The Gates

I’ll admit it. When I first heard about Christo’s The Gates, I was skeptical. I thought it was a silly idea, had no function, and would be a complete waste of time to do, money to pay for it, and police presence to protect it. After hearing that approximately 1 million people were expected to visit it in the time it was to be set up, I started to realize this may have been a better move than I originally thought.

Christo paid for the entire thing, and after 30 years and 37 million dollars, finally got to do it.

My wife and I went down there earlier today to see what all the fuss was about. When the “exhibit” first opened, the buzz was that it was awesome, amazing, and so on. Then it became fashionable to bash it, and all the people who loved the idea when it was cool, hated it now. Go figure. Who knew people were such fickle poseurs?

Anyway, we entered the park on 72nd street, and saw the mosaic dedicated to John Lennon. People were crowding around it to get as many pictures as possible (me being one of them). Even standing at that very spot, you start to look up and realize the scale upon which The Gates exists on. It’s huge! Everywhere you go through the park, there are gates. Tons and tons of orange gates. It wasn’t as impressive as I expected it to be, but it was still massive. Every walkway had gates. The wider walkways had wider ones, the smaller walkways had smaller ones, and so on.

My wife and I walked around the walkways for awhile, just kind of in awe of the hugeness of it. Not really shocked, but just surprised at how much ground they covered, while at the same time being a bit disappointed that there were so many gaps in the continuousness of the gates.

The views from some of the landmarks were great. We went to the Bethesda Fountain, the Boathouse Restaurant, Lewis Carroll’s statue, and Belvedere Castle, and at every spot we could see nothing in the distance but the orange gates. Here is where I think doing the exhibit in February was basically a stroke of genius. If you look at the pictures I took, you’ll notice pretty much one thing. The park was gray and cold, and the only color you could really see where the orange arches with the flowing fabric underneath them, and while the fabric wasn’t as bright and eye catching as I thought it was going to be, it definitely grabs your attention amidst the backdrop of a somewhat overcast day and leafless trees. It was very well done in that respect.

The debate about this “exhibit” is whether or not it’s actually “art.” As cool as I thought it was, it would be hard for me to call it artistic in any real way. It’s large, it’s bright, and it’s attractive. It adds a splash of color in a colorless park. But art? I’m not sure. I see art, in my mind, as something that can never be replicated, immitated, or done again to the same effect. As original as this may be, and as original as dressing all the walkways in Central Park is, it just doesn’t strike me as something amazingly original. Oh sure it’s never been done, and anything after this is just immitation, but it’s an easy immitation to do!

I liked it. I think it brings something to the park. Seeing how crowded the park was today, a lot of people obviously agreed with me. It’s worth a trip, being free and all, and the park is always a nice place to go (from what people who frequent it tell me). If you’re in the area, go in with an open mind and just soak it all up. While you’re at it, try to take in the interest of people walking through the gates as the look up at them in awe.

Some people are utterly impressed by it. Others think it’s a waste. I probably fall somewhere in the middle of the two. Either way, I’m glad I went and I hope the city and other artists try to do something interesting with the park during the winter months in the future.

Pictures from my visit available here.

This entry was posted in Cool. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://site-essential.com Kathy K

    Interesting, even fun to go see, yes. Art? I don’t think so.

    The ‘Gates in Cheetos’ actually comes closer to what I might call art. (Yes, I do consider parody to be an art-form.)

  • balbulican

    I haven’t seen it, but I’ve seen the videos and coverage, and I quite enjoy the idea.

    Not to get too pseudo-intellectual about all this, but one of the things art has been “about” in the last century is exploring the notion of what art is “about”…breaking it out of the frame, the concert hall, the stage or the pedestal. Work like Christo’s reopens that question, and has people furiously debating it…(it’s not ART, it’s just a buncha curtains! It IS art, it’s a multipart sculpture that actually uses its own environment as an element in the composition! etc, etc, etc,)

    It’s wonderful that his work has kicked off this discussion worldwide.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com Vinny

    I like the way Christo has steered the discussion about what part of the work actually is the art…

    From his web site:

    What is the best part of Central Park for The Gates?
    The entire park is the work of art. The Gates are distributed over walkways from park border to park border, the entire thing. Please keep in mind, there are 7,500 separate gates. No part of the park has more or less of them. If you plan to be any where in Central Park, you will be in the best part of the artwork.

