Lululemon - another thing MQT doesn't need and can't rightly afford. If parents don't want to go broke or be bothered by their kids trying to get those goods - then start teaching them better. Teach them that buying and chasing brand names simply for the sake of the name does not lead to anything good - except lining the pockets of the megacompanies that make them. Teach them quality vs. name brand, thriftiness & value vs. status and department store credit cards. It's not being cheap - it's being smart and responsible. Teach them the difference - and also learn to say "NO" to your kids. It's on you to raise them right and responsible.
I do not often agree with Margie - hell, I don't think I ever have. She has frequently prided herself on making sure the community knows just how much of a whackadoo she is for many years. But on this instance - I have to agree with her. Regardless where the money came from - and yeah, some of it did indeed come from taxpayer funds (how do you think things like grants and public art funds are paid for?) - it is money ill-spent. I 110% agree that the opportunity for local artists to develop a display should have taken precedence over... this... whatever it is.
Instead - as per usual - the city council prefers to cater more to out-of-towners bringing their influence into our small city. A grossly repeating and ever increasing pattern that has plagued our town for going on 2 decades now. Ridiculous.
Just a few short weeks ago MAT posted a nauseatingly, exhaustive article on how chic, cosmopolitan and artistic the town and its residents are. Between the liberal arts type students at the U, and the regular hazed-over gang of self-proclaimed artisans that continually bless our streets with their ripened presence - I am positive that they could have come up with an excellent, more vertically oriented display that wouldn't require you to sit on ice-cold concrete to observe and appreciate. It would have most likely been far more pertinent to the community than... whatever this is. And it sure as hell would have been a whole lot cheaper. Those now-wasted funds could have then gone to something far more useful.
Don’t speak for a group of people you aren’t involved with. In this case, the local artists.
As a “local artist” I’m excited to see an installation in Marquette. When was the last time we’ve had the opportunity to see one here?
That’s right. Never.
The “local artists” haven’t been up to the challenge of the bigger art projects, yet. But the arts and culture center is doing things to get us there.
As far as cheaper? Frankly to do something exactly like this would take me a very long time and a lot of wasted materials. It’d cost someone something and you’re suggesting the “local artist” absorb those costs, even if you don’t realize it. I deserve to be paid for my work too. And if you think the costs to the city would be any better, you’re wrong.
Oh, Margaret. No. The local artists are ready to be inspired by art. If all we ever see is ourselves, we’ll never dream of anything new.
Lululemon - another thing MQT doesn't need and can't rightly afford. If parents don't want to go broke or be bothered by their kids trying to get those goods - then start teaching them better. Teach them that buying and chasing brand names simply for the sake of the name does not lead to anything good - except lining the pockets of the megacompanies that make them. Teach them quality vs. name brand, thriftiness & value vs. status and department store credit cards. It's not being cheap - it's being smart and responsible. Teach them the difference - and also learn to say "NO" to your kids. It's on you to raise them right and responsible.
I do not often agree with Margie - hell, I don't think I ever have. She has frequently prided herself on making sure the community knows just how much of a whackadoo she is for many years. But on this instance - I have to agree with her. Regardless where the money came from - and yeah, some of it did indeed come from taxpayer funds (how do you think things like grants and public art funds are paid for?) - it is money ill-spent. I 110% agree that the opportunity for local artists to develop a display should have taken precedence over... this... whatever it is.
Instead - as per usual - the city council prefers to cater more to out-of-towners bringing their influence into our small city. A grossly repeating and ever increasing pattern that has plagued our town for going on 2 decades now. Ridiculous.
Just a few short weeks ago MAT posted a nauseatingly, exhaustive article on how chic, cosmopolitan and artistic the town and its residents are. Between the liberal arts type students at the U, and the regular hazed-over gang of self-proclaimed artisans that continually bless our streets with their ripened presence - I am positive that they could have come up with an excellent, more vertically oriented display that wouldn't require you to sit on ice-cold concrete to observe and appreciate. It would have most likely been far more pertinent to the community than... whatever this is. And it sure as hell would have been a whole lot cheaper. Those now-wasted funds could have then gone to something far more useful.
Do better, MQT.
Don’t speak for a group of people you aren’t involved with. In this case, the local artists.
As a “local artist” I’m excited to see an installation in Marquette. When was the last time we’ve had the opportunity to see one here?
That’s right. Never.
The “local artists” haven’t been up to the challenge of the bigger art projects, yet. But the arts and culture center is doing things to get us there.
As far as cheaper? Frankly to do something exactly like this would take me a very long time and a lot of wasted materials. It’d cost someone something and you’re suggesting the “local artist” absorb those costs, even if you don’t realize it. I deserve to be paid for my work too. And if you think the costs to the city would be any better, you’re wrong.