http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/ The Official Blog of Art21, Inc. and the Art in the Twenty-First Century PBS series Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:42:15 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/comment-page-1/#comment-14126 Blog From NY Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:02:04 +0000 http://blog.art21.org/?p=9641#comment-14126 [...] art:21 Blogへの寄稿者である Lily Simonson と Catherine Wagleyは、ロスにおけるアートについて新たに隔週ごとの報告を提供し始めました。 [...] [...] art:21 Blogへの寄稿者である Lily Simonson と Catherine Wagleyは、ロスにおけるアートについて新たに隔週ごとの報告を提供し始めました。 [...]

]]> http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/comment-page-1/#comment-13943 Christina Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:07:46 +0000 http://blog.art21.org/?p=9641#comment-13943 The commentary on LA creating culture is worth some thought. The Romans had their own unique culture, but decided simultaneously that it was both unimportant and extremely important - it just depended on who you talked to. It was fashionable to emulate the Greeks, but politically important to represent yourself as Roman. LA is going through the same kind of generational/cultural shift. The commentary on LA creating culture is worth some thought. The Romans had their own unique culture, but decided simultaneously that it was both unimportant and extremely important – it just depended on who you talked to. It was fashionable to emulate the Greeks, but politically important to represent yourself as Roman. LA is going through the same kind of generational/cultural shift.

]]> http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/comment-page-1/#comment-13913 What’s Cookin on the Art21 Blog: A Weekly Index | Art21 Blog Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:12:58 +0000 http://blog.art21.org/?p=9641#comment-13913 [...] Lily Simonson and Catherine Wagley look at Los Angeles in their new bi-weekly dispatch about art in the city they love, starting with The Last Days of Pompeii in LA [...] [...] Lily Simonson and Catherine Wagley look at Los Angeles in their new bi-weekly dispatch about art in the city they love, starting with The Last Days of Pompeii in LA [...]

]]> http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/comment-page-1/#comment-13909 Lily Simonson Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:29:34 +0000 http://blog.art21.org/?p=9641#comment-13909 Stephanie, excellent point. You are right that there are a great deal of amazing places to see in Los Angeles, but they are rather low-profile. I think that at the heart of that issue is the magic word "public"... There is so much amazing architecture in LA but it's almost all private homes. In the case of the Ennis House, I just learned that the nonprofit that has been caring for it, is selling it to a private owner. Of course lots of landmarks around the world were once private homes or institutions, but I think that (perhaps because of the car culture here) Los Angeles is more split between public and private than almost any other city, and that is part of why so many landmarks go un-visited. And not that I would ever disparage the Frank Lloyd Wright, the Mayans, the Egyptians, or the Greeks, but all of the landmarks you mentioned were built in the 1920s and are examples of Blum's statement, cited by Catherine: "Angelinos wanted their art to preserve past cultures, cultures to which they had no real relationship." Still, you make an excellent point about the strange ambivalence that extends to all levels of the city, where there is a push-pull between fame and anonymity. Stephanie, excellent point. You are right that there are a great deal of amazing places to see in Los Angeles, but they are rather low-profile. I think that at the heart of that issue is the magic word “public”… There is so much amazing architecture in LA but it’s almost all private homes. In the case of the Ennis House, I just learned that the nonprofit that has been caring for it, is selling it to a private owner. Of course lots of landmarks around the world were once private homes or institutions, but I think that (perhaps because of the car culture here) Los Angeles is more split between public and private than almost any other city, and that is part of why so many landmarks go un-visited. And not that I would ever disparage the Frank Lloyd Wright, the Mayans, the Egyptians, or the Greeks, but all of the landmarks you mentioned were built in the 1920s and are examples of Blum’s statement, cited by Catherine: “Angelinos wanted their art to preserve past cultures, cultures to which they had no real relationship.” Still, you make an excellent point about the strange ambivalence that extends to all levels of the city, where there is a push-pull between fame and anonymity.

]]> http://blog.art21.org/2009/09/17/the-last-days-of-pompeii-in-la/comment-page-1/#comment-13908 Stephanie Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:24:04 +0000 http://blog.art21.org/?p=9641#comment-13908 Excellent post, I have often thought about the irony of the lack of a true cultural history in LA, a place set on recording every happening whether fictional, real, or in between, but when I went searching, I actually found a hidden history. Your statement "...there is virtually no history embodied anywhere in Los Angeles, and that is very unsettling. My neighborhood in Hollywood is overrun by European tourists taking pictures of the Walk of Fame and trying to get to the Hollywood Sign. Is that our Eiffel Tower?" really hit home with me, I think the nature of the Los Angeles culture is one of 'outshining'. By this I mean Los Angeles has a deep historical culture such as the Ennis House, Hollyhock, the Frolic Room, The Egyptian Theater, the Greek Theater,etc, however it is completely outshined by more public sites such as the Walk of Fame. I like what was said about the cultural items in disrepair and what will save them, I think that also goes back to the nature of Los Angeles culture; just as the stars and starlets wish to maintain their anonymity and lead a "normal" life, the historical monuments of LA wish to do so as well, but at their own peril (also similar to the stars). The desired anonymity to retain a peaceful existence can soon turn into becoming "little known" or the dreaded phrase "forgotten". When a site becomes "forgotten" then it is at risk of degenerating into terrible disrepair, or worse being torn down with only a nod to it's history on the nightly news with video of it being blown to smithereens in the background. I think our cultural history is laying buried under years of forgotten artistic contributions piled with deep-set anonymity, but when you begin to dig you find immeasurable sites of historic interest, so then the question becomes, can these places benefit from being more public, or would it turn them into tourist traps, is it worth the trade off? I'm thinking maybe... Excellent post, I have often thought about the irony of the lack of a true cultural history in LA, a place set on recording every happening whether fictional, real, or in between, but when I went searching, I actually found a hidden history. Your statement “…there is virtually no history embodied anywhere in Los Angeles, and that is very unsettling. My neighborhood in Hollywood is overrun by European tourists taking pictures of the Walk of Fame and trying to get to the Hollywood Sign. Is that our Eiffel Tower?” really hit home with me, I think the nature of the Los Angeles culture is one of ‘outshining’. By this I mean Los Angeles has a deep historical culture such as the Ennis House, Hollyhock, the Frolic Room, The Egyptian Theater, the Greek Theater,etc, however it is completely outshined by more public sites such as the Walk of Fame. I like what was said about the cultural items in disrepair and what will save them, I think that also goes back to the nature of Los Angeles culture; just as the stars and starlets wish to maintain their anonymity and lead a “normal” life, the historical monuments of LA wish to do so as well, but at their own peril (also similar to the stars). The desired anonymity to retain a peaceful existence can soon turn into becoming “little known” or the dreaded phrase “forgotten”. When a site becomes “forgotten” then it is at risk of degenerating into terrible disrepair, or worse being torn down with only a nod to it’s history on the nightly news with video of it being blown to smithereens in the background. I think our cultural history is laying buried under years of forgotten artistic contributions piled with deep-set anonymity, but when you begin to dig you find immeasurable sites of historic interest, so then the question becomes, can these places benefit from being more public, or would it turn them into tourist traps, is it worth the trade off? I’m thinking maybe…

]]>