More choice for public art

07/25/2014 2:07 PM

07/25/2014 9:16 AM

Re "Arts commission has crucial tests on its palette" (Editorials, July 24): Sacramento has more than $2 billion in long-term debt we don't know how to pay. Yet, almost $6 million will go to public art in the new arena. Typical.

Why should the artistic taste of a few dictate what the rest of us must view -- especially if we have to pay for it? Is Sacramento's art scene vibrant and diverse? Then why not set aside space to display contributed artwork, rather than buy a few selected works? That way, more local artists could be exposed to the public, at less cost. And bad choices could be periodically replaced, as opposed to long-term monstrosities like that giant red rabbit at the airport.

Of course, the best solution would be to get government out of the art business altogether, but I suppose it's far too late for that.

-- Martin Owens, Sacramento

Editor's Choice Videos

 

Join the Discussion

The Sacramento Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Terms of Service