I love art. I love art of all kinds, and believe strongly that we don't put enough of an emphasis on its importance in schools. We tend to think of those who have chosen art as a career as lazy people who cannot commit to reality, and portray them as not driven enough/not smart enough/not normal enough to succeed. (Succeed from a financial standpoint, of course, because that's all that really matters.)
Because I have always been around art, (I have even been known to barter haircuts for ceramics, paintings, and knitted items,) I am torn about the artist Christo's plans to suspend fabric over part of the Arkansas River between Canyon City and Salida. To be clear, I am not torn about whether or not I think he should be able to do it- I am torn because I feel like a traitor to the art community. I think if the Bureau of Land Management permits this installation, named Over the River, it will be a mistake.
|Christo standing in front of plans for Over the River.|
taken from artinfo.com
|What it might look like if it ever|
taken from overtheriverinfo.com
|Who are you people, and what is all that crap you |
are draping over my river?
In chapter 3 of the Environmental Impact Statement, there is a lot of discussion about the harm that will likely be done to animals who live near the river. 400,000 new people in the area? That's a lot of stressed out little critters.
Am I way off here? Do you think the two year commitment that will have to be made by residents in the area and the negative environmental impact is worth the $121million in economic output and overall amazingness of this installation? Maybe my bologna-meter is off, but I just don't think it is worth it. What do you think?
Talk about a liberal conundrum- Having to choose between art and the environment? It's like having to choose which of your children you love the most!