the state

– of public trash art. by vastate
Saturday, 6 June 2009, 15:24
Filed under: -of art, -of harrisonburg, -of jhumphrey

this is what has become of the spectacular trash art sculptures on N. Liberty:


somebody is trying, but remember the tall people like figures that alternately embraced and fought?


we want our impromptu street expression back!


5 Comments so far
Leave a comment

I am not Boss (just logged in as him), but I want to say I sure do miss those figures on Liberty Street. Bring ’em back!!!!
Kathleen Temple

Comment by Boss

come one,
seriously? i thought they were kind of funny too, but i also wondered how the city justified leaving them up. i’m all for art in place type programs (see what they’ve done in c’ville) and even guerilla/viral art sorts of things, but at the risk of starting the ‘what is art?’ debate, i’m going to say that those weren’t.

again, i’m all for more public art in this place, but i think presenting this as that could potentially undermine the goal.

Comment by seth

we at the state are all for rogue art. rogue artists. graffiti. illegal public expression. secret trash communication.

check back through our back posts. we have a history of supporting such things. and these, organic, changing, non-invasive, anonymous sculptures certainly fit into our personal definition of art.

shiny apples, pigs, and bears carefully planned by men in business suits and painted by artists deemed appropriately diverse are a little forced.

look forward to a post on public art. we have artists in mind – some who painstakingly plan their beautifully complex public art and some who fly by the seat of their pants to make a point – that we want to highlight.

thanks, seth. you totally started a “what is art” debate. but, hey, we’re game.

Comment by vastate

one of my favorites (in terms of street art) is here:

i’m also a fan of a lot of the rogue art. train cars going by with badass tags on them make me happy. but it is important (and often difficult) to distinguish between what is and isn’t art (for instance i give no credibility to the swastika painted over the alleged hispanic graffiti in the alley behind my house (is that because it’s offensive? (art often is) or because there was really no skill in it’s inception? (you could say the same of the trash mannequins)). i think so much has to do with intention. i think that it’s maybe this absence of intention/meaning that makes me reluctant to categorize our liberty street loiterers
as art.

Comment by seth

“you totally started a “what is art” debate. but, hey, we’re game.”

….or not

Comment by seth

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: