I'd love to know that the same Chinese so offended by the dog sculpture are also actively working to get rid of the dog eating festivals in China.
1
The comparison of ‘art world’ expertise to that of a brain surgeon is priceless. The hubris of ‘the art world’ never ceases to amaze me. Those of us, like the Schattners, out here making stuff, just chuckle. The ‘art world’ really is quite amusing, as are those sychophantic artists trying to please them, I guess. At least I find them amusing, although they cross the line when they’re just taking the rich people for a ride.
I do wonder, at times, whether the Schattners aren’t a bit sychophantic (is that a word? probably not) with respect to another world, called ‘the market.’ They seem quite adept at manipulating it. Even Tchaikovsky was good at it. When his works were first performed at ———? people walked out, fewer walked out the next night, very soon you couldn’t get tickets.
I like sculpture more than the figurative 'modern' pieces most places install. Suppose that makes me 'low brow'. These may not be classic, but they're better than many.
File this in the "Art is supposed to provoke thought" folder. And any artist that stretches the boundaries has always come under criticism and even initial rejection.
For this native New Yorker now living in PA, I can only smile at some of the comments here. New York City is the greatest city in the world, and this kind of artistic statement will always have a place on the city's streets.
4
At first, I thought the paparazzi dog was pretty cool, especially how the one is sitting, with its legs crossed. I also liked the group of dogs in the Dumbo and Greenwich Village 2016 photos. But the female rabbits were kind of creepy. Seeing these rabbits with bras were just too weird.
As for the painted cow "sensation" from years ago, I thought the various colors and designs were incredible and beautiful. But what I found really ignorant was every animal had horns and udders. Maybe city folks don't know or care about that blatant error, but for what it's worth, a "cow" is a female animal that has had at least one calf. A "heifer" is a female animal that has never had a calf. A "bull" is a mature male animal that is used for breeding. Bulls don't have udders, do not produce milk nor can be milked. I guess being raised on a farm did have some value.
5
Insipid self-gratification and self-glorification. Too bad bronze doesn't rot.
4
This reminds me of the divide between Republicans and Democrats in todays world. If you criticize them you're a "snob" if youre for them youre a "philistine". Let those that enjoy enjoy and please let us alone who despise this trenchant assault on aesthetics wallow in our pristine idilli of enchantment. Je vous en prie.
2
Yes, this art is a little bit twee. And it's good for a city to have a bit of twee whimsy scattered here and there.
But just a bit.
3
"It’s like asking someone who isn’t a brain surgeon to operate on a brain tumor"
Really? Brain surgery? I think that I need an MFA to understand what you said.
3
This stuff doesn't feel like art to me at all. It says nothing at all. How is it that one can make such bronze's, then spend their lives replicating them, and call themselves artists? It's astounding that this shallowness is being placed all around the city. Someone is asleep at the wheel. What a drag.
8
not sure what's worse Banksy try hard street cred or These pooch bronzes.....hmmm.... Banksy I guess, he takes his naff works too seriously....
2
As more and more of New York is eaten up by luxury housing, chain restaurants, chain shopping brands and chain entertainment venues, this type of “art” fits right in. It’s bland, homogeneous and has no relationship to the neighborhood around it. It’s corporate art. New York is becoming an themepark caricature of its self.
6
@Umm..excuse me
It may be corporate, but it's not art.
I feel like these works have been "heavily influenced" by successful artists like Barry Flanagan (jumping hares), John Kelly (three cows in a pile), Jeff Koons (cute balloon dogs) and Damien Hirst (enormous children's toys). A brilliant piece of market research, and clearly a successful business, but do we really need a funny animal on every street corner in NYC?
