Comments on: Opening the Gates

Opening the Gates

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:11:49 -0800

Opening the Gates. Christo and Jeanne-Claude's The Gates opens tomorrow and many are excited about this potentially record-breaking public event. The finishing touches are now being put on the saffron-colored structures, which span 23 miles of path through New York's Central Park. Bloomberg hails the project as "a once-in-a-lifetime work of art," but others aren't so sure. For some, the question remains: is this art?

By: interrupt

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:12:11 -0800

Previously discussed back in November — thought on the eve of the opening, perhaps it was worth another look. Also, here are more photos of the installation process.

By: splatta

splatta — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:14:32 -0800

I guess I'll throw in my own photos about the gates.

By: interrupt

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:17:24 -0800

Also, the weekend forecast for those lucky enough to be there.

By: splatta

splatta — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:21:49 -0800

Oh, also, also there will be a mefi meetup saturday night. Come for the gates, stay for the nerds!

By: MotherTucker

MotherTucker — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:23:35 -0800

I bought a little disposable Kodak camera to take pictures of Mr. Tucker and the gates. I have friends arriving from Denver just to look at the gates. I have gate fever. Woo Hoo!

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:29:14 -0800

I wonder if you can take the things with you when it's over? There certainly are enought of them....

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:29:25 -0800

Here's all photos at Flickr tagged with "thegates" for those like me that wished they could see them in person but can't.

By: boomchicka

boomchicka — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:36:42 -0800

Paris: No. I would love to see the unfurling live on TV tomorrow. I'll check the usual sources, MSNBC, CNN, etc. but has anyone heard of any specific coverage?

By: ZenMasterThis

ZenMasterThis — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:39:00 -0800

...is this art? That depends: did the "public" fund it?

By: xmutex

xmutex — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:43:37 -0800

Nothing more pompous than asking "is it art?" If you're asking, it likely is. Why can't we just say that anything you want to be art certainly is, but that there exists good art and very, very bad art.

By: bshort

bshort — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:47:43 -0800

That depends: did the "public" fund it? No. And how does that make / not make it art?

By: interrupt

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:48:14 -0800

xmutex: I agree. I have no problem calling the project art. But some do — like Mark Goldblatt.

By: TwelveTwo

TwelveTwo — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:49:38 -0800

I am art!

By: bshort

bshort — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:51:34 -0800

Also, that Goldblatt article appears to be completely worthless, even by the National Review's standards.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:47:58 -0800

Bshort, that response is an invitation to steal one, or at least the fabric. I probably won't go that far, but it would be cool too have an orange curtain in my apartment. Legal question: does someone have the right to control whether something is recycled or not?

By: delmoi

delmoi — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:55:03 -0800

Well, whatever it is, it's ugly.

By: arielmeadow

arielmeadow — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:55:37 -0800

By sheer coincidence, my husband and I will be in nyc this weekend. I look forward to battling the crowds on Saturday and checking out the scene. For me, the gawkers will be almost as interesting as the art/"art" itself.

By: me & my monkey

me & my monkey — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:23:21 -0800

By: The Deej

The Deej — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:36:15 -0800

Is it art? I don't know if it's art, but I know it's saffron-colored cloth.

By: eustacescrubb

eustacescrubb — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:36:24 -0800

is this art? Who gives a shit? Better questions are: does it make your heart beat faster? Does it make your mind buzz? Does it give you new insight into the whole business of being human?

By: Songdog

Songdog — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:40:58 -0800

This certainly falls within my [pretty liberal] definition of what's art, and I intend to pay it a visit next week.

By: Eekacat

Eekacat — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:52:38 -0800

I am young enough to have seen the "Running Fence" Christo did out in California. It was very cool. After, you could buy swatches from the installation.

By: interrupt

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:56:27 -0800

I'll be in NYC on the 21st, and I plan to have a visit.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:12:47 -0800

Asking "is it art?" is an attempt to draw lines and attain exclusivity. It's a way of kicking people out of your club. I think it's a perfectly valid discussion what sort of art something may be, and whether or not it's good art (which is still wanky, but an endless discussion we always engage in and sometimes to fun and meaningful extents, and sometimes to drunken fights!). But do question whether it is art is just high snobbery and destructive.

