Just how low profile is this project? Interesting how difficult it seems to be to get people to judge the five ideas from the Artists (flavoured with a Turner Prize or two so you know where we are coming from).
A interesting paragraph from here yesterday sums it all up nicely, and I quote:
Controversy has surrounded the competition after campaigners, including Kent President of Campaign to Protect Rural England, Graham Clarke, claimed the designs have been forced on the county’s residents. Despite an exhibition at Bluewater giving residents a chance to vote for their favourite design, many complained that there was not enough choice.
Looking at those designs one might be forgiven for thinking about “a wing and a prayer”, but not the sort that Angels have!
So what do you think?
The quote reminds me of the big sculpture competition that some friends of mine won here in Chicago.
Initially, they hadn’t even been invited to submit designs — but the committee was not happy with any of the conceptual art proposals – so the dark horse of tradition ambled home with the prize.
The judges of this event need to look at human history: what are the great monuments that really enhance a landscape and make it more enjoyable?
Forget the goofy stuff – just put up a temple.
On further thought — the big issue here is honesty about permanence.
If the promoters have no serious sense of timeless aesthetic value — they should plan to have their displays removed after a certain date — like the gates and waterfalls recently installed and then removed in NYC.