Sunday, March 1, 2009

Wazz Widdis?


A horse is a horse
of course, of course
unless
it looks like this....yuck...
Wunst agin, I'm about to venture into a debate upon which I have only my own opinion, buttressed by my (apparent lack of) artistic taste to put forth.
And as I recently learned via another source, this makes me ineligible to debate, according to the supporters of the abomination pictured h'yar.
On the outskirts of Denver's International Airport, visitors and citizens are "greeted" (or bid an ominous farewell) by the sculpture pictured at the right. A giant sculpted horse. A giant sculpted Tidy Bowl blue horse. With big, angry red eyes, the kind that even Visine can't touch.
The originating artist -- Luis Jiminez -- dubbed this creation "Mustang". It was sold to the City and County of Denver for $300,000. Next time I make one of those silly putty ashtrays from shop class, I'm going to hold onto it and find a city this artistically gullible, but I digress.
At any rate, after spending a ridiculous amount of money for it, some city wonk -- my sources tell me the wife of the mayor that preceeded the current one -- thought that it would be a perfect representative for the City and County's artsy-fartsy crowd, if placed prominently to scare...er...greet arriving and departing travellers from DIA.
For many who've seen this...."thing", debasing the visual approach to DIA, it has differing names. One I like just now is the Tidy Bowl Demonic Whorse.
Now, I could start by saying that the previous mayor's wife had all of her art taste confined to her mouth, but in the interests of being fair and open-minded -- of which I have no real interest in being, since it's my blog nyuk nyuk -- I'll start by saying where I sit on this 'un.
I am not what one would consider to be much of an art person. I can't paint. I can't draw. I can't sketch. I can't sculpt or model clay. I don't have an eye for taking oblique angles of differing items, and making something of them that makes others go "ooooh" and "ahhhhh", like a Coke can, or a strung-up collection of dildos that not long ago adorned a local library as 'art'. When I worked at a Fortune 500 company in the late 70s, my first exposure to "modern art" was this big, off-white thing that was representative of something "free-flowing and high-spirited". To me, it was a giant fiberglass wonton, or used kleenex. Pronouncing it thus wasn't well-received by the art crowd at that facility, needless to say.
Now, I know 'art' when I see it, when it's 'art' as I care to define it. When it comes to art, I'm subjective, and can live with that. I know what I like. I know what I don't like. I know what I think is authentic 'art', and what I think is authentic 'crap'. A photo of a mountain sunset in snow, or a plains sunrise, mixed with fog and auburn-edged clouds...now, I can appreciate that as art. A painting of an 18th century sailing ship in a stormy sea, or a Rembrandt, or a sketch of a snow-capped mountain valley....I can see the obvious in these. A tornado, ravaging across the Eastern Plains...now that, in my eyes, and hopefully in my camera lens, is art (it's other things to folks having their trailer park disassembled, but I digress). And I have some online and roundabouts friends who have an unerring eye for Nature's finest in art, especially with a camera in their hands (such as Mayden's Voyage, for example).
When I am confronted with a science beaker full of urine, with a crucifix in the middle of it, that isn't art to me. It's complete, total, unadulterated, hate-filled crap, the kind of empty-headed liberal nonsense that a lowlife segment of the population dares to haughtily claim is "art".
Now, my admission above -- not being much of an art person -- immediately makes my opinions on 'art' heresy, according to those who arrogantly claim to be more "gifted" of the arts. On the matter of the "thing" pictured above, a local radio talkshow host was castigated by an artist for having an opinion about the artistic value of "Mustang", after admitting that he wasn't as up on "the arts" as some claim to be. The talkshow host is decidely negative about the "thing" -- he calls it "The Blue Demon" -- and he regularly chides (good-naturedly) the current mayor to get rid of this eyesore from the premises of DIA, before it "traumatizes more kids with those scary red eyes". An opinion shared by a lot of regular folks hereabouts.
But according to the artist who called the show to defend the airport eyesore, a person who is not gifted of the arts, has no right to express an opinion about the worth of something an artist calls "art", no matter how patently ridiculous or deadly it is.
We'll forget the stupidity of the caller's "rights" argument for a moment, to delve into the more important here. Oh yes, my good readers. I did say, "deadly". This so-called piece of "art" is deadly. It killed it's creator, Mr. Jiminez, when a piece of the sculpture fell on him. I don't know who managed to complete it, let alone then sold it to the City over a year or so ago, a dubious piece of "art" with a murderous past, but whomsoever they are need to be hunted down and confined in a small room, and be forced to listen to all of Barney Frank's public speeches, until the guilty party(es) break down and renders up heart-felt repentance for bringing the conveyance of the Apocalypse, to Denver's aerial doorstep.
What's more, I don't reckon that the Tidy Bowl Demonic Whorse is happy with just one human sacrifice. Not with those satanic red eyes, glowering to the west toward the skyline of Denver. A skyline of over 2,000,000 potential human sacrifices, just waiting for the Tidy Bowl Demonic Whorse to unleash it's progressive, satanic powers upon the masses.
At the risk of offending the artsy-fartsy crowd out there, I am here to tell you....the Tidy Bowl Demonic Whorse needs to go. Now. Before it becomes animated and unstoppable, eating virgins and stampeding the cowed and the subjugated with it's satanic gaze, and devilish intent.
Just in case IT breaks loose and comes hunting it's antagonists, before it's time as a Denver eyesore is done...anyone know where I can get some 40mm rounds that -- hopefully -- will stop an attacking Tidy Bowl Demonic Whorse, what doesn't appreciate my criticism?