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:12:55 -0800

IMO this is art. But so is the discarded candy wrapper I admired briefly this morning--the flattened awkward purple shape in the sun against the grey sidewalk. I prefer other works by Christo. I like art and neighbourhoods that haven't become too chic.

By: Rashomon

Rashomon — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:24:12 -0800

It's hard to believe that in 2005 we are still trying to define what is and what is not art. The American Heritage definition of art is: "Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature." In other words, just about anything goes as long as human effort and imitating, supplementing, altering, or counteracting nature are involved. So, yeah, it's art. The question is how do we feel about it? What do we think of it? And on an aesthetic and intellectual level does it give us a sense of exhilaration, disgust, hope, confusion...in short does it move us in any way at all? I think it's pretty cool.

By: donovan

donovan — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:26:10 -0800

Is it art? Absolutely not. Art must be framed, fit on a wall or in foyer, and have an appraised value. If we go around allowing things to be called art that can't be bought then all hell will break loose.

By: alteredcarbon

alteredcarbon — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:49:26 -0800

Is it art? Well, as long as I'm not a homeless person living in NY city trying to find a place to sleep and find food near Central Park and possibly beg for some quarters, altough there's bound to be some rich tourists to get money from, it's art to me.

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:57:25 -0800

Is it art? No. It is podiatry.

By: interrupt

interrupt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:00:16 -0800

Absolutely not. Art must be framed, fit on a wall or in foyer, and have an appraised value. If we go around allowing things to be called art that can't be bought then all hell will break loose. Took the words right out of my mouth.

By: Balisong

Balisong — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:28:21 -0800

Every intentional act is a work of art.

By: fungible

fungible — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:03:42 -0800

[angry old man voice] You kids get offa my lawn!!!

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:08:27 -0800

It makes me think of frisbee golf, for some reason.

By: SPrintF

SPrintF — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:09:09 -0800

Are there copyright issues about taking and posting photographs of this installation? Sounds stupid, but there's precedent in Chicago.

By: uni verse

uni verse — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:12:51 -0800

If we experience mystery or beauty, the birth of new thought or feeling, the feeling of a sacred object, it was creative expression. Is it Art? Do you need someone to tell you? A critique or dismissal tells more about us than the object. In the end we discard art based on our angles / angels of perception, not what is right or good.

By: KS

KS — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:37:00 -0800

Is it art? I thought we settled this in the first half of the twentieth century. Duchamp and his cronies made it clear that this is a silly question. The real questions to ask include: is this art interesting? do I want to experience more of this art? Does it give you new insight into the whole business of being human? And business is very much a key word. I find the business of this and previous work pretty interesting. They are entrepeneurial. They don't accept sponsorships or donations. (Other people's money comes with other people attached.) They realize, and share a grand experience for free, and then destroy (recycle) the original. People can patronize the artists by buying other related works. This all seems to me to fit well with the 21st century. It's also interesting that on their site they list a number of films, books and videos about their work and how to buy them. They also point out that they "do not participate in the films' marketing and do not share in any financial gain from the selling of these films. Not any." So, much of the documentation of their work is created as separate entrepeneurial/artistic endeavours by others. ...so is the discarded candy wrapper I admired briefly this morning--the flattened awkward purple shape in the sun against the grey sidewalk. I would argue that the art happened during perception. You made it by seeing it. You were the artist. If someone else sees the same accidental art they are also the artist. Full disclosure: I photograph litter and post it online, so I've got a stake in when it becomes art.

By: undule

undule — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:47:23 -0800

I hope this all doesn't ruin The Lawn.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 20:43:13 -0800

I don't know if its art but, as one friend is going to do, I bet it looks very, very cool at sunrise after a night of booty shaking.

By: R. Mutt

R. Mutt — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 21:16:33 -0800

Well, whatever it is, it's ugly ... Oh Look! It is an art review by DELMOI ! Who I assume has actually seen the yet unveiled work? Or maybe Delmoi hasn't seen it...

