Comments on: Houston House and Lot Flipping: Conceptual Art Meets Sharpstown Deed Restrictions

By: Amy

Amy — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:13:57 +0000

Anyone remember the Holstein painted house (black and white spots) that was located in West U by the railroad tracks (Bissonnet and Weslayn area)? Wonder how those neighbors felt about conceptual art?

By: Errol

Errol — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:41:31 +0000

What absolutely galls me is the outrageous fiscal irresponsibility of the Medici administration.

By: RWB

RWB — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:33:05 +0000

Indeed, Leonardo was totally on the dole. Michelangelo too! All those Renaissance artists (or should I say “artists”?) were. Vasari should have named his book “Lives of the Welfare Queens.”

By: Errol

Errol — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:12:48 +0000

RWB,
Hey, no fair confusing self-made Texas he-man Bob Perry with that waste of time, pie-in-the-sky dreamer Da Vinci. Didn’t Leonardo milk the governments of Milan, Florence, and France for his useless projects?

By: RWB

RWB — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:47:21 +0000

Yes, I am Leonardo de PerryHomes. Texas is my canvas and sprawl is my paintbrush. My ouevre is best viewed from 100 miles straight up.

By: Errol

Errol — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:45:51 +0000

“all artists should have to find a private benefactor to fund their “art” and therefore their living. It is not the responsibility of any government entity.”
———
Should that apply to “serious, non-artistic” suburban developments too? What about all the government subsidies that make them possible? What would Katy be without the Katy Freeway? Not to mention the home-mortgage deduction?

Before you start imposing libertarian fantasy rules on topics you (by your own declaration) know little about, try to imagine their effect on your own (apparently artless) world.

By: Errol

Errol — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:31:08 +0000

‘Houses are not “Art”.’
———
Let me guess . . . you’re a suburbs of Houston homebuilder?

By: RWB

RWB — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:14:46 +0000

“Houses are not ‘Art’.”

Hey, in the future, if I have a question about whether or not something is art (or “art”), can I call you? You apparently are an expert, right?

By: wcsjr

wcsjr — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:01:51 +0000

Houses are not “Art”. Yes, one man some years ago spent his money decorating his own house with beer can tabs. That is fine. He did it with his own money. It is even better if he and/or his heirs make a little money off of his “artwork”. It is not okay however for any kind of tax revenue to go towards frivolous endeavors such as this. I totally agree with most of the others who have responded, that all artists should have to find a private benefactor to fund their “art” and therefore their living. It is not the responsibility of any government entity. The world has too many other more pressing issues and problems to waste time and money on silliness such as this project

By: Lauren

Lauren — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:16:42 +0000

“What possibly can be gained by pie in the sky type projects.”

Not being so dull.

And yes, some taxes (VERY little) go toward art grants like those from HAA/CACHH (COH hotel occupancy tax) or Texas Commission on the Arts.
And egads, monies also go toward art programs which may give otherwise unrealized opportunities to naive artsy wannabes! (And make sure not to buy the TCA “State of the Arts” vanity plate for god’s sake).

By: b.s.

b.s. — Fri, 29 May 2009 03:03:06 +0000

Jeez, I guess this is not the place to bring up art.

By: kjb434

kjb434 — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:38:55 +0000

I disagree with the sport stadium funding also (at least for the reason they use).

Sports stadiums don’t increase tax revenues in surrounding area (at least not enough to recoup expenses). If they were honest that they wanted to spend the money just because a stadium is cool, they may get the support that way.

Same argument can be made for rail transit (especially in Houston).

I guess in the end, I would rather the taxpayers had a chance to vote for these expenditures.