This page makes it sound like that was the intended (or at least an accepted) outcome for Meyer's piece. The childrens' "need to understand extend[ed] beyond sight," I guess.

Which, by the way, puts me in the mood to resume our bimonthly debate about authorial intent. Let's forget about these particular pieces (your post might've been tongue in cheek, for all I know; I don't know anything about this show). Let's say you got upset about a work at a show being destroyed by a child -- plausible, right? If you later learned that this was what the artist had in mind, would your reaction change?

Not to change the subject, but what (by the way) happened to the G.p image at the top of your blog?

the server it's hosted on "expired on 01/03/06 and is pending renewal or deletion."

Lucky my actual face isn't stored on that server!

I'm going to have to make a new banner. I kind of like it without my big giant head floating above the fray.

And I don't understand, Tommy—we're neither drunk nor at DC9, so we can't possibly be having that conversation. Anyway, so you're asking about a piece made to appeal to destructive adolescent urges? Artists have the right to outline the ways viewers can interact with the artworks—don't look–don't touch, walk all over it, take a bite, whatever. That's authorial control (or what have you) as opposed to intent, which might be better pictured by a sentiment such as: "Please walk on it, and when you do, that is about the environment."

Most of the time you know going in which rules deviate from the don't–don't touch variety, or they're advertised. But if you witnessed someone appropriately interacting with a piece but interpreted that as vandalism and were upset, you'd want to reframe your reactions once you had better informed expectations of the work. I don't think you necessarily have to change your reaction—maybe you just like the piece better when children aren't involved.

"I kind of like it without my big giant head floating above the fray."

To each his own, I guess -- I was only asking because the banner had utility to me. I despise those (other) blogs where, when you're reading a specific post, there's no obvious link that takes you back to the "front page." Navigation issues abound. Sorry to come to your blog and be all surly about it.

I like that function, too. I'll make sure it goes back in.

Use the "Hook 'em!" photo!

I don't know, Kriston, I liked that banner. Kind of reminded me of the billboard in Gatsby (the glasses any way). Maybe you could reveal the "Hook 'em!" photo as a rollover.

Once I saw kids grabbing at the reflective metal piece and shaking it around I knew it was time to leave. I'm sorry to hear about the damage...

Meyer's piece was easily my favorite and I heard he had trouble with it when transporting to the gallery. The change in humidity caused the surface to crack. I've talked to him about his wrok before and that's fine by him. The kids... probably not.

If the surface cracked, he was able to repair it before the opening—it looked fine but for the huge handprints and gobs of flour missing.

Hmmm... when I was there from 6:30 - 7:30 the flour was very cracked. I don't know how it got fixed between that time and when you arrive. As I understood it there was no way to repair the cracks except for recasting the piece. Anywho...

OK, well, it's possible I didn't see the cracks, what with the handprints.

Yeah, I'm not sure I would have either.

From David Meyer's website about his flour cubes: "Over time, depending on the space and the audience, the piece evolves as the need to understand extends beyond sight."

So it's a participatory piece. Or isn't not? Wasn't it destroyed? Or did "evolve" "depening on...the audience."?

When children damage my work they're sorry- or at least too young to know better- adults however tend to yell at me for not making it clear enough to them that they shouldn't walk on the art. (I have actually tried signs that said "Don't walk on the art") In general I would recommend that if you aren't sure then don't touch.

Yes..the flour sculpure artist came from deleware..met his wife..good people....i did see the childs handprint on it..and almost a guys ass was going to sit on it! HUH!!??? some people don't get it or are just to tired to watch their own KIDS..yes the show was PACKED and the speaker curator from Sculpure mag was so soft spoken and long winded who could hear him....PEEVE!!! If people want to public speak....SPEAK UP!!!SEMI-Loud! simmy.....
Cool 3D...nice work.....nice space...i wish i had seen the call for entries...

Useful information! Thank you.

urls33.txt;15;20

8Om98H

kF0qlZ