By: sophist

sophist — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:41:42 -0800

Why are they doing this?

By: goofyfoot

goofyfoot — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 23:17:27 -0800

Why not? It's hat-over-the-windmill stuff. Nonsensical, whimsical, and apparently not on the public dime. Kinda like the Olympics, and less displacing to citizens. Wish I was there.

By: HTuttle

HTuttle — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 03:25:59 -0800

It'll be an interesting event. And could be considered art as much as any designed event such as a play. The Art-Not Art crap usually spews from confusion with art as painting vs. all the friggin other versions no one has any problem referring to as art. But it's also a safe haven for questionable 'artists' to hide in the nether-crevices to avoid criticism from well established regarders of those other traditional forms of art.

By: afroblanca

afroblanca — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 06:16:22 -0800

I live in NYC, and I think this thing is totally retarded. One of my friends came to visit me from L.A. last month, and I got the chance to give him the "Why NYC is soooo Much Better than LA" tour. Anyway, we got to Central Park, and everywhere we go we see these wierd neon things and these other things that look like little benches (this was while they were still setting up the exhibit.) Well, needless to say, all this neon totally threw off the previously-beautiful Central Park in The Wintertime aesthetic, giving my friend the (false) impression that Central Park is actually less cool than it really is. Thanks alot, egocentric "artist" guy. Geez. First the Republicans at MSG, now THIS!

By: smackfu

smackfu — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 09:08:51 -0800

At least you had no problem showing him the stereotypical New Yorker.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 09:16:08 -0800

I will definitively report on The Gates' value tomorrow evening.

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 09:22:42 -0800

Next year: wrapping Paramus Park in metalic fabric. Ideally, so that the mall is completely inaccessible.

By: cloudscratcher

cloudscratcher — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:05:32 -0800

2007: Wrapping Paris Paramus... aw, never mind.

By: Balisong

Balisong — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:12:24 -0800

Next year: wrapping Paramus Park in metalic fabric. Ideally, so that the mall is completely inaccessible. Well, accessible by a select few...

By: interrupt

interrupt — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:40:25 -0800

Some words and photos of The Gates are up at kottke.org.

By: uni verse

uni verse — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 14:43:20 -0800

Anticlimax.

By: bshort

bshort — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 16:31:42 -0800

I just got back from walking through the park and taking pictures and there was really nothing anti-climactic about it. The whole "art" of the gates is more than just the gates themselves.

By: Ayn Marx

Ayn Marx — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 17:29:34 -0800

Nothing more pompous than asking "is it art?" Well, expect for chiding people for asking, "Is it art?" It's hard to believe that in 2005 we are still trying to define what is and what is not art. Not as hard as believing there are people who think "What is art?" is a done deal. Duchamp and his cronies made it clear that this is a silly question. No, Duchamp and his cronies made the question explicit. The idea is to keep asking the question.

By: moxyberry

moxyberry — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:23:04 -0800

The beauty of the project is that if you want, you can enjoy the gates in solitude and quiet: The Gates cover 23 miles of the park: you shouldn't have a hard time finding a stretch of path to take in the scene without a dozen of your NYC neighbors. This is, I think, truly a gift to NYC by Christo and Jeanne-Claude: $21 million, 20+ years, not a penny earned and all for only 16 glorious saffron-clad days. Makes me feel very lucky to live in NYC and have this spectacle right on my doorstep.

By: sourbrew

sourbrew — Sun, 13 Feb 2005 06:09:59 -0800

I wont be there till march 7th... CURSES

By: muckster

muckster — Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:28:19 -0800

We were going to wait until Monday morning to miss the crowds, but today was such a gorgeous sunny day, we had to check it out. It's truly spectacular, and I'm going back tomorrow anyway.