7
Thank you for this article. Many of the points revealed need to be read. But NYC has always had a history, if not a magnetic core, of artists working in the public sphere, and more often with very little financial smarts as you point out, or at least infer. Christo (and the late Jean-Claude) were artists and not designers, the intent much different, and my point. Do have a look at their production videos as well as the annals of other works by local and international artists. It took them years (I believe 25) for The Gates to be realised. In 2007, with my partner, we came to NYC and created The Encampment, a massive tent installation on the south end of Roosevelt Island where now has been built Kahn's FDR Four Freedoms Park. Our focus was a deliberated artwork with RI's community and participation concerning the history and stories of quarantine, its institutions, laws and people. Thousands came to a place they had never been to nor know the history to encounter a metaphorical archaeological dig. The New York Times did an amazing editorial at the time. Given the approach, no matter what people think of the final product requires perseverance and humility.
2
@Thomas The Encampment was a self-financed project with the help of the Roosevelt Island Community, a group of dedicated benefactors, public donations at the door, in-kind contributions and an amazing group of over 200 committed volunteers! My apologies. It should read Jeanne-Claude (not Jean-Claude) as Christo's partner. As far as other errors please excuse.
The view that art must connect with the expressed opinion / objectives of some random interest group or other has persisted since the time of Plato (keen to shackle it to the cause of 'the good'.
Who defines the good. An interesting (yet meaningless) Rorschach can be built from the snarky comments on here.
...so... art invites comment, this is mine.
2
Not sublime, merely clever. Therefore advertising, not art.
8
“It’s like asking someone who isn’t a brain surgeon to operate on a brain tumor,” said Anne Pasternak,
Translates to; I/We have objectively provable good taste in art.
The arrogance (and inaccuracy) is breathtaking.
7
@John Pardey Ann Pasternak is just right. This is decoration, not art.
1
Sometimes, when I read comments like many of these, I wonder if Trump is where he is as a nasty reaction to the elitism of some self- appointed arbiters of taste in art and culture.
Who cares what "they" think?
Remember "Christina's World" ???
2
For me, the "serious" art world needs to get over itself. Somewhere in the 20th Century we went down some bizarre path with regard to "art". There may, in fact, be too many of these statues but they are at least amusing. Someone brings up Twombly - good - because frankly his stuff looks like what would get tossed into the garbage can in school art class. That's art and this isn't? Seriously - get over yourself.
Someday - if there aren't already - there will be scholarly treatises on how art "broke" in the latter 20th / early 21st Centuries. I like the discussion on what is "kitsch" and what is "art". I don't regard modernist piles of rubble as "art" just because there is an accompanying clever explanation. I do think that art should break molds and challenge us - and these statues are sure challenging us. So what is 'art'?
5
Much prefer these whimsical statues over what is called by the Art Snobs as "Street Art"and the rest of us as Graffiti
1
The home of Capitalism and its agents and automatons are indifferent to the destruction of the world and these figures are meant to amuse?
These figures leave me cold:
No sense of form or warmth of surface, these are just giant overblown trinkets with the form of stamped out plastic toys from China.
Kitch concept art by people who dont care about sculpture. Melt it down and save habitat for animals and the streets for grafftti.
5
@horsewithnoname
Couldn’t you say the same about Jeff Koons work which is praised by the art world ?
2
@horsewithnoname Yes: trinkets. And commerce.
1
I’m no art critic or expert but I love the public art I’m treated to in NYC. It is yet another reason why I love living here. But I don’t like the Dogman or Rabbitgirl. They seem kitschy. Can someone who knows more about art than I please explain why the Tom Otterness bronze sculptures in the subway are so charming yet these are meh or worse.
7
@AV Terry "Can someone who knows more about art than I please explain why the Tom Otterness bronze sculptures in the subway are so charming yet these are meh or worse."
The Otterness sculptures capture your attention and provoke thought because they engage the viewer with their unspoken comments on wealth, privilege, politics and art, while the Schattners' sculptures just kind of stand or sit there, with little thought, intent or purpose (I passed by those Astor Place rhinoceri almost daily, with little comprehension of their reason for being until I read this article). And the Otterness sculptures continue to surprise (literally and figuratively; I take the A train daily, but am still finding sculptures I hadn't seen before tucked away in beams and along the floor of the 14th Street station). Meanwhile, the Schattner sculptures ... well, for someone who claims not to be an "art critic" you critique it very well: they are definitely "meh."
