Thursday, June 25, 2009

The Other Foot



That's supposed to be art? That monstrosity is so ugly! I'm more offended that that piece of garbage is exposed to the public.

i seen gang tagging that looked better than that crap

I wouldn't want that mural on my building. If ever vacant, she might have trouble ever renting the building because of it.

-comments on ABC13


City Controller Annise Parker, used to using art to attack political opponents, is now the target of a political hit job by another mayoral candidate, Roy Morales. Using Reginald Adams' MOCAH mural on the side of a building Parker owns, Morales contends that the work is a conflict of interest for Parker. Oh yeah, both of them are running for mayor next year, and this is just the beginning of a full-on back-biting session slated to begin next spring. After Parker's participation in the Dolchefinko dust up over Houston Arts Alliance funds last year it was clear that she was against local money going to art projects- the production of the mural was funded by Waste Management, United Way of Greater Houston, CenterPoint Energy, AT&T, Chamberlin Roofing, JE Dunn and Texas Business Alliance- all people who would like to be on the good side of Parker should she be elected mayor.

This privately funded mural seems to be a great way to funnel influence to Parker, she gains altruistic advertising about the mural and there is no link between Parker and the funders if you don't pay attention to the details. Parker gets to make her point about publicly funded artwork being a wasteful sham by peddling her influence through art. Everybody happy yet?

It is unfortunately worse. That mural looks like an elementary school cafeteria. MOCAH calls themselves the "the city’s most prominent public art developer" and the mural "the first public art project in the city to honor Houston’s broad diversity" and both are total bull. At this rate Parker's pony MOCAH is leagues behind the HAA, ranking below GIVE UP and DUAL and slightly above the guy who writes GOD IS GREAT on bus stops.

The willing hypocrisy in this case is terribly fun, and I do hope that Morales gets to trip up Parker if for no other reason than her insistence (against all logic) that the mural is "not permanent". Hell, even MOCAH's site says that the mural is permanent. Parker is one of the architects of the late 90s ordinances that shut down the Westheimer Street Festival and attacked public spaces in Houston, she also claims to have "created a civic art program". A wink-wink nudge-nudge "donated" mural on the side of her building won't halt her ambitious bull run for the mayor's seat, but I sure as hell hope she doesn't get there.

-thanks bill for the 13 tip!

8 comments:

jeff said...

It's fair to attack the motives behind the mural, but when you attack the aesthetics, your argument loses credibility.

That's a shame because it's important to expose the motives behind the mural.

b.s. said...

Why? I attack aesthetics all day. Are you new or sumthing?

jeff said...

Yeah. Whatevs. I think it's pretty.

b.s. said...

Totally! To each his own :)

jeff said...

Agreed - to undermine my own credibility, I think the philadelphia mural project is pretty too.

http://www.muralarts.org/

b.s. said...

those philly murals are a lot better.

Reginald said...

I've traveled the world and I can honestly say that I have never seen a monument or sculpture ever dedicated to honor a critic.

Reginald Adams

Anonymous said...

that would be an ugly, putrid sculpture.