by JBaymore » Sat Oct 09, 2004 5:03 pm
Speaking as a professional ceramic artist of 33+ years and a background as a professor of ceramics.......:
I feel that this person's original mistake and subsequent attitude about correcting the situation is an embarrasment to the field. It is completely unprofessional, in my opinion.
Intentional mis-spellings can certainly be used to artistic effect at times... but my guess from the image and the context was that in this particular case that was NOT any part of the intent of the piece. In fact, she admits that she was "on her hands and knees" and did not see it and also that others should have seen the "mistake".
The most qualified person who should have seen the mistake was HER. The final "review" of the completion of a piece of artwork resides with the ARTIST.
I would guess that she has installed this commissioned piece (that likely went thru numerous reviews) that does not match the proposal submitted. It is only if the mis-spellings are in the approved public art proposal that I feel that there is any grounds for her to stand upon.
If the city actually has already given her the $40,000 before inspecting the piece to comply with the contract,.... I do also have to say that THEY screwed up a bit. She should not have gotten her money until the installation matched the proposal. A contractual deposit on the piece, yes.... the full payment....no.
I personally would not be surprised nor have an objection if the city subsequently sued her for breach of contract, got the money back, and had the defective piece removed.
My $0.02 worth.
best,
.........................john

Intel i7 960 quad 3.2G LGA 1366, Asus P6X58D Premium, 750W Corsair, 6 gig 1600 DDR3, Spinpoint 1TB 720