Campus artwork a nuisance or an experience? Depends on the critiquer

The column about the campus sculpture collection caught my interest. The author expressed frustration for the sculptures around campus. I always thought that Wichita was blessed to have all of these works; others find them to be a nuisance?

I can understand why people would question some of them; for example, I was walking around campus checking out the sculptures with a friend who stopped by a tree to stare at the ground near it. I realized he was admiring a garden hose coiled up next to the tree. Laughing. I made fun of him because he was questioning if it was just a garden hose or if it was a sculpture itself.

This experience made me realize that everyone has different views of what they consider art and why. Most people view great pieces of art as successful only when they look realistic or life-like. This sometimes is the goal of the artist as well.

I will admit, when I first began to draw I wanted my drawing to look like a photograph. Now evidence of personality, emotion, or intentional morphing is more interesting to me and can tell a story about a subject.

The same goes with the campus sculptures: you don’t have to believe that all of them were made to be critiqued as masterpieces to go down in history. I think they were made to be experienced, to maybe even be laughed at, to question and be questioned, and to provide contrast to the surrounding area.