I've received some feedback regarding my posts about The Gates. I'm using the bully pulpit of my 'blog to respond out of sheer sloth; I can't deal with typing individual responses. No one should interpret this as a personal or public attack. Honestly, this is so long I doubt most people will make it all the way to the end, anyway.

It seems that the bulk of the discussion falls into one of the following categories: 1) Christo sucks; 2) The Gates are not art; 3) The Gates are bad for Central Park's environment.

I really can't address the first category; that is opinion. Common knowledge equates opinions with assholes.

Because none of us are ornithologists or biologists, I don't want to belabor the third point. However, I did some research and found out that, other than for some kinds of Owl, February is not mating season for any birds in the park. The idea that the gates will frighten or otherwise cause little bird penises to malfunction doesn't seem to hold water. [If there are ornithologists in the audience, I'd be happy for some clarification here.]

I find the second point most interesting.

I've heard from a lot of people say that The Gates aren't art. Most often, I've heard something like "they aren't art" because "Christo is all about self-promotion and self-aggrandizement."

While those may be valid criticisms, they are criticisms of Christo, not The Gates, and they don't address the art / not art question, either. Rather, they are kind of like a non sequitur wrapped in an ad hominem.

Quite impressive, really.

Criticize the art, or criticize the man, but don't criticize the art by attacking the man. Or vice versa. That just doesn't work. If you don't like the aesthetics of The Gates, address the aesthetics. If you assert that the gates harm Central Park's environment, present some evidence. If you have issues with the money involved, explain those issues.

Try this on for size: I think Eugene Smith was a fucking asshole, but the truth and beauty in his photographs make my head spin. Don't like the guy, like the art. I assure you, this is possible. Here is another: I really don't care for that "wrap the Reichstag" or "surrounded islands" stuff, but The Gates really work for me. Good God, stop it! My world only exists in black and white!

An illogical argument is an illogical argument.

[edit] In fact, the lack of logic doesn't annoy me as much as something deeper. To attack a person's work by attacking the persona seems to be a symptom of our crushing cult of personality. I'm not sure if this is an American thing, or a modern thing, but we seem unable to separate art from the artist. People become known not for what they have done, but for their public image. This "artist before art" mentality really bothers me and is responsible for a lot of nutty behavior.

I've also noticed that the ad hominem arguments seem to come more from "artsy" people than regular Earth people. At the risk of pissing people off, these arguments smack of jealousy more than anything else. Certainly Christo's wealth and notoriety engenders some of that.

I honestly thought that in these post-postmodern times we had evolved past the tiresome "what is art?" debate. Really, I did.

I think The Gates are a beautiful installation, remarkable in scale and execution. Walking through them in the sunshine results in an ever-changing, saffron-tinted scene with beautiful Central Park in the background. Because The Gates cover the paved walkways, they encourage, they beg you to walk around and explore, and to interact with the rest of the people in the park.

I don't remember the last time I walked past so many people in the park discussing art, nor do I remember seeing so many people walking around the park smiling. I'm a little tired of seeing photos of the gates, but that is another issue.

If the little room covered in gold leaf at The Whitney is art, surely The Gates qualify, too.

Most of Central Park is a construct. Nearly every hill and dale, most trees and streams were consciously placed there during the park's construction. It is kept groomed and clean by a small army of people. Central Park is a place of nature, but by no means is it "natural." I don't run around during the Christmas holidays screaming at people for desecrating the natural beauty of their rhododendron bushes, much as I'm able to appreciate how the orange plastic gates look nice in the wintry park. I think the gates are beautiful in the park, and I'll be glad when they are gone. I don't find these two ideas incongruous.