![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
What a spoiled little brat!
The artist who created the now-infamous Livermore library mosaic that contains 11 misspellings says she no longer wants to fix it because of the "nasty messages from people who don't understand art."
Oh, that's nice. They're not being nasty because they don't understand art, they're being nasty (if they are being nasty, I don't know that) because they understand that you messed up. At any rate, it's your mess, you need to fix it. You can't act like a five year old just because people are being big poopyheads.
Maria Alquilar, who complained that her name, too, was often misspelled, said she had been overwhelmed by dozens of phone calls and more than 1,000 e- mails since her errors -- from "Eistein" to "Shakespere" to "Michaelangelo" -- were widely publicized.
Aside from the fact that you weren't famous until very recently... well, no. I'm not finishing.
Fed up, Alquilar said Friday that she was reconsidering her decision to correct her work because the people of Livermore had been so mean.
"If I come out, there will probably be a demonstration," she said. "There is so much anger. I am so upset, I can't even think straight."
That much is obvious. You need to fix your mistakes. It's stupid and petty to say "well, you're mean, I'm not gonna, nyah!"
Alquilar will wait for the issue to die down before she makes a firm decision, but she said she would prefer that the city just tear up the piece, which measures 16 feet in diameter and includes 175 historical names and cultural words.
"I will consent if the city wants to pay to have it removed," she said.
Wait. Wait, you got paid for this already, and you didn't do the job properly, but you'll consent if "they pay to have it removed"? What world are you living in?
City officials, who paid $40,000 for the mosaic, said they hoped Alquilar would correct the mistakes but had not received an answer.
"She indicated that she is not sure if she wants to come back," said Assistant City Manager Jim Piper. "We will get her final decision next week."
Nothing to say here.
Livermore officials selected Alquilar in 2000 to create a mosaic at the entrance to Livermore's new library. It shows a tree of life in its center surrounded by icons representing science, art literature and history. Officials attending the library's opening in May noticed that 10 names and one word on the piece were misspelled.
The artist said the names were spelled correctly on her sketches, but she got them wrong as she was doing the piece. She admits noticing "Einstein" was misspelled but choosing to go forward anyway.
"I just wasn't that concerned," she said. "None of us are particularly good spellers anymore because of computers. When you are in a studio full of clay, you don't give it much thought.
Excuse me? I'm a good speller. How could you not have been concerned? Did it never occur to you that people in a library might be concerned about correct spelling?
"When you look at Michelangelo's David, do you point out that one (testicle) is lower than the other?"
I'm told that men often have one testicle lower than the other. This would mean that it's not a mistake.
Earlier this week, the Livermore City Council voted 3-2 to pay Alquilar $6,000 to fix the misspelled names. State law prohibits removing or changing public art without the artist's consent.
They were going to pay her to fix her own mistakes.
The city debated leaving the misspelled names and creating a game where visitors try to find them -- an idea that angered Alquilar.
"Can you imagine them suggesting that a work of art be used as a game?" she asked. "It is outrageous."
Lots of works of art as used as a game. Here's an idea. If you don't want people to do that, proofread your work, and take enough pride in it to be concerned if you aren't doing your best.
Though some argue the artist should be allowed to spell names however she wants, others say the piece is an embarrassment.
No, she shouldn't. They aren't her names to mangle. And yes, it IS an embarrassment.
Phone calls to the artist started after the city said she would be paid to correct the errors. Alquilar was screening calls when she got a call from a man claiming to be a police officer. She picked up the phone, and the caller joked that he was from a special Livermore unit that is inspecting spelling errors.
Another caller suggested Alquilar had a learning disability, and several used ethnic slurs, she said.
"It turned into a sport for them," said Alquilar, who said she was well educated and not dyslexic.
They shouldn't've done that (though at this point I think I would've clung to dyslexic as long as I could, and certainly not implied that dyslexic means poorly educated).
Alquilar worked on the piece for more than a year and said the whole experience was negative. She said people were unfriendly, and she was offended that she wasn't invited to the opening.
"I just wasn't left with a good feeling, like I would want to fix it for them," she said.
That's nice. You still have to fix your mistakes. You got PAID for it, and if it's wrong, you need to fix it.
She said the piece had been on display for four days before it was completed and viewed by city employees, architects, contractors and library officials. No one noticed the errors, she said.
"That proves that words are not the important part," she said. "The mural is supposed to lead people into discovering different parts of the world and its influences. This one has been detrimental."
It proves nothing of the sort. I doubt people go with a red pencil to look for errors in a mural. Probably they didn't even look that closely at it, which is why they didn't notice.
Maybe she's not a spoiled brat. But I still think she needs to grow up, and own up to her responsibility.
The artist who created the now-infamous Livermore library mosaic that contains 11 misspellings says she no longer wants to fix it because of the "nasty messages from people who don't understand art."