9 Comments:

Blogger gal artist said...

Wow that thing is dang scary! I'm gonna have nightmares now.

Think I am traumatized for life!

Great, all that therapy just went down the proverbial toilet.

01 March, 2009 03:32  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

I'm not an art person either. But common sense tells me that $300,000 for this hideous statue is ludicrous.

Not long ago, I visited the National Gallery of Art to see the Pompeii exhibit. The museum, as usual, held the exhibit in the modern art building. Many of the items throughout the building -- so-called art -- consisted of rectangular canvases painted in a monocolor. I have no idea how much NGA paid for something I could have spray painted in just 10 minutes. But I'm willing to be that the artsy-fartsy curators shelled out huge sums.

Note: NGA receives government funding. It's, therefore, a given that the money would be wasted. "Free" money!

01 March, 2009 07:03  
Blogger Paul Mitchell said...

That is not the scariest horse I have seen, because that was my grandfather's ride, Dan, but it is butt ugly. Why not just call it "Helen Thomas" and be done with it?

01 March, 2009 09:07  
Blogger Little Lamb said...

I don't understand art myself.

01 March, 2009 15:02  
Blogger Sandee said...

That is just plain UGLY. Period.

Have a terrific day. :)

01 March, 2009 19:19  
Blogger Hale McKay said...

Is that suppose to make other NFL teams fear the Denver Broncos again?

Did John Elway pose for the horse's head?

02 March, 2009 08:15  
Blogger Right Truth said...

Wow, it's neon blue. Where are my sunglasses??? ha

It might look OK if it were done in bronze or carved from stone. But it looks like something a kindergarten student might color.

Debbie Hamilton
Right Truth

02 March, 2009 09:31  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like baked beans, that Tidy Bowl Blue Whorse makes me wanna _art.

02 March, 2009 18:09  
Blogger Suburban Turmoil said...

You know, I had a layover in Denver last week, so this really doesn't surprise me.

I've had three Denver airport experiences and have decided it's the WORST airport I've flown in or out of. Mostly because of the constant high winds. (Hint: Don't fly between Durango and Denver unless you don't mind your stomach hurting for two hours afterward- and BTW, I don't get carsick). But now, also because of this monstrosity.

03 March, 2009 17:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home