The Crowhill Report - Content

crow
Views and opinions on the news, culture, politics, beer, art, science, education, religion and ethics

Sites endorsed by Crowhill:
Crowhill Publishing Homebrewbeer.biz
The Krehbiel Report on Publishing@gregkrehbiel


Bill de Blasio is an ass

by Greg Krehbiel on 13 April 2017

The artist who created “charging bull” in New York doesn’t like the defiant little girl they’ve put in front of it. He says it distorts the meaning of his art.

I’ve never much liked this “you’re destroying my art” thing — mostly, I’m sure, because I don’t really “get” art — but I realize there’s something to it.

If the bull is supposed to represent the strength of America and the strength of the market, then putting a defiant little girl in the way confuses that message. It implies that the strength of America is somehow opposed to the notion of a fearless girl, which completely changes things. The bull is transformed from a positive to a negative thing.

Predictable things have been spewed about this controversy, but the most irritating thing I’ve seen is from NYC major Bill de Blasio.

This is classic, and exactly what I expect from the “you go girl” crowd. It misrepresents the issue and tries to put the worst possible construction on the other side.

Bill de Blasio, you are an ass.

2017-04-13  »  Greg Krehbiel

Talkback x 17

  1. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 12:34 pm

    I am by no means part of the “you go girl” crowd, but when art pisses people off I totally love it!

  2. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    13 April 2017 @ 1:35 pm

    One function of art is to challenge people. But mayors shouldn’t be making ugly insinuations against artists to win points with their base.

  3. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 1:42 pm

    When an artist puts his work in the public square, he will just have to live with the fact that he he no control of the surroundings and indeed no control over the prevailing socio-political forces.

  4. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    13 April 2017 @ 1:51 pm

    I think you’re wrong about that. The artist does have some legal rights about how his art is displayed. I don’t know all the details, but I’ve read about cases where artists have been able to force people to keep the surrounding area in a certain way, or style, or something.

  5. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 2:02 pm

    Maybe, but I don’t think he should have such rights merely to make an ideological point. Of course, I’m not a lawyer.

  6. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    13 April 2017 @ 2:39 pm

    Temperamental artists. 🙂

  7. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 3:18 pm

    This one can’t even handle a little girl. 🙂

  8. pentamom
    13 April 2017 @ 7:16 pm

    The Fearless Girl is absolutely stupid, though.

    A fearless girl CANNOT face down a charging bull. She will without fail be a dead girl or a seriously injured girl.

    There are ways to represent human (or, I suppose, specifically feminine) boldness that do not make a complete mockery out of the concept. Pretending you’ve depicted something worthwhile when you’ve created a piece of artistic nonsense, is not it.

  9. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 7:49 pm

    I totally love it! You just have to bear in mind that is symbolism and therefore not to be approached in such a literal frame of mind. Also, it helps to consider that options were limited due to the circumstances. I suppose that Wonder Woman would work better for some people, but give me the Fearless Girl!

    PS I think that she is just provoking the bull. As soon as he gets near her, she will dodge him and he will run headlong into the traffic and will become, without fail, a dead or seriously injured bull.

  10. Robin R.
    13 April 2017 @ 7:50 pm

    *that it is symbolism

  11. Greg Krehbiel Greg Krehbiel
    14 April 2017 @ 8:54 am

    Yes, pentamom, there is no way a little girl can stare down a witless bull, that doesn’t care about her sass or attitude or standards. It would be more appropriate to having her stare down a tank, ala Tiananmen square. It would be far more meaningful and relevant.

  12. Robin R.
    14 April 2017 @ 9:07 am

    The bull was already there. That couldn’t be changed. But as I say, she is getting ready to dodge it.

  13. pentamom
    14 April 2017 @ 12:10 pm

    I get that it’s symbolism, but it symbolizes the progressive mentality that you can wish reality into existence by having the right things going on in your head.

  14. pentamom
    14 April 2017 @ 12:12 pm

    Right, Greg, that’s what I mean. There are ways to symbolize boldness and “don’t back down” that don’t amount to nonsense.

    Robin, obviously they couldn’t do it by starting with the bull. But there was no law that said that they had to add something to the bull, or that they couldn’t erect a different statue elsewhere.

  15. Robin R.
    14 April 2017 @ 12:59 pm

    I think that it was done very well with the bull. If you wanted to show the girl wishing the bull away (which has nothing to do with the “progressive mentality” as far as I can tell), she would be depicted with her eyes closed and her hands over her eyes. She is most definitely fearless and it is entirely up to our imagination what is going to happen next. Moreover, the fact that certain people are responding to the Fearless Girl with anger is a clear-cut indication that this statue facing the charging bull gets its point across quite effectively. I totally love it!

  16. pentamom
    14 April 2017 @ 8:20 pm

    I am saying that it is wishful thinking that a girl can face a bull and wind up something other than dead. That was the wishing I was referring to.

  17. Robin R.
    15 April 2017 @ 8:14 am

    That’s not what wishful thinking looks like.