Christo and Goldsworthy

["Betsy Brown" <betsybrown@zzzzzzzzzzzzz>]

Intellectually, yes.  Emotionally, probably not.  I think Christo's work can
be aesthetically judged without personally judging him - I don't think
Norman was personally indicting Christo - I think he was quite bluntly
indicting his work.  He thinks the fabric wrapping is stupid. He's in good
company, but then so are the rest of us who disagree.

I shake my head at some of Christo's work, but nonetheless, I absolutely
love it.  I love the fact that the gates are running right atop the Met - it
lets me know that art in this country is still alive, controversial and that
it can still be vibrant.  When is the last time we heard art being discussed
in daily conversation like this?  I rescheduled a quick trip back to NY
because I wanted to see the gates in person.  And anyone who says that art
doesn't belong in nature hasn't been to Central Park previously....or maybe
Delacroix and the statues along poet's walk don't count as art.

Any artist who puts their work out into the public domain must be prepared
with a sense of humor for moments they can't avoid reading the reviews.  No
matter how well intended, criticism (good or bad) always stings -- but if in
the end, it makes us turn inward and reaffirm our own artistic intent and
hone our skills, it's constructive.  I personally see great value in
Christo's work, but I absolutely appreciate hearing opinions to the
contrary. It's why they made chocolate, strawberry, vanilla and passion
fruit. 'One man's trash is another man's treasure--somewhere in that old
adage lies art I think.

Thank you everyone who posts on this list.  I don't write much, but I always
enjoy the reading.

Betsy