already a subscriber? Register me
Subscribe now See my options


  • We reserve the right to close commenting on specific stories.

Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

Sort by
Comment threads per page: 10 | 20 | 50
  2. I've got an incredibly progressive suggestion, and one guaranteed to make a public statement that I'm sure would get national attention.

    Send it back.
  3. "Public art is public! Come listen to the discussion."

    Listening is a fraction of participation. If it's truly a public forum, then more than just listening should be invited.

    I'd suggest Milwaukee rethink it's definition of public art. $800K is a fantastic pot of seed money to create something bigger than another piece of pathetic plop (including "Wind Leaves"). Change the question from "what to buy?" to "what initiative(s) to fund?". These initiatives could be built to generate tourism and income to our city.

    The artistic vomit that is Bronzie did have one respectable goal of bringing more visitors to Milwaukee. I'm highly doubtful His Hideousness is packing airlines, but creating a draw is an obviously worthy notion beneficial to all. The upcoming influx of cash should be implemented as an investment, rather than as an expenditure. Whatever is suggested for the funds should be measured by it's return and potential benefits.

    These are the times we live in, and the thinking about the money and public art has to be more proactive and creative than "what to buy".
  4. Quality over quantity. Art should be there to benefit a city and make it a better place.

    In the past all of public art was funded by private donors and groups. Although I'm not a conservative, I do have feelings of responsibility being a burdened taxpayer. That, and I believe the filthy rich who are getting huge tax breaks and benefits should be the sole donors of art and culture to our city. For some reason, the Laytons, Plankintons, Pfisters, etc of the past are seemingly lacking in today's Milwaukee although I know their equals are out there.
  5. "Food on the plate"? While Milwaukee has got to be the full plate capital of the world, how about aiming higher? Pursue the best art available? Even if we fail, at least Milwaukee can demonstrate that excellence is what we strive for.
  6. I wish people would stop criticizing "The Fonz" statue on the riverwalk. It's the most popular art exhibit for tourists from all over the world. Everyone who views it has a huge smile on their face. If art is created for people to enjoy then the Fonz statue has met its goal ten times over.

    Long live the Fonz bronze! I celebrate your presence with laughter and good cheer!
  7. Hi, this is Pegi Christiansen.
    Thank you for the comments.
    I am not going to engage in "The Fonz" debate, but I want to mention two things:
    1) The Milwaukee County Public Art Committee offers a variety of ways for citizens to get involved. You can certainly do more than listen.
    2) James J's notion about private versus government support for the arts might lead to a future story. For example, the US historically has had stronger private funding for the arts than in Europe, where there has tended to be stronger government funding.
  8. Thank you Pegi for your addition to clarify that more participation beyond just listening by the public is possible and encouraged. Perhaps you can add the necessary details and information on the how, what, where, when of those various ways that citizens can get involved.

    "delafield"- for many the sharing opinions, often widely varying ones, are integral to art and the experience and fulfillment of it. However, whereas everyone is entitled to their own opinions, everyone is not entitled to their own facts. With a definition of an "art exhibit" so broad to include a cast off idea from an obsolete ad campaign, I'd guess that broad definition may include architecture as well? Although popularity isn't on my personal checklist to measure arts importance or success, surely the MAM/Calatrava (a tough candidate to be beat for the best of art of the last decade in Milwaukee) would top Bronzie (a tough candidate to beat for the worst of "art" of the last decade in Milwaukee) in global visitor popularity.

    Which- more pointedly on topic- brings me to these questions; What public percent-for-art works would rank high on anyone's list for the best of Milwaukee art of the last decade? What do those candidates- or lack thereof- say about the works completed in Milwaukee under percent for arts, about the audience, awareness, management, and participation in the program? Perhaps most importantly, what does a long term review suggest about what might change to make best use of the future opportunity for Milwaukee? I hope this is the nature of the discussion on January 22 at 10 a.m. at Quorum Architects, 3112 W. Highland Boulevard.


Design Ideas Column



Art City Asks

An ongoing series of interviews with creative people.


Art City

E-mail Newsletter


Get the Newsletter!

Login or Register to manage all your newsletter preferences.