We need actual, respectful representation in District 5, at long last - not the small-minded, rudely embarrassing obstructionism and catering to special interests we've suffered at the hands of Mr. Lamborn. Enough is enough.
My opinion: Anyone who continues to support Lamborn just isn't paying attention; but, as we've sadly witnessed in the past two elections of our Dist. 5 Congressperson, ignorance is bliss. We deserve MUCH better than the kind of alleged "representation" we've suffered over the past six years at the hands of Mr. Lamborn. Enough is enough of that guy.
It's imperative that, at election time, Lamborn's buffoonery is not only remembered, but brought to the fore. Any "representative" who refuses to seriously entertain opposing viewpoints, as does Lamborn, has no business in elective office. Period.
I feel so incredibly fortunate that we have the arbitrator of what is and what isn't art, who are and who aren't artists, living so nearby. Perched on her lofty overlook in Green Mountain Falls, Carol Krick once again attempts to inform us, the ignorant and uninformed, about what art truly is. Okay then. But I'm curious: Is she an artist? If so, is there some reason that nowhere on the web (the most modern and efficient means through which to expose the public to our art) is there any examples of her work. I would very much like to see what springs from her pen/pencil/brush/sculptor's tools that may be so astounding as to lead her to proclaim herself to be the pre-eminent authority on art itself. Perhaps it is a good thing Carol wasn't around when Van Gogh was working and trying to show or many of the other, at that time, avant guarde artists and painters. In the face of their then-outrageous interpretations of painting, there's certainly no way they would have met with Ms. Krick's overwhelmingly high criteria.
I'm an artist. Oh yes, I am. Ms. Krick may not regard my work as worthy of public consumption and may think it far, far below her condescending criteria to even give it a second glance, but - as I've always felt and believed - art is in the eye of the beholder and I have the great fortune of enjoying a great many appreciative beholders with regard to my work.
When Stravinsky began issuing his compositions in music, a great many had very few kind words for his creations. It was chaotic, they said. It didn't fit the expected norm of what "should" be regarded as great musical composition. Mozart was chided for using "too many notes". My point in mention these musical artists is that it seems, since time in memorial, there have been an ample supply of the Carol Kricks in the world, ready at any moment to tell the rest of the world what they should and should not enjoy, appreciate or regard as artistic accomplishment. Ms. Krick's comments only prove that, in human history, precious little ever changes.
One last comment - a question, really: Did someone recently reject Ms. Krick's work again (since, from what I can tell, this is the second time she's written in with the "this isn't art/you're not an artist" commentary. Or is this an issue of the relative isolation of living in Green Mountain Falls leading her to prop herself up as a Toy Critic for lack of something more productive to do? I'm merely asking.
About the only thing I can conclude is that it's probably most appropriate to feel sorry for Ms. Krick. To be so embittered by a human pursuit that, for the most part, serves to convey an idea, share an image (mental or real), to represent a time or a place and perhaps even to educate, she would take it upon herself to act as arresting officer, judge, jury and executioner when it comes to art. That's a very pathetic place to be, in my estimation, and ultimately, I feel sorry for her. It must be pure torture to be surrounded by a society in which diversity and self-expression is permissible without strict adherence to her Book of Rules. Tragic, isn't it? I think so.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation