium," as it were.

The piece was only in Rockefeller Center for a short time anyway, by the original plan. I have not yet found any information on what was supposed to happen to it after that.

#Comment made: 2002-09-21 04:19:13+00 by: topspin

Guernica is disturbing.

The art about the Holocaust is disturbing.

The Art of the Hibakusha is disturbing.

Some events are disturbing and honest art about them is disturbing.

Yes, "Tumbling Woman" conjures up a horrid image.... an "unacceptable" image.... an "offensive" image. Good art, tough object d'art.