1
Does Boston have to be the city where fun goes to die? (www.masslive.com)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/boston@lemmy.world
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

The article seems to confuse “fun” with “tacky corporate eyesores.” It talks a lot about “public art,” but almost all its examples are branded photo ops thrown up by international megacorporations to generate Instagram posts. I love that Boston isn’t crammed with that crap—if you want to be bombarded with ads masquerading as culture, you can go to Times Square.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 11 months ago*

    Thanks for commenting and not just downvoting.

    Totally fair to say you don't want Boston to just get crammed with corporate ads, but I don't think you're giving the post enough credit that it is talking a lot about public art. That doesn't mean it can't also acknowledge the reality that we don't have a lot of truly public spaces in Boston, so the lower-hanging fruit for bringing more art into our city instead of just drab buildings and old revolutionary war statues is from private companies.

    Art of things that are part of our culture, corporate-owned or not, outside their buildings is sometimes better than nothing. Would a lego sculpture outside their headquarters really be that bad? It'd certainly be better than the 60-foot LED Citgo sign sitting on top of our skyline.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent