Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown84
What's your beef?
You paint over them or give them a touch up. Not rocket science.
That's quite the hyperbole. There's what, like 3 murals in Bricktown? A nameless alley was named after a world famous band from Oklahoma. There is plenty of Brick still showing and plenty of streets that haven't changed.
When they are painted without the permission of the building owner and other authorities. Again, doesn't take a rocket scientist...
Oh, so public art is sad now??
|
Well first, jbrown84, what's your definition of public art? I would define public art as any art that's accessible to the public, contrasted to a private collection that's on display in a person's home. I've always thought that public art could be found in museums, art galleries, and parks. OKC has terrific public art, including permanent and traveling exhibits at the OKC Museum of Art, IAO, Untitled Art, and in Paseo. In fact, OKC's downtown even has some pretty intriguing outdoor sculptures. So, I'm not against public art. In fact, I believe art is critically important to any community, including OKC.
But I guess I'm a little curious about people's obsession with painting murals on walls in Bricktown. Do you have the same desire to paint murals on Downtown's First National Bank Building, on Western Avenue's Will Rogers Theater, or on your own house? Probably not. But based on your definition, if it's painted on an outdoor wall, then it's public art, right? Funny, but I'm pretty sure that you (or your neighbors) wouldn't be as enthusiastic about painting murals on every exterior wall in the neighborhood.
So why are we so driven to paint murals in Bricktown?