Like most people, we try to stay out of the hoo-ha. When some workers whacked a mural last week, it caused quite a stir amongst the mural set, both in Lexington and out of it. Essentially, someone's work of art was destroyed, and there's really no putting the genie back in the bottle on that one.
Of course, fair or not, that's been the fate of most murals over the years. My father-in-law designed a mural that eventually met the wrecking ball 35 years ago during a building demolition. Outdoor art has its perils (to say the least).
To me, it brings up a larger question, though. Where does public art start and end? Frankly, I don't really like the idea of a few tastemakers controlling the entire local landscape anymore than I like tycoon brothers building (and in some cases failing to build) soulless downtown skyscrapers. I'd like to think there's room for more than one view.
Art is subjective, but then again it's not. People like what they like, and that's just the way it is; however, those who study art can point to the logical evolution of the form and why (in certain academic ways) one piece of art is "better" than another with regard to its nods to history.
What do you think about the murals around town? I like some better than others, and there are some that I wish weren´t there at all. And that's okay, too. In the end, it's better to have some folks giving it a whirl than nothing at all.