WSTB

Winston-Salem's Tallest Buildings and Skyscrapers
It is currently Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:58 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1736
Can’t get the YouTube to open?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:34 am
Posts: 2128
AFAS would prefer you just paint pretty flowers & keep your mouth shut . . .

https://www.tiktok.com/@kudzu_gardens/v ... =more&_r=1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Tue Sep 14, 2021 7:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:00 am
Posts: 90
I certainly wouldn’t take down the mural as art is supposed to be provocative and make a statement, not to mention some random mural isn’t going to affect Wake Forest in the slightest. In fact forcing it’s removal is more likely to bring attention to it than just leaving it up. All that said the idea that Wake is some negative force in Winston is almost too stupid to even dignify with a response. What a bunch of bullshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 12:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:34 am
Posts: 2128
B-V-R wrote:
I certainly wouldn’t take down the mural as art is supposed to be provocative and make a statement, not to mention some random mural isn’t going to affect Wake Forest in the slightest. In fact forcing it’s removal is more likely to bring attention to it than just leaving it up. All that said the idea that Wake is some negative force in Winston is almost too stupid to even dignify with a response. What a bunch of bullshit.


It is my understanding that the unfinished mural was painted-over in response to a complaint from WFU.


Quote:
"Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable."
- Cesar A. Cruz


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:36 pm
Posts: 3234
B-V-R wrote:
I certainly wouldn’t take down the mural as art is supposed to be provocative and make a statement, not to mention some random mural isn’t going to affect Wake Forest in the slightest. In fact forcing it’s removal is more likely to bring attention to it than just leaving it up. All that said the idea that Wake is some negative force in Winston is almost too stupid to even dignify with a response. What a bunch of bullshit.


:good:

Based on the work I saw in the video, if that was basically the gist of the mural, I agree it should have been left alone because unless the "bearded Picasso" was going to put up a plaque to interpret what it meant, I'm pretty sure it would have went over the heads of 99.999% of anyone who viewed it. I have little patience will this emerging narrative that Wake Forest is this evil gentrifying force that is putting the screws to some working class population of people who were "displaced" from housing downtown that never existed immediately prior to WFU committing resources to the IQ. I was here prior to the work starting on the district and it was all empty, decaying, industrial/commercial properties which was populated with 0 jobs and a non-tax producing drain on the city. No one lost a place to live from what is happening in the area covered by the IQ. I'm all for affordable housing and there are multiple blocks of empty land fairly adjacent to the downtown core that would be good candidates for "workforce housing"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 11:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:17 pm
Posts: 165
Quote:
Based on the work I saw in the video, if that was basically the gist of the mural, I agree it should have been left alone because unless the "bearded Picasso" was going to put up a plaque to interpret what it meant, I'm pretty sure it would have went over the heads of 99.999% of anyone who viewed it. I have little patience will this emerging narrative that Wake Forest is this evil gentrifying force that is putting the screws to some working class population of people who were "displaced" from housing downtown that never existed immediately prior to WFU committing resources to the IQ. I was here prior to the work starting on the district and it was all empty, decaying, industrial/commercial properties which was populated with 0 jobs and a non-tax producing drain on the city. No one lost a place to live from what is happening in the area covered by the IQ. I'm all for affordable housing and there are multiple blocks of empty land fairly adjacent to the downtown core that would be good candidates for "workforce housing"
Started to post the same thing earlier this morning but it wasn't even worth explaining. This dude probably moved here 3 years ago. Horrible take and seemed to be a mural just for shock value. If Wake hadn't revitalized the Innovation Quarter I guarantee you that area would look exactly how it did 10 years ago. The very few businesses that were in that area have actually benefitted from this revitalization. I'm sure Krankies would have not been able to completely renovate their business without Innovation Quarter building around them. Piedmont Leaf Lofts now have access to a greenway, a park and restaurants a stone's throw away. It's amazing to go to Bailey Park on any given evening and see the diversity of people enjoying the park.

If Wake Forest in some form or fashion (by donations) contributes to keeping the water, power and landscape maintenance for the AFAS park (not City owned) I completely agree with removing the mural.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:34 am
Posts: 2128
Triad City Beat has the story . . .

https://triad-city-beat.com/art-for-art ... EQL94uNLx0


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:00 am
Posts: 90
The Possum wrote:
B-V-R wrote:
I certainly wouldn’t take down the mural as art is supposed to be provocative and make a statement, not to mention some random mural isn’t going to affect Wake Forest in the slightest. In fact forcing it’s removal is more likely to bring attention to it than just leaving it up. All that said the idea that Wake is some negative force in Winston is almost too stupid to even dignify with a response. What a bunch of bullshit.