Oh, that's nice. They're not being nasty because they don't understand art, they're being nasty (if they are being nasty, I don't know that) because they understand that you messed up. At any rate, it's your mess, you need to fix it. You can't act like a five year old just because people are being big poopyheads.
Maria Alquilar, who complained that her name, too, was often misspelled, said she had been overwhelmed by dozens of phone calls and more than 1,000 e- mails since her errors -- from "Eistein" to "Shakespere" to "Michaelangelo" -- were widely publicized.
Aside from the fact that you weren't famous until very recently... well, no. I'm not finishing.
Fed up, Alquilar said Friday that she was reconsidering her decision to correct her work because the people of Livermore had been so mean.
"If I come out, there will probably be a demonstration," she said. "There is so much anger. I am so upset, I can't even think straight."
That much is obvious. You need to fix your mistakes. It's stupid and petty to say "well, you're mean, I'm not gonna, nyah!"
Alquilar will wait for the issue to die down before she makes a firm decision, but she said she would prefer that the city just tear up the piece, which measures 16 feet in diameter and includes 175 historical names and cultural words.
"I will consent if the city wants to pay to have it removed," she said.
Wait. Wait, you got paid for this already, and you didn't do the job properly, but you'll consent if "they pay to have it removed"? What world are you living in?
City officials, who paid $40,000 for the mosaic, said they hoped Alquilar would correct the mistakes but had not received an answer.
"She indicated that she is not sure if she wants to come back," said Assistant City Manager Jim Piper. "We will get her final decision next week."
Nothing to say here.
Livermore officials selected Alquilar in 2000 to create a mosaic at the entrance to Livermore's new library. It shows a tree of life in its center surrounded by icons representing science, art literature and history. Officials attending the library's opening in May noticed that 10 names and one word on the piece were misspelled.
The artist said the names were spelled correctly on her sketches, but she got them wrong as she was doing the piece. She admits noticing "Einstein" was misspelled but choosing to go forward anyway.
"I just wasn't that concerned," she said. "None of us are particularly good spellers anymore because of computers. When you are in a studio full of clay, you don't give it much thought.
Excuse me? I'm a good speller. How could you not have been concerned? Did it never occur to you that people in a library might be concerned about correct spelling?
"When you look at Michelangelo's David, do you point out that one (testicle) is lower than the other?"
I'm told that men often have one testicle lower than the other. This would mean that it's not a mistake.
Earlier this week, the Livermore City Council voted 3-2 to pay Alquilar $6,000 to fix the misspelled names. State law prohibits removing or changing public art without the artist's consent.
They were going to pay her to fix her own mistakes.
The city debated leaving the misspelled names and creating a game where visitors try to find them -- an idea that angered Alquilar.
"Can you imagine them suggesting that a work of art be used as a game?" she asked. "It is outrageous."
Lots of works of art as used as a game. Here's an idea. If you don't want people to do that, proofread your work, and take enough pride in it to be concerned if you aren't doing your best.
Though some argue the artist should be allowed to spell names however she wants, others say the piece is an embarrassment.
No, she shouldn't. They aren't her names to mangle. And yes, it IS an embarrassment.
Phone calls to the artist started after the city said she would be paid to correct the errors. Alquilar was screening calls when she got a call from a man claiming to be a police officer. She picked up the phone, and the caller joked that he was from a special Livermore unit that is inspecting spelling errors.
Another caller suggested Alquilar had a learning disability, and several used ethnic slurs, she said.
"It turned into a sport for them," said Alquilar, who said she was well educated and not dyslexic.
They shouldn't've done that (though at this point I think I would've clung to dyslexic as long as I could, and certainly not implied that dyslexic means poorly educated).
Alquilar worked on the piece for more than a year and said the whole experience was negative. She said people were unfriendly, and she was offended that she wasn't invited to the opening.
"I just wasn't left with a good feeling, like I would want to fix it for them," she said.
That's nice. You still have to fix your mistakes. You got PAID for it, and if it's wrong, you need to fix it.
She said the piece had been on display for four days before it was completed and viewed by city employees, architects, contractors and library officials. No one noticed the errors, she said.
"That proves that words are not the important part," she said. "The mural is supposed to lead people into discovering different parts of the world and its influences. This one has been detrimental."
It proves nothing of the sort. I doubt people go with a red pencil to look for errors in a mural. Probably they didn't even look that closely at it, which is why they didn't notice.
Maybe she's not a spoiled brat. But I still think she needs to grow up, and own up to her responsibility.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 11:51 pm (UTC)How on earth can you not be concerned when you realize you are spelling something wrong on a Library wall?
