3 ms·
I wasn't trying to call out the art as a significant reason for station expense, but rather like a marker of extravagance. Much like how you can assume that som
by saosebastiao 10y ago
I wasn't trying to call out the art as a significant reason for station expense, but rather like a marker of extravagance. Much like how you can assume that someone wasn't very frugal with their car purchase if they are wearing a Patek Philippe watch.
- mmoche 10y agoGot it. It may be an indicator. I do also think that one of the obligations of any large public project is to ensure that it reflects the public - art is a good way to do this.
- slavik81 10y agoI don't think that comparison is fair. In the context I'm familiar with, the city has a 1% public art budget tied to all new works. If I'm buying a car and spending $10,000, sure I'll spend $100 to get the color I want. I'll be driving it for years. It's worth it just so I don't wince every time I look at it. To me, that is not a marker of extravagance. At least, not like a $20,000 watch is.