Comments on: Is meaning simply in the eye of the beholder?

By: Ethan Rogati

Ethan Rogati — Thu, 04 May 2017 12:00:10 +0000

In reply to Diane Roth. It's interesting to me to find out about the intent and timing of the bull sculpture as well. How it gets portrayed and how this whole event played out in the public eye is very challenging to me. I admit that I got a little captured by the depiction of the girl standing up to the bull. As a resident of Vermont, the home of Bernie Sanders, it tugs at the imagination a little bit. But, until now, it seems none of it is being publicly depicted as actually took place.

By: Diane Roth

Diane Roth — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 03:12:57 +0000

it matters what the artist originally intended, especially if you are going to study art. But it’s also fair to note that art does sometimes “take on a life of its own,” especially public art. It is interesting to find out what the intention of the makers of the girl sculpture is. But I’m not sure it’s going to make people run out and buy stuff from that investment firm. It will be interesting to keep track of the debate.

By: Nina de Borde

Nina de Borde — Thu, 20 Apr 2017 13:52:21 +0000

Yes, I care what the artist intended. And it shouldnt be able to be “added to” by another artist without collaboration or permission. Leave the bull to stand alone, as it was intended.

By: Nathan Willard

Nathan Willard — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 16:41:57 +0000

Is the meaning assigned to the artwork controlled by those who appropriate it. We can chose to live in our bias-affirming echo chambers, or we can try to engage in meaningful conversation. Meaningful communication requires us to try to understand authorial intent.

By: Sher

Sher — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:31:25 +0000

The girl being added to another persons art is not fair or right.
Put her in another spot. SHe ruins the original intent of the Bull’s artist