Oh god no why. Is there seriously no better artwork that they can come up with here?The squiggly signature artwork gets its companion piece (this time vertically oriented):
View attachment 24569
View attachment 24570
View attachment 24571
Yeah, it looks slapdash. Needs to be bigger if they're going for that sort of thing.I think it's just lazy more than anything.
Everybody who I've ever seen walk by it, including myself, has just been confused.what's wrong with it?
Of all the things in the world -- architecture- or urban design-related -- to be offended by, this seems like a really odd place to take a stand, maybe?I honestly don't know how more people here aren't offended by this.
I'm offended because it (along with a lot of other parts of this project) flies in the face of what MIT said in community meetings for this project. They held a whole bunch of public meetings that were clearly just for show. They didn't take any feedback from it. I get that it wouldn't mean much to people who didn't actively participate in these meetings (I don't know if you did or not), but when a multi-billion dollar plan promises public art in the open space as part of the plan and then crams some very confusing, contextless lights three stories up and calls it a day, it feels kind of like a slap in the face to people who participated.Of all the things in the world -- architecture- or urban design-related -- to be offended by, this seems like a really odd place to take a stand, maybe?
It's "art" -- kind of by definition, some people will like it and others won't. You seemingly don't like this. Fair enough. "Offended"?!?! Yikes.