I feel uncomfortable with the term public art, because I'm not sure what it means. If it means what I think it does, then I don't do it. I'm not crazy about categories.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I have to say that I reject somewhat the distinction between something called art and something called public art. I think all art demands and desires to be seen.
It was Public Art, defined as art that is purchased by experts who are not spending their own personal money.
Art is about the 'I' in life not the 'we', about private life rather than public. A public life that doesn't acknowledge the private is a life not worth having.
If people think of public art as something the public decides, it's impossible to make anything of substance.
In my regular life, I am very involved in commissions for cities and sometimes countries. And I think of public art as a team sport. The outcome is only possible with the interaction of all the players.
Art should never try to be popular. The public should try to make itself artistic.
The public needs art - and it is the responsibility of a 'self-proclaimed artist' to realize that the public needs art, and not to make bourgeois art for a few and ignore the masses.
Art is the close scrutiny of reality and therefore I put on the stage only those things that I know happen in our society.
Art is the way people see things, and I think it's great when individuals can find in fashion something they truly believe is artistic.
I love the idea of bringing my work to the general public, not just people who go to gallery openings.
No opposing quotes found.