8
@AV Terry Tom Otterness' figures lost all its ironic Disneyland charm for me when I learned about his original "concept" piece, wherein the young artist got a dog from an animal shelter and filmed himself blowing its head off with a pistol. Just to see the reactions.
Art critics, this way please to discuss the poetics of cruelty...
https://observer.com/2011/10/the-dog-killing-woes-of-tom-otterness/
5
I remember walking to a meeting on a recent cold, bleak windy day in Brooklyn. And then I saw the rhinos. I stopped. And smiled. And for just a moment, the day got a bit brighter for this native New Yorker. So what's the problem?
4
The critics don’t like it? The artists are actually managing to make a buck? Someone is bringing whimsy to the public square? The easily-outraged are signing petitions? What’s not to love about this story?!!
9
They have a background in advertising, make $5 million a year peddling replicas, and have an assiduously self-promoting website. It's not art, it's banal decorative hucksterism. But the stacked rhinos are going to eventually end up at the San Antonio Zoo where they belong, and I'm all for a gargantuan King Kong statue. As long as it isn't bronze.
11
So, Andy Warhol spends a career creating images of Campbell's Soup Cans, Claude Monet makes about 250 paintings of water lilies, but the Schattners can't reuse Dogman and Rabbitgirl in multiple sculptures?
4
@Chris. No, they can't.
2
“Mr. Schattner was working in advertising, with long hair and a Porsche.“
Okay. And we need to know that because...why?
It’s interesting that the writer takes a few swipes at Schattner, but not at his wife, the fellow creator and business partner. “Mr. Schattner, whose persuasive charm and brimming smile recall the gifted salesmanship of Jeff Koons...”. Hmm.
I agree that this couple’s sculptures are not great Art (and perhaps not even art), but who says public art and maybe-art can’t be fun and even decorative? Must everything be deemed “Important” by the great and few gatekeepers of taste to have any worth? Banksy has been playing the public on that question for years. Remember the Banksy painting sold, anonymously, for $60 on a NYC street?
I think
13
That rest of that truncated bit at the end of my post is “...that the dog and rabbit characters are cute.”
Having said that, I might not want them turning up all over the place.
5
As an artist who is very critical of the state of the art world, I should probably be more offended, but I am not, and not sure why. As art, I don't find it particularly good or bad or even unusual. It has plenty in common with Koons or William Wegman. Just an example of what I like to call the complete "Warholization" of art. Public art has never been on the cutting edge, anyway, as illustrated by thousands of statues created by artists far from the avant garde.
As for saturation, 8 sculptures in all of NYC doesn't seem like much. This article in the NY times is many times more helpful to their bottom line than all of the public installations combined. And the vast majority of art buyers don't give a damn what the critics think or even consider it a plus to be shunned by the elites ( Like many voters, alas)
The one concern is how this business model will affect our public art in the future. We are going through a long dry spell for public art funding, and I am afraid this will exacerbate the problem.
12
What a great departure from Picasso, Calder and Rodin.
5
The objections of the arts experts to these works are predictable, and it doesn't necessarily have to do with their quality. First and foremost, the gatekeepers are determined to hang onto control of the gates.
13
What historic quirk of culture has made ordinary citizens feel qualified to judge any type of artwork, no matter how advanced, when these same citizens wouldn’t dare to judge, say, the latest work in heart surgery or quantum physics?
4
We need to give other artists their due. Cute but enough already. One or two are fun but let's spread the creative public art around. Please - no more.
23
I absolutely love this! I was have having a pretty bad day until I read this article and I am still laughing now.
How whimsical and light! In our too-serious world we need this kind of art to break the sometimes dense severity of our world view.
14
The way I understand it, art is supposed to challenge the viewer. Guess that's true, unless the viewer is the "serious" art establishment. C'mon guys, lighten up.
13
Their art reminds me of this TV show called 'The 10th Kingdom'. They seem to have copied the golden trolls and golden dog to a great extent. Not really a new idea...
