Slog Comments


Comments (5) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
tainte 1
hey, that's awesome. i got laid off from spu a couple of years ago. now they're spending 125k on art.

Posted by tainte on January 3, 2013 at 5:20 PM · Report this
thatsnotright 2
So following your logic, it would have been "weird" for the Department of the Interior to have acquired and commisioned its fabulous collection of American landscapes which would otherwise not exist or be in private hands. Should museums of modern art open their collections to antiquities? What's next, no human figures at The National Portait Gallery? Why shouldn't they have a curatorial point of reference?
Posted by thatsnotright on January 3, 2013 at 6:14 PM · Report this
Matt the Engineer 3
1. I didn't know our 1% for art sometimes ends up simply decorating offices. I feel like if my utility bill's going to pay for art, it should be in some public place where I can see it.

2. I'd love to see how hanging art creates a "diverse work environment". Maybe they're planning on selecting a style of art that makes straight white men want to quit.
Posted by Matt the Engineer on January 4, 2013 at 7:29 AM · Report this
@2: Our perspectives on what constitutes a perspective worthy of the description "curatorial" differ.
Posted by Jen Graves on January 4, 2013 at 10:34 AM · Report this
thatsnotright 5
@4, our perspectives on the word "curatorial" may differ but you dodge the question. What is "weird" about an individual or organization basing a collection on something in which they have an interest? From the tone of your article I get the impression that your scorn for this project arises from its lack of an "art-pro" of whom you approve. Your article reeks of snob.
Posted by thatsnotright on January 4, 2013 at 11:21 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.