You Call THAT Art?!?

 

My trendy in-town Atlanta neighborhood is known for its liberal politics, fierce loyalty to the ‘hood and propensity for all things artistic.  We have several little theaters, music venues that draw the tattooed and pierced types with crayon-colored hair, and all the architectural amenities that earned it its Historical District designation.

When the City of Atlanta decided to sponsor a new public-art project, one of our prominent gallery owners was given the honor of choosing a muralist to do his magic on the exposed and blank side of a local building in the upscale retail area of the neighborhood.  The corner building is located at one of the busiest intersections around, so it is virtually impossible to miss the mural.

One of the residents who is also a real estate agent has taken exception to the idea, calling the massive mural an invitation to graffiti artists to deface even more of the surfaces along our leafy streets and avenues.  He even claimed he had a carload of buyers in his car who practically lost their lunches upon viewing the unfinished mural.  He claims they refused to buy because of the graffiti that already exists, and he thinks the mural is negatively affecting the area’s property values.  And, he says, it doesn’t resemble anything, so it’s no better than graffiti, commissioned or not.

Really? Seriously, sir?

Let me go on record with my personal critique of the mural:  It’s not speaking to me.  It’s not pressing any of my visual buttons so far, but the thing is still under creation.  I probably won’t be buying a print of the finished product to hang in my living room.  Big deal!  There are plenty of paintings hanging in the Louvre at this very moment that I wouldn’t hang in my living room or any other room in my house.  That doesn’t make the art any less valid or valuable.  It just means it doesn’t appeal to my unsophisticated eye. But given the choice between the bare, blank, brick wall and the mural, I lean toward the mural.  It is colorful and it is the expression of the creativity that is the hallmark of our community.

Our online Yahoo Group has been buzzing for the past three days over this controversy and most commenters are in favor of public art, no matter what they think of the piece in question.  I’m beginning to think this guy is one of the handful of Republicans who live among us.  He seems to think things need to stay pristine and sterile so that he can make his money, above all else.  That is his right, but he’s going to have to move to the suburbs or some other area of the City of Atlanta, because he is losing the argument here big-time.

What do you think of public art in general and this unfinished piece specifically?