3
The dog & bunny are around the corner from my office. Quite a shock to read this fawning love letter in the Times to this "art" best suited to what it does: serve as backdrop to umptillion tourist photos.
These sculptures are cartoonish schlock with no intent to be anything more. The "equality" statutes featuring Oprah and Beyonce make this statement of opinion nigh-on fact. They appeal to tourists in a neighborhood overrun by tourists. Thanks to this article I see that they, like the tourists they serve, will be clogging up public spaces all over the city. This is not a step in the right direction.
34
@Clotario. What’s wrong with tourists?
Are out-of-town tourists in NYC supposed to be worse than tourists from NYC traveling out of town?
I see tons of New Yorkers in other places, many of them also taking pictures.
7
@Clotario Why can't public art in America be as diverse as say, film or music? There are all kinds of people, so it stands to reason there should be all kinds of public art -- especially when it is as well executed as the works pictured in this article. I imagine that these sculptures have brought a number of smiles to a number of faces. Considering how the U.S., is such a sad and glum place these days, the provocation of a smile is at least as important as the provocation of thought -- and something from which we could all benefit. Why must all artistic endeavor have appeal to the few who are paid to write about it?
9
@Clotario:
Strange. I read it as anything BUT fawning.
5
It's fine if private developers who generally find art "off-putting" want to put this kitschy schlock in their private homes or work spaces. But it's another thing altogether to force New Yorkers all over the city to have to encounter it in public spaces.
13
Dog litter should be cleaned up and rabbits should not be allowed to multiply.
13
Ugh.
10
He’s a “man” and she’s a “girl.” Get with the times people!
19
@papergirl2
Couldn't agree more! Hard to keep a straight face when the artists focused on gender equality name their obviously adult animals Dogman and Rabbitgirl...
7
What a bunch of snobs you people are. Really !. It's quite unbecoming. I know my small town in Colorado would gladly accept temporary and free installment of sculpture to help fuel the economy of our already vibrant downtown. Maybe the Schattner's will come to Fort Collins. Listen to yourselves. Self righteous, stuck up, holier than thou. Not everyone wants or likes MOMA or the Guggenheim...
21
@Jack Hunter All NY should not be represented by the Art Elites, These are the same Snobs who fawn over the glorified graffiti artist Banks. Most of us whom Hans Christian Andersen mocked in "The Emperor Has No Clothes"
@Jack Hunter I hear you Jack. New York City is a different place from Fort Collins, CO. It just is.
These pieces are ok sparingly. This cultural capital deserves better.
2
@Jack Hunter
Ok, agreed, lots of modern art is alienating to people who aren’t schooled in it or interested in it, and plenty of modern art is bad, but the lines around the block for the Guggenheim, currently showing 100 year old abstract paintings, indicate that many people are liking it, including those who are seeing it for the first time.
Not enjoying statues of “men” with dog heads and “girls” with bunny faces doesn’t make a person a snob, however. These things are just ugly, and seeing a bunch of them makes them no more attractive, no matter how down-to-earth the viewer. They’d be ugly in Ft Collins, just as they are in Manhattan
6
Fits right in with the Disneyfication of NYC. Their works are banal and insipid Gift Shop trinkets, not worthy of a great city.
I'd frankly rather look at scaffolding or traffic pylons. At least some design thinking has gone into these objects.
42
I love the fact that the "art establishment" is upset. It is a healthy sign for the people of New York.
18
Maybe one or two of their sculptures would be ok, but after a couple of them they get to be pretty boring. And like a writer below states, it's advertising at public expense for their business.
And what happens when we find out that Beyonce or some other "famous" woman they plan to exhibit is found to be a person that doesn't belong on a pedestal?
Making the same thing over and over just to make a profit isn't art. They might as well make cars.
21
I thought at the first quick view, that the rabbit and dog were kind of fun. But the figures, in different poses, are too many. and can therefore be counted as adding to the visual litter of the sidewalk. And they are not finely made; a waste of bronze. They make Jeff Koons' work look like Rembrandts. Not really, but eeew.