By: TNLNYC

TNLNYC — Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:40:01 -0800

Well, a day later (went yesterday but didn't get to read MeFi 'til now), I have to say "WOW". I'm still amazed by the Gates and plan on going over and over again as much as I can. Is it art? My answer would be yes, in that it is an installation that helps us rediscover some fundamental truths about human nature. Does it matter whether it is art or not? In my view, absolutely not. Decisions as to whether something is art or not are interesting as mind games but nothing much beyond that ;)

By: IndigoJones

IndigoJones — Sun, 13 Feb 2005 18:56:56 -0800

$2800 a pop wholesale....

By: ParisParamus

ParisParamus — Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:54:10 -0800

Well, I think the performance art aspect of the Gates is quite remarkable: people abandoning televisions and Times Square, and the Gap to parade in the February cold; to look and react--that's fantastic! As for the Gates themselves, I was on Central Park South for a dentist appointment today, and at least in the mid/late afternoon sun, the orange does nothing for me; it's the color of highway construction warning objects (or close). I also don't like the "inverted stubbyness" of the fabric: too little of each gate's height is covered by fabric; the proportion is not graceful. Oh, whatever, I urge everyone to take a trip to CP in the next two weeks.

By: gleenyc

gleenyc — Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:06:44 -0800

from Manhattan Users Guide: '...."The Gates" is the first truly citywide event since September 11th, a malign and permanent transformation of space on the one hand, a benign and temporary one on the other. From people born outside our shores, one was done to us, one done for us. September 11th was a vertical event; this installation encourages you to see horizontally, to reframe the landscape with its proscenium arches and show curtains. Terrorists cast ashes over a golden morning, artists launched patches of orange under ashen skies.'

By: nequalsone

nequalsone — Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:02:13 -0800

Is it art? My answer would be yes, in that it is an installation that helps us rediscover some fundamental truths about human nature. posted by TNLNYC at 5:40 PM PST on February 13 Care to elaborate? I guess art is art if you choose to view it as art... but it is hard for me to see the point of viewing this as art if the only discussion it provokes is "Is it art?" *shrug*

By: Morrigan

Morrigan — Mon, 14 Feb 2005 10:18:30 -0800

Art and "happening" both. I was in the park all of Saturday, arriving shortly after the unfurling. The park was full of people talking about the installation, talking about what is beautiful and considering meaning. That response defines art. I appreciate the gifted aspect of the project and that, as a result of of this work, people are experiencing all corners of the park in safety and in joy. Central Park is elevated by it; The Gates is a memorable episode in the rich history of the park. It moved me.

By: muckster

muckster — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:15:18 -0800

So, I went back today and figured out that the trick is to go as much as possible. The Gates changes with the light, the time of day, the wind, the crowd, the music on the iPod, your mood, and thousand other factors. Plus, it's huge--I've spent hours and hours wandering all over the place, but I've only seen about half of the park transformed. It's just incredibly pleasing. This afternoon, I stumbled on a group of people wearing pastel-colored robes: the Polyphonic Spree was out, having their pictures taken with the Gates. It was a perfect match. To keep walking, I had to push through the lot of them, lined up left and right to let me through. I passed Tom DeLaughter, thanked him for the music, and kept on going. It was all very casual; it made perfect sense, like wandering though some kind of artifical enchanted forest left behind by benevolent aliens. I can't wait to explore the northern end of the park.

By: muckster

muckster — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:29:07 -0800

The Gates from space.

By: buddhanarchist

buddhanarchist — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:52:49 -0800

IS the Gates art? Ofcourse-- but what isn't? Muzak is also a form of music. The one word for the Gates: BLAND. Its prozac for the masses. Its big big art to create a big big event, using big big money and big big egos: not exactly what the world needs right now. But how could someone criticize something like the Gates? Theres nothing really to criticize. Which is part of the problem. Its so cloying, bland, calculated to go down smoothly, that its a greeting card, a piece of IKEA furniture. Sure: the money is private: but think about what other things could have been done with it. Really stop and think about it. Read the readers comments in the New York Times and you'll find, that by about 3-1, people agree with this sentiment.

By: muckster

muckster — Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:05:56 -0800

You knew all along you'd hate it, didn't you. Well, I'm glad you got at least that much satisfaction out of it. (Or did you not actually go?)