    Art I guess is what you think it is in the world. What he’s done here, as stumpy noted in the channel, is take color and make it the central element of composition in a natural setting. The effect of the orange gates on what was an overcast day was magnificent.

    Christo and Jean Claude did this for the city for free, and brought probably over a million people to see it. Sunday was 31 degrees, and the park was packed. I’d say they did a really good thing here.

    I enjoyed it. My wife wasn’t too crazy about it. The owner of my company thought it was a waste of time. One of my friends at work liked it also, one of my other friends not so much.

    Guess a true sign of what is and isn’t art is how many different opinions you can get on the same work.

  • balbulican

    The late great Frank Zappa explained it brilliantly, I thought. From “The Dangerous Kitchen”:

    “Art is whatever you decide it is. If I record three minutes of the guys backstage, frame it by putting it on a CD and call it art, it’s art. It’s not the THING…it’s the act of taking the THING, and putting it in a new space or a new kind of frame, and asking people to look at it in a new way.”

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com The Other Mike S.

    When I was in high school or college, he did this “curtain” thing across the hills in Marin County (north of San Francisco). People thought he was nuts, but it was pretty cool. Miles and miles of sheets, blowing in the wind, winding its way to the Pacific Ocean.

  • http://site-essential.com/ Kathy K

    Interesting, even fun to go see, yes. Art? I don’t think so.

    The ‘Gates in Cheetos’ actually comes closer to what I might call art. (Yes, I do consider parody to be an art-form.)

  • balbulican

    I haven’t seen it, but I’ve seen the videos and coverage, and I quite enjoy the idea.

    Not to get too pseudo-intellectual about all this, but one of the things art has been “about” in the last century is exploring the notion of what art is “about”…breaking it out of the frame, the concert hall, the stage or the pedestal. Work like Christo’s reopens that question, and has people furiously debating it…(it’s not ART, it’s just a buncha curtains! It IS art, it’s a multipart sculpture that actually uses its own environment as an element in the composition! etc, etc, etc,)

    It’s wonderful that his work has kicked off this discussion worldwide.

  • http://www.insignificantthoughts.com/ Vinny

    I like the way Christo has steered the discussion about what part of the work actually is the art…

    From his web site:

    What is the best part of Central Park for The Gates?
    The entire park is the work of art. The Gates are distributed over walkways from park border to park border, the entire thing. Please keep in mind, there are 7,500 separate gates. No part of the park has more or less of them. If you plan to be any where in Central Park, you will be in the best part of the artwork.

    Art I guess is what you think it is in the world. What he’s done here, as stumpy noted in the channel, is take color and make it the central element of composition in a natural setting. The effect of the orange gates on what was an overcast day was magnificent.

    Christo and Jean Claude did this for the city for free, and brought probably over a million people to see it. Sunday was 31 degrees, and the park was packed. I’d say they did a really good thing here.

    I enjoyed it. My wife wasn’t too crazy about it. The owner of my company thought it was a waste of time. One of my friends at work liked it also, one of my other friends not so much.

    Guess a true sign of what is and isn’t art is how many different opinions you can get on the same work.

  • balbulican

    The late great Frank Zappa explained it brilliantly, I thought. From “The Dangerous Kitchen”:

    “Art is whatever you decide it is. If I record three minutes of the guys backstage, frame it by putting it on a CD and call it art, it’s art. It’s not the THING…it’s the act of taking the THING, and putting it in a new space or a new kind of frame, and asking people to look at it in a new way.”

  • http://nonannystate.blogspot.com/ The Other Mike S.

    When I was in high school or college, he did this “curtain” thing across the hills in Marin County (north of San Francisco). People thought he was nuts, but it was pretty cool. Miles and miles of sheets, blowing in the wind, winding its way to the Pacific Ocean.