Slashdot Mirror
The Strange Story Of the Sculpture On the Moon
braindrainbahrain writes "Slate magazine has written a story about the only work of art placed on the Moon: the Fallen Astronaut sculpture. It was placed on the Moon during the Apollo 15 mission to commemorate both American and Soviet deceased astronauts. The little statue, rather than bringing fame and fortune, ended up being nearly forgotten, and got both Apollo astronaut David Scott and Belgian sculptor Van Hoeydonck in hot water with the U.S. government."
From TFA: "Now, after years of obscurity, Fallen Astronaut is making an unexpected comeback. Four decades after van Hoeydonck’s private meeting with the Smithsonian’s director, the Smithsonian invited the artist and his most famous sculpture out into the public for an absurdly belated lecture on Dec. 12 at the National Air and Space Museum"
The Chinese will recover it and put it on display in a Beijing museum. Plastic replicas on sale in the lobby gift shop.
Have gnu, will travel.
That is the ugliest chunk of milled aluminum I have ever seen. I'd have been ashamed to admit creating it. They should have skipped the statue and just laid a larger plaque instead.
Agreed, but TFA mentions that it couldn't have any clear race or even gender.
I find it more bizarre that people actually wanted a copy of it. I mean, the stamps that had actually gone to the Moon, sure, I can see the appeal there. But a copy of an ugly statue merely left there, rather than the original? Meh. Maybe as a $10 trinket from the Smithsonian gift shop.
The sculpture was meant to commemorate the dead astronauts and cosmonauts, not to promote the guy who made it. Van Hoeydonck failed to understand this, and that was his undoing.
The most interesting art on the Moon is the full-size replica of the Deutschlandhalle, built on the dark side.
It's where the Nazi Moon Olympics are held every four years, without any Jesse Owenses to spoil the fun.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Is this a promotional piece for the artist? Interesting that van Hoeyndonck's pride isn't in his chubby tuning fork, but in conning other people into doing a tremendous amount of work for him. "I am the only human being who has been able to get a sculpture to the moon." That, and the tendency of the Apollo era astronauts to be stand-up guys, makes me skeptical of skewing all those misunderstandings in his favor. They negotiated pretty carefully with the stamp dealer, but didn't discuss the intention of the piece or marketing of copies or any timeline? I don't feel sorry for the guy, and am a little irked that this promotion will likely make him a pile of money.
Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
“The astronauts told me that when they met Nixon later he asked them, ‘The artist—he’s a Democrat?’ They said, ‘No, he’s Belgian,’ and he said, ‘OK.’
They illegally downloaded it
rewriting history since 2109
I'd have been ashamed to admit creating it.
Not everyone can appreciate art, but there's no reason to be a prick about it.
I don't respond to AC's.
Don't forget the allegedly smuggled "Moon Museum" etching on Apollo 12. Andy Warhol penis sketch FTW.
It doesn't matter. The point is, there's no need to shit on somebody else's art.
I don't respond to AC's.
The point is, there's no need to shit on somebody else's art.
Indeed. Unless the artist is Piero Manzoni, then it's alright.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Most people are priggish busybodies. If they don't understand something, they act like that's proof its worthless.
That said, a lot of the fun of art is having opinions about it. Not liking a piece of art isn't the same as "shitting on it". You like what you like; where you end up on treacherous ground is when you have an opinion about what other people *ought* to like.
I don't like the novel Twilight. I have very specific opinions about things that are not good about that novel. On the other hand, I understand why the people who like that novel like it. My not liking that novel doesn't make me better than them, only different. Likewise I can tell you a lot about what's wrong with Lord of the Rings as a novel, but it's a story I love and re-read every couple of years.
The more serious you are about an art form the less it becomes about what you like or don't like. Liking or not like is still important, but it's not everything.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
|>E#
I just made that up and pronounce it to be art. You are allowed to either appreciate it's beauty or admit that you hate all art. Any -1 mods are merely people who don't understand art and whose opinion on art should therefore be ignored.
I'm reminded of the scene in L.A. Story in which Harris (Steve Martin) is admiring and remarking on a painting hanging in the museum:
Harris: I like the relationships. I mean, each character has his own story. The puppy is a bit too much, but you have to over look things like that in these kinds of paintings. The way he's *holding* her... it's almost... filthy. I mean, he's about to kiss her and she's pulling away. The way the leg's sort of smashed up against her... Phew... Look how he's painted the blouse sort of translucent. You can just make out her breasts underneath and it's sort of touching him about here. It's really... pretty torrid, don't you think? Then of course you have the onlookers peeking at them from behind the doorway like they're all shocked. They wish. Yeah, I must admit, when I see a painting like this, I get emotionally... erect.
[The camera pulls back and the painting is revealed to be of a large red rectangle.]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Actually, this is proof that the moon landing wasn't faked. As all slashdot knows, it is extremely difficult to get something back from the moon -- but it can be done.
Getting anything from one of the studios is beyond impossible.
It doesn't matter. The point is, there's no need to shit on somebody else's art.
Why not? Art is in the eye of the beholder, and indeed people actually get paid to shit on other people's art (figuratively). If an artist can't take criticism, they need to get out of the art biz (though they can still produce crap for their friends).
Seriously, no one can criticize "art"?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
In the correct context, it would be art. This is not the correct context, so no.
Really, stop discussing art because you don't know jack shit.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
there is no such thing as bad art. just art that some people think is of low artistic quality. Art is not science (which is why I think it all is roughly equivalent to ... fill in the blank with whatever you want), there is not scale but whatever arbitrary one you have chosen. My childhood finger painting are as much art as the modern art I see in galleries... and frankly they are just as "good" (if you can use such an adjective regarding art). On the other hand, your last two categories are correct,
you can like something. or not like something. that is about it when it comes to art. At least for me, this is why science and maths are so much more attractive on so many levels. But I can understand that that is a choice, and again pretty arbitrary.