B u r n l o g

Comment by Max

February 26, 2008 @ 6:20 pm

That would be Seattle, WA. Not Washington, DC.

Comment by stache

February 26, 2008 @ 7:58 pm

Shucks! Thanks for the valuable comment. The article mentions “Capitol Hill” numerous times and Mike Ross is east coast based and… what? Of course there’s a Capitol Hill in Settle too. Ah well, all fixed now.

Comment by H.W. Petersen

April 4, 2008 @ 11:57 am

Mike Ross proposes airplane parts, or representations of them, strung across the Capitol Hill subway station being built by Sound Transit. This so-called sculpture scoffs at all the airplane crashes with parts strewn about a crash site that we see in the news much to often. It vividly brought back memories of such a site I was assigned to work on over half a century ago. Perhaps we should hope Ross’s plans don’t include a few broken and bleeding bodies for authenticity. If installed, this will be an insult to all crash victims and their families.

Comment by stache

April 4, 2008 @ 12:41 pm

Ah, interesting. I see your point. There could be some controversy here.

Comment by stache

April 6, 2008 @ 1:50 am

Concerning any potential controversy and the upcoming Capitol Hill subway station sculpture, I’d say there’s not much. Seems like Mike Ross is diffusing controversy by re-envisioning the notion of aggression in a fighter jet into something graceful and colorful. It’s hardly a callous vision of plane parts strewn about a station. Honestly, after viewing the somewhat startling and amazing Big Rig Jig, I’d be surprised to see otherwise. See this taken from a recent article in the Seattle Times:

“Take a pair of used fighter jets. Slice each fuselage and the wings into cross-sections. Paint the segments a soothing pinkish-orange. Rearrange the slices so that each plane curves, like a heron taking flight.

That’s the vision of Mike Ross, the public-art sculptor for Sound Transit’s future underground station at Capitol Hill. His steel birds, one facing north and one facing south, would appear to kiss each other. They would lurk among huge crossbeams, over the train platforms.

“Because I started with such aggressive symbols, I arranged them in a nonaggressive way,” he said Thursday. A New Yorker, he was inspired by Seattle’s natural setting and aviation history, but wanted bright colors to offset the region’s perpetually gray skies.

“The concept recalls his famed “Big Rig Jig,” a curvy duet of sliced semi trucks that Ross built in the Nevada desert last year for the Burning Man festival.

“The Seattle sculpture would explore the relationship between nature and technology, war and peace, strength and fragility. “It asks a lot of people,” he said. Ross said he hopes children will enjoy the playful shape.”

Comment by H.W. Petersen

April 8, 2008 @ 6:38 am

All the artsy talk about rearranging agressive symbols in nonagressive ways and exploring relationships is nonsense. Perhaps if Ross saw a crash site with a tail section here,a wing a quarter mile away, and parts of people and fuselage strewn between them he would stop being so insensitive and cavalier.

Comment by stache

April 8, 2008 @ 8:25 am

This is becoming an engaging conversation! Thanks for taking the time to comment, Mr. Petersen. Your experience is well recognized and appreciated. One thing I must note is that we’re making assumptions that render discussion fruitless until the finished project is seen.

For instance, I initially assumed that your viewpoint on Ross’ artistic intentions are valid. To do so is to take for granted that you know Ross intimately and have exact knowledge of his hardly begun and large project that is sure to take years to complete. Similarly, I had to take the Seattle Times author’s positive views on the upcoming work to be true. No one will know what the work’s effect will be until it’s finished.

More importantly, though, is this idea that discussing the values or effects of an artwork is “nonsense”. To decry that art can explore relationships of anything, be it symbols of aggression or non-violence, is to utterly and completely deny art exists in my opinion. Turning our perceptions beyond our norms and revealing truth and, indeed, sometimes pain is exactly the point and value of true artistic endeavor.

Art is supposed to confront us with new and striking viewpoints that may (and often must) conflict with our preconceived beliefs, biases, and prejudices. In turn, to garner that value we must discuss and stumble through words for nebulous feelings and thoughts as we assess. This process is a form of education and is one way of growing in knowledge and understanding as multifaceted human beings in a complicated world.

Another strong item not commented upon is the importance of context. Seattle is aircraft industry central and has been for decades with Boeing located there. Using planes for public sculpture in that locality has intrinsic value. Better yet though is the fact that, along with valuable public transit and private services, Boeing is the world’s foremost military industrial corporate producer of aggression and death via bombers and fighter jets. If Ross is taking parts of planes that literally enabled the destruction of life and property, and then remixes those bits of vile pain and anguish into a new vision of playfulness and peaceful nature, I’d say he’s launched a cutting and ironic missile deep into the heart of a cancerous wound in our corrupt society of war profiteering.

If this last assumption of mine is true about Ross’ artistic intent, as it seems to be from his interview, I heartily welcome his artwork and call for more!