14
Let’s not be so quick to criticize. Better instead to offer suggestions. Here is mine:
A single lamp hangs over a card table covered in green felt and cards. The cards are being watched intently by seven ponderous players. Now here is the artistic twist: the players are all dogs.
You’re welcome New York.
39
The dogs with cameras were in DUMBO for a while, where I walked past them every day. They are the bronze equivalents of paintings on velvet showing clowns with large sad eyes, and culturally related to those famous people who seem to do nothing except be famous.
It’s not surprising that the fabricators (not artists) of these objects have the work experience and sales abilities that they possess, but it is unfortunate that we have to look at them just because they are made by people who can afford to drop them all over.
Worse than the painted cows.
31
@Michael c, I liked the painted cow project, in the larger context.
6
New York—once the art and avante garde capital of the world—is now home to this pap and drivel. I’d have enough trouble accepting any one artist (or artist team) with that many public displays on Manhattan streets. But this schlock?
30
Why should a business improvement association decide what a citizen's experience of public space will be? This creeping privatization of public space is not confined to NYC: outdoor public art festivals run on similar models in, for example, Vancouver, where both the Vancouver Sculpture Biennale and the Vancouver Mural Festival sidestep public art policies by local government via deals with parks boards and the development community.
18
I'd rather look at a tree...or an interesting rock.
17
You can have both.
6
hideous. too much of a very boring thing. not fair to struggling artists.
17
Supposedly liberal New York has done everything in its power to drive its once vibrant community of New York artists out through a host of methods, most dramatically via economic policies which make it impossible for real New York artists, as opposed to trust-fund dilettantes, to afford to live here and have studio space.
Further, the "public art" featured here by Australian artists, working out of Australia, perfectly exemplifies Kevin Baker's critique of New York City in his piece "The Death of a Once Great City." Just published in Harper's digital edition, it explores in great detail how politicians and big money so distorted public policy that they've destroyed everything that made New York real; everything that made New York New York.
As Baker demonstrates, the only interests of big corporate money and large developers are to "blank out everything with the generic and the tragically hip. Our buildings and our public art today are not a corrective but the easy disengagement of the developer. The void in our art reflects the sensory deprivation of our neighborhoods, where the complex and varied city has also been wiped out. Once the iconography of New York honored ideas, enterprises, achievers, and heroes, but today’s public spaces speak a secret language of the cool and knowing, an inside joke that is lost on the rest of us. The things we have lost will never be found again, and the new things we have received are literally empty and spiritually devoid of meaning."
20
France donated the Statue of Liberty to NYC. How many small replicas have been sold since then? Imagine if all the money from the sales of Lady Liberty chotchkies went back to the original sculptors. That seems like these artists’ business plan. Public art donations are their promotions to create demand for their ceramic replicas and paintings. $5 million in revenue makes a $200,000 promotional investment seem small. Clever capitalism.
14
I’ve seen their work in Australia. At first I was delighted and amused, then surprised at the third encounter of another Dogman and Rabbitgirl. Somehow it took away from experience of discovery. I’m all for public artwork. My mother sculpted in bronze and was fortunate to have larger work in public settings (ie cattle dog in a children’s park). I’m surprised this is happening in NYC where there are so many artists and such diversity.
32
Good for them!! Reality check-the only people who pay attention to ‘art critics’ are other ‘art critics’. And kudos to them for avoiding the NYC bureaucracy!
Their work is fun, triggers conversation about art and it is especially appealing to the public because of its accessibility.
Keep up the good work and hope to see all their sculptures on my next trip home!
21
@nurse betty I'm not an art critic, but their work is banal and after a couple of viewings they become pedestrian impediments.
11
I guess there are no more artists in New York City.
19
@Matt D
Or good art.
7
@Matt D
Who cares where they come from or live? Brancusi's and Oldenburg's residences were irrelevant. Ditto Twombly. The problem is the art, which is kitsch, not their birth place.
8
@Laurence Bachmann
The problem is actually the kitsch, which is not art.
1