Moved (belatedly) from the BBQ Pit to Cafe Society.
**
Gfactor**
Pit Moderator
I think I like it. It would certainly be better without the supports. Probably the artist should have found a better way to deal with it. Like most of these things, the old guard will snub their noses until they graduate and the new students will slowly develop an attachment to it. It flows very well without the supports, and the sun contrasts the cyclone nicely. At least the sun is supported by wavy bars, rather than the uprights in the middle.
I love the not-even-subtle hyper-sexed sculpture at Shippensburg University (where Robin and I went). It bulges out at the bottom, goes straight up with the edges lined with spermatazoa, and at the top where the glans would be it splits into a V with red glass completely filling the void. I have no idea what the name of it is, but it simply has to be as pornographic as the sculpture itself. At least, I hope so. :rolleyes:
That is actually lovely. Why can’t more modern sculptures be like this?
What do you all think of this bit of sculpture on the Washington State University campus?
Just trying to provide some perspective, here.
The name can mean everything though. When the San Francisco tour book told me THIS was called “transcendence” I hated it. When a guy at the deli told me the locals called it “The Banker’s Heart” I started to love it.
As for the OP, I hate it. She’s tried to break the plane and create a sculptural trompe l’oeil. Instead it just comes across as a poorly disguised attempt at forced framing. And cheap, tacky yellow plastic.
ETA: That particular shade of yellow plastic always makes the word “Tonka” pop up in my brain.
It looks like the artist finished it and then dropped it in a pile of brushes and paint pots, and was too lazy to fix it before he submitted it.
As Chicago has been mentioned, may I offer the The Town-ho’s Story - in the lobby of the Metcalfe federal office building no-less! 
Madly stirring the grey matter, a friend of mine with GSA is still outraged at the cost of that - $300k+ of your tax dollars IIRC.
Ha! I just drove past that thing! Rumor has it that it’s supposed to be a horse.
Man, that thing looks like you should have an up to date tetnis shoot before you get near it.
The university I work at has a sculpture mounted on the wall of one of the buildings. It’s brown leather, padded underneath, and culminates into a bumpy mass at the center. It literally looks like a giant hemorrhoid.
…licking a penis.
Ick.
That is beyond awful. As someone said in the comments, it looks like an 18 foot wad of garbage. I find no redeeming aesthetic qualities in that at all.
Just to be fair, it’s not only Universities that pay to install bad art. Corporations and Museums do it, too.
For example, I once worked in the Operations Center building in Minneapolis for the Northwestern Bancorporation, later Norwest Banks, later Wells Fargo. (A building we called the “black palace”.) In front of it they had installed a ‘sculpture’ by Mark di Suvero* called Inner Search. (Had to look that up – we employees just called it many things, from ‘the guillotine’ to ‘the rusty girders’.)
See the red girders in the lower left of this overhead view, or this street level view.
I remember the big ceremony when this was installed. Then the next week, leaving work late one evening, I saw a man walking his dog. And the dog had cocked his leg onto this ‘sculpture’, and was expressing his artistic evaluation of the work I laughed out loud, since I certainly agreed with the dogs opinion on this artwork.
*di Suvero seems to have sold the same basic idea over and over again; there are basically similar ‘sculptures’ all over: at the Smithsonian, the Denver public library, Millennium Park in Chicago (5 of 'em), Univ of Texas at Austin, Fairmont Park in Philadelphia, in Milwaukee, WI, etc. All twisted steel girders, painted chinese red (he must have gotten a deal on barrels of this color paint!).
I think that is AWESOME looking, but I like most of what’s been posted in this thread. De gustibus non et cetera.
You know, this sort of crap drives me up a wall. Just because I don’t have your sensibilities on something like art, or music, or etc., does NOT mean that I’m “tacky” or any other pejorative adjective you care to name. It simply means my tastes don’t jibe with yours. And I dislike in the extreme people who assert that they somehow have the handle on exactly what should be acceptable in the world of art. To make this assertion is to show exactly the same hubris the sculptor shows when she hears the criticism of her work, a hubris you vilify in your OP.
I don’t find it offensive, but I’ve not walked by it in the day or the night. But I don’t think I’d find it offensive or tacky. Mind you, I don’t particularly “like” most modern scupture, so I’m not saying I would stand and stare and appreciate it.
Of course it does. If I didn’t think my opinions were objectively justified, I wouldn’t bother having them! And just to show I’m fair, I actually accept things I don’t like but can find no critical flaw in!