The NPR article discusses the major points of this project including the viewpoints of both those in favor of the project, and those against it. The author described how Christo works; creating sketches models and mock-ups of the project and then selling them to raise the funds necessary to put the project in place. Christo was interviewed and he again commented how the entire project is the art, including the people protesting, the permits, and everything associated directly or indirectly with the completion of the project.
I have always had a love/hate relationship with the work of Christo. On the one hand I can see the arguments that it is not art, and more a construction project. On the other, I like how Christo brings issues of land use into the realm of art. One thing is certain: he makes valid arguments in a creative way that really get people to respond, both positively and negatively.
2 comments:
These types of ART give art and artists a bad name in the U.S. I do not appreciate what ever it is he is trying to express. I think his stuff is a waste of time and money, and to some extent, it desecrates the landscape.
That guy again! What is the picture of, what he thinks the installation will look like when he is done?
Post a Comment