<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Public Art and Its Discontents. Julie Mehretu at Goldman Sachs	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://artcritical.com/2010/11/07/public-art-julie-mehretu/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://artcritical.com/2010/11/07/public-art-julie-mehretu/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:49:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.5.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: drew cronen		</title>
		<link>https://artcritical.com/2010/11/07/public-art-julie-mehretu/#comment-11773</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[drew cronen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:49:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://artcritical.com/?p=11986#comment-11773</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Banksy, really??]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Banksy, really??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Barry Schwabsky		</title>
		<link>https://artcritical.com/2010/11/07/public-art-julie-mehretu/#comment-2098</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry Schwabsky]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 14:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://artcritical.com/?p=11986#comment-2098</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks for a fine piece--it makes makes its moves very lithely. But I object to your statement that &quot;it is essential for an artist to control the reception of her work&quot;--surely that&#039;s impossible, though one always tries? Instead we could paraphrase Marx: Artists create their reception, but not just as they please. More broadly, I wonder if you haven&#039;t pinned your important and interesting considerations on public art to a work that isn&#039;t really a piece of public art at all (just as Barnes&#039;s Matisse commission wasn&#039;t): As the conditions of its viewing were meant to impress on you, the mural&#039;s placement is more private than public. The only people who are supposed to see it straight-on are those inside the company; and when inside, one is not to make what Kant called public use of reason--inside, one&#039;s reason has been privatized.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for a fine piece&#8211;it makes makes its moves very lithely. But I object to your statement that &#8220;it is essential for an artist to control the reception of her work&#8221;&#8211;surely that&#8217;s impossible, though one always tries? Instead we could paraphrase Marx: Artists create their reception, but not just as they please. More broadly, I wonder if you haven&#8217;t pinned your important and interesting considerations on public art to a work that isn&#8217;t really a piece of public art at all (just as Barnes&#8217;s Matisse commission wasn&#8217;t): As the conditions of its viewing were meant to impress on you, the mural&#8217;s placement is more private than public. The only people who are supposed to see it straight-on are those inside the company; and when inside, one is not to make what Kant called public use of reason&#8211;inside, one&#8217;s reason has been privatized.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
