11-10-06 #10
So I think that Diego Rivera should have followed what he said he was going to do. And that Rockefeller was not wrong in destroying the work of art. The piece was supposed to be American encouraging work of art and Rivera’s showed much support to his communist roots. It was not an appropriate thing for him to paint in such a building at such a time where people feared communism. He should have stayed true to what he told Rockefeller he was going to do. And again, I think Rockefeller had all right to remove the painting, he owned the wall it was on, and he decided it was what was best for the people. He didn’t need people getting upset with him for having a painting of such controversy in his building. The same goes for all art of the time, it was an important project to support the arts, but at the same time the artist should respect who is paying them to do what they want for a piece and to support their country. Art for art sake is a good thing, but when it addresses such issues as communism during red scare times, I do not believe it is appropriate. Art should have been done in a positive fashion and not to frighten citizens. Art for art sake is a very integral part of the art because it creates movements and new types of art and expresses ideals. But there is a place and a time for every work, and some are just not appropriate during times, for instance terrorist supported paintings would not be appropriate well anytime, but especially around 9/11. Art needs to be done to be appreciated, and therefore an artist needs to know their limits when painting for someone else.
posted by Ann @ 10:37 PM
2 Comments:
I agree with you that artists should stick to their original plans. If an artist is being paid by someone for their work, then their work should be acceptable to the buyer. Art is free expression, but in the case of Diego Rivera, the work needed to meet certain requirements.
I can agree with the you should get what you paid for type of comment.But art should adress the time not shy away from it. Not doing works on communism during the red scare is ridiculous.Thats like when people say you can doing antiwar protests but only during times of peice as for the thing on art supported by terroists obviously as an artist I would not want binladen as a patron at any time howver the poet laureate of New Jersey lost his job for a poem he wrote about 9/11 if people want safe art they can buy a Thomas Kinkaid but for some of it's about expression even when what we have to express isn't popular.
Post a Comment
<< Home