It is my understanding that the unfinished mural was painted-over in response to a complaint from WFU.


Quote:
"Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable."
- Cesar A. Cruz


Nothing I posted contradicts what you say here, in fact I pretty much said exactly what the quote you posted by Cruz says.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 6:26 am
Posts: 428
Seems like much ado about nothing. He broke the rules set by the owner ("no politics") and his painting was painted over. Wake Forest was not involved at all. I also don't think Arts for Arts Sake setting guidelines for what is and is not allowed constitutes corporate censorship.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:59 pm
Posts: 3499
I agree with smain.

I think some people see others protesting something and they want to protest, too. Even if they don't have those issues in their community, protesting them is the cool thing to do right now for some artists, so they feel they need to do it to join the group. The problem is: This isn't Austin, San Francisco, or Seattle ("It" cities). If Winston-Salem was seeing what this person claims, you would see high-rise construction downtown, people paying $1 million for a small condemned three bedroom house in West Salem, there would be upscale shopping, and growth rates higher than 0-1%. Wake Forest took a city that was about to become the next Youngstown or Charleston W.V., and rescued it. To be honest, until Winston-Salem and its residents are willing to stop worshiping parking and are willing to remove parking minimums/requirements for sites near transit, this city isn't really serious about making its housing more affordable. Developers have said this city is already so affordable, the only way to make it more affordable is to remove parking, which this city isn't willing to do. The typical incentives used in Denver or Washington D.C., don't work on cities that are already affordable, like Winston-Salem. Only removing parking requirements works. If you want housing to be more affordable, let City Council and the Planning Department know you want to remove parking minimums and show-up like you do for police defunding efforts. That will bring housing prices down in an already affordable city.

It sort of sounds like this person had a bad experience working for Wake Forest (in food service) and maybe wanted to paint this to get back at them?

Keep-in-mind that Wake Forest is really the only employer making "big" investments in this city's turn-around. Instead of leaving a multi-billion-dollar campus that took decades to build, they are trying to make the city more desirable. Every business here should do this, instead of just leaving. Transform this city into the city you and your employees want to be in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:17 pm
Posts: 165
Quote:
It sort of sounds like this person had a bad experience working for Wake Forest (in food service) and maybe wanted to paint this to get back at them?
Ding Ding Ding. And if he looked at his pay stub closer it was probably a subcontractor/vendor and not even Wake Forest that paid him and was his actual employer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:34 am
Posts: 2128
WSBornNBred wrote:
Wake Forest was not involved at all.


This is clarified in the TCB article posted above.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1736
Well, I reckon self-expression is some sort of right, but one wonders where is the threshold. And all sorts of opinions are possible. My opinion of this and similar murals is it’s definitely political and my comment is very scholastically crapola. From the City Beat article
Quote:
“It’s brought up questions like, ‘What is our city?’ and ‘What is our identity as a city?’”
. What ultra crapola. If it wasn’t for Wake Forest you’d be listening to crickets downtown, and such questions would be irrelevant. I have never liked any of these gaudy, egregious murals anywhere in any city. They are offensive to the senses and apparently now are used for political statements.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:41 pm
Posts: 294
yadkinv wrote:
I have never liked any of these gaudy, egregious murals anywhere in any city. They are offensive to the senses and apparently now are used for political statements.


I disagree completely. I love murals and think they add a lot to most cities. Recent murals I really enjoy include JEKS' mural on the Hoots Satellite wall and all of Laura Lashley's murals--the flowers at Bailey Park, the mural with birds on the Cherry St. side of Small Batch, the new mural at the shopping center at Robinhood/Peace Haven. I think the wall where this particular mural was painted is a nice addition to ARTivity Green, and I like that it rotates.

I hate that the mural in question was painted over. It doesn't help Wake at all, and it adds weight to the artist's message, which to my eye is standard reactionary anti-"gentrification" drivel. It's lazy to say that any economic/redevelopment driver is somehow the bad guy, and I just don't think it tracks with the kind of partner Wake has been. But that's something that AFAS should have worked through with the artist before the mural was painted. Taking it down after the paint is spilled is a bad look.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Public Art
PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 2:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:10 am
Posts: 1736
Quote:
I disagree completely.
And I suspect almost everyone agrees with you. I know I'm in the extreme minority on this matter. I am not totally against murals, it's just that progressively I find them, shall we say, not the art I appreciate.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group