Comments on: Eliasson’s Waterfall Begins

By: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Dumbo Top Ten in 2008 (DumboNYC.com)

Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Dumbo Top Ten in 2008 (DumboNYC.com) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:43:01 +0000

[...] neighborhood as it used to be. We did see plenty of art installations in Dumbo this year including Olafur Eliasson’s NYC Waterfalls that people either loved or hated, Tom Otterness’ Large Covered Wagon (which is on view through [...]

By: Beavis

Beavis — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:58:45 +0000

What is the ugly gray slab in front of the Watchtower in the proposed park rendering?

By: joe

joe — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:38:15 +0000

Well, look at what we have here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_(Duchamp). Or go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcel_Duchamp and click on 'fountain'

By: mod squad

mod squad — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:32:47 +0000

I’m a F**KIN genius!

By: dumbostreets

dumbostreets — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:02:50 +0000

Look up “Marcel Duchamp” on wikipedia. Check out the link to his piece “Fountain.”

By: dumbostreets

dumbostreets — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:00:28 +0000

About Duchamp’s Fountain, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_(Duchamp)

By: mod squad

mod squad — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:25:57 +0000

Who’s Duchamp?

By: dumbostreets

dumbostreets — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:25:01 +0000

I am pretty sure Duchamp would agree with me on this one. I won’t elaborate because, apparently, explaining things is “trollish.” In that case, I recommend sticking with TV commercials.

I feel I’ve made my point(s) and I am done here. I don’t think you “need” to agree with me; but, in my opinion, it is not a bad idea to be a little more curious and little less damning when it comes to art.

I like hip hop, but some artists better than others, of course… so I can’t say I have an “opinion on hip hop.” I also like Rube Goldberg.

By: mod squad

mod squad — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:09:15 +0000

Just for the sake of argument, lets say an artist put a men’s urinal in a show(I know this is craziness). Is it an irritant? Yes. Is it art? Sure, why not, the artist says it is. Is it GOOD art? Yea it is. It is simple and elegant and unencumbered. Nothing gets in the way. The message is clear, “anything can be art and some are great works of art. On the other hand the waterfalls are a bloated Rube Goldberg contraption with explanations needed about the pumping system and a map supplied by a bridge troll like you as to where to view them from.
You need to get caught up, dumbostreets, whats your opinion on Hip HOP?

By: dumbostreets

dumbostreets — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:18:22 +0000

mod squad:

Comrad, I don’t think it is proletarian to consider scaffolding “vulgar.” It is certainly narrow, if not elitist, to tell someone they “need” to agree with you.

Most of the “opinions” against this work are mean-spirited and lazy… You know, criticism and well-formed opinions, like art, take effort too.

I’ve tried to explain WHY I liked them rather than just say “they’re cool and I like them because I like them. You’re lame if you think they look cheap. ZING!”

If you want me to agree with you, like you have asked, you are going to have to do better than insisting on the supremacy of your tastes… because they’re, uhm, common and virtuous.

By: low bmi

low bmi — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 06:29:21 +0000

Hello Ugh –

I will not reply to you again.
Your comments to me are not very nice at all.
You should think twice before you post. Excuse me now; I have to leave this “Museum of Stupidity”.

By: mike d

mike d — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 04:11:55 +0000

I like them. I like football and hockey too. Mostly for the hitting.
So what do I know.

By: mod squad

mod squad — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:19:14 +0000

I shoulda put a comma after “artist technique,” in my post of 5:11 July 3rd. I meant that people viewing the structure are unable to get pass the vulgarity of said structure to find a deeper or higher meaning. The artist’s thoughts and inspirations or whatever are irrelevant at this point, its what the thing says to the viewer. He could of been “inspired” by 15 million for all we know.
Call me old fashion, but a 3 dimensional sculpture should work from any angle you choose to look at it, without a caveat. I think, don’t get me wrong, that is the reason why people work in 3 dimensions.
Yes, I agree, you are the only one defending this thing. You need to get off your high horse and boogie on down with the proletariat.

By: dumbostreets

dumbostreets — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:50:09 +0000

You did say (and I cut and paste): “with no thought whatsoever to what these structures represent”

If that is not snobbish, I don’t know what is.

This statement is not thoughtful or well observed. Most of the critical statements on this blog are, as you say, “heaping scorn.” They are just mean and nasty. I am the only one who has attempted to defend this work a little and that somehow makes me “elite.”

Your complaint about the scaffolding means you haven’t considered all the places from which it is not visible, which I mention in my previous post. That’s what I mean by “looking at it.”

By: mod squad

mod squad — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:13:20 +0000

didn’t say that, don’t know what the artist intended these things to represent. I said the structure itself precludes any attempt to decipher what the hell it all means.
Frankly you sound like an academic lauding a student for his good effort without the courage to call it shit.
You speak to a bigger problem however. An elitist attitude toward the common people. The snicker that comes over your face when “art” is not appreciated by the unwashed because they “haven’t really looked at it” What does that mean exactly? Do we need a terminal degree to go to a museum these days? Maybe directions on those lighted signs on the BQE could say instead of CARPOOL or WATCH OUT FOR CYCLISTS, CAUTION, MODERN ART AHEAD.