most popular:
2008 Holiday Gift Guides



most popular: Hot Home Wind Turbines


most popular:
$19k Electric Car in US


th comments
JSDreyer said: "@ MKI, I was trying to be ridiculous. I forgot that you can actually use LCD opacity as a shader. I was trying to give the image of placin..." [read]

Aaron said: "For anyone who believes that normal snap traps are humane: I will leave you to judge what is and isn't humane, but you should be aware that these ..." [read]

good greif said: "These people are stupid. what they did didn't change anything. if they wanted to make change they should be raising money to help fund research i..." [read]

Jenny said: "Great article. I design eco-friendly clothing and have a store that sells it. I always tell my customers that the most important thing is how you..." [read]

Frants Combrink said: "I love these things too, but the one thing I constantly hear is the word "shipping." Jeeze, how about selling the plans so people can have the furn..." [read]

But Is It Art?

by Bonnie Alter, London on 01. 8.08
Business & Politics

kelley_olklk.jpg

It looks like a field of wildflowers, which it is (was...) It was commissioned for Grant Park in Chicago in 1984 and created and planted by the Texan artist Chapman Kelly. The work, called "Wildflower Works", was a 1.5 acre field of rare wildflowers. The artist described it as a painting in the summer and sculpture in the winter. He said that it was "a pilot study in ecologically sound, low maintenance public landscaping." It contained 200,000 plants, 47 different species, including evening primroses, poppies, daisies and larkspurs and bloomed happily until 2004. Kelly and his friends and supporters maintained it over the years with their own time and money. Then in 2004 the Chicago Parks Department, without consulting Kelly, cut its size in half, surrounded it with a knee-high hedge and planted a water-guzzling lawn.

Kelley, who was 71 at the time, took them to court and sued under legislation created specifically to protect public art. He said that it was environmental art and that he wasn't given sufficient time to take legal action or remove the flowers himself. The judge questioned whether the work could qualify for protection under the legislation since it was not a painting. But the lawyer convinced the judge that the work was a sculpture made of flowers and the judge agreed. He also ruled that Kelly was the owner of the flowers and the value of the flowers that had been destroyed was $1.5M. The victory comes in the midst of a municipal battle to save the park from redevelopment. So the next time you seen a garden that looks like a work of art, remember: it is! :: The Art Newspaper

Comments (3)

No one could create a painting or sculpture as beautiful as a wildflower.

jump to top Art says:

Insert evil victorious laugh, here -> Take THAT you stupid lawn-loving park haters!

:-D

jump to top Emily says:

Hollow victory. Chicago Park District won't commision any more work of this sort nor will other cities.

Still good to see a judge find in their favor.

jump to top Chuck says:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

th ads
th top picks
th ads