I can understand being upset about the nasty phone calls and not being invited to the opening, but she's acting like a five year old. You'd think she'd be embarrassed at her mistake and want to fix it as soon as it was noticed. Instead of dragging it out so more people notice.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 11:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 11:52 pm (UTC)The difference, though, is that the company could generally get another designer to edit the program (depending on how the contract is written up, I suppose). This piece of art is stuck with errors unless she allows them to take it down or she goes in to fix it.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-09 11:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 12:50 am (UTC)She's a downright evil person. She's waaaaay beyond spoiled.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:06 am (UTC)If I design a web site and I say "upon acceptance of this work, I get paid" and I deliver the site, and you look at it and say 'hey, GREAT, here's your money" ... then, you know, I'm not obligated to fix anything after that.
Once you ACCEPT it, further work is a further contract.
And she got too much shit from anti-art people on the Internet to feel like dealing with the entire mess (especially after the city dragged their feet on it, letting it sit in her studio for two years). Why can't she simply say "I'm going on with my life?"
The city should have looked at the artwork before it was installed. Duh. The time to make corrections was before it was set in stone (literally), not months down the road.
--K
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:08 am (UTC)--Kynn
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:15 am (UTC)No, she doesn't need to fix it. They accepted the work. Why can't she decide that it's not worth it to do further work for the city given all the big poopyheadedness?
I doubt people go with a red pencil to look for errors in a mural.
Apparently a lot of people do, or else she wouldn't be getting the attacks she's getting.
Probably they didn't even look that closely at it, which is why they didn't notice.
Then it's their fault, isn't it?
But I still think she needs to grow up, and own up to her responsibility.
By doing what? Continuing to hold on to what turned out to be a lousy deal anyway? She didn't enjoy working with the city, and she's got thousands of people around the world harassing her (not to mention calling her names on their livejournals). Why would she want to have anything to do with this again?
She completed it months ago. She got paid. Her work is done. Any further work is optional and is up to her. She's not contractually obligated to redo her work on demand.
And outraged Internet whoevers, with no connection to this case at all, have made her decide that it's not worth it. I can understand this myself.
--Kynn
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:18 am (UTC)Not inviting the artist to the opening is a deliberate snub. Why would she want to do further work for them?
You'd think she'd be embarrassed at her mistake and want to fix it as soon as it was noticed.
You realize that it's not as easy as just taking out an eraser, right?
She DID want to fix it, anyway. She changed her mind when judgmental people without all the facts on the matter started harassing her, calling her spoiled and evil, etc.
--Kynn
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 01:20 am (UTC)Because there's really not any other way that this could be "revenge," you know. First she created the artwork (and it sat for two years because the city wasn't getting off its duff), then she turned it over to them, then they had a grand opening and didn't invite her.
--Kynn
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 02:18 am (UTC)*There were plenty of people around during the installation who could and should have seen the missing and misplaced letters, she said. (http://www.kron4.com/Global/story.asp?S=2395577)
** The mistakes wouldn't even register with a true artisan, Alquilar said.
"The people that are into humanities, and are into Blake's concept of enlightenment, they are not looking at the words," she said. "In their mind the words register correctly." (http://www.kron4.com/Global/story.asp?S=2395577)
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 04:22 am (UTC)If, on the other hand, you submit a design for the site far in advance, and *it* is approved, then you submit actual sketches, and *they* are approved, and then you turn in a final version that has significant changes from the original versions, that weren't discussed with or agreed on by the client, then, yes, I'd say that there's a strong case for making you re-do the work. Hell, I'd sue the person who did that to me for a full refund.
According to the articles I've read, the original sketches submitted didn't contain any of these spelling errors. What was agreed on was that the artist would create a mural that looked like the sketches she'd submitted. The errors were discovered at the library's opening, according to the same articles. That was, quite likely, the first time that many city employees had looked closely at the mural--and why should it have been otherwise? Do you really think the city manager had nothing better to do with his or her time than to go baby sit an artist who can't get by without spell check? It is *not* reasonable to think that any city employees who happened to be around would (or should) have been proofreading her work. That was her responsibility.
You made a good point when you said in response to someone else's post that it's not as easy as taking out an eraser. It's not. Once the stone is laid, it's hard to get back up--which is exactly why this idiot should have paid more attention to what she was doing. She misspelled eleven names! ELEVEN! names! of some of the best known people in the world!
I disapprove of the harrassing telephone calls, I really do. But I would also like to point out that they didn't begin until after it was announced that she was going to be charging the city money to fix her own errors. She delivered a substandard product and has been whining ever since about how it's not really her fault, because people were mean to her and she got bad vibes from the city and they just didn't treat her right and spelling doesn't matter to the GOOD people anyway.
Eistein and Michelaangelo would be rolling in their graves, if there were any such people.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 05:45 am (UTC)She probably doesn't deserve the amount of shit she's getting, but she could still stand to be more graceful about it.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:50 am (UTC)I got the impression that the city originally just offered to pay her to fix it.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:54 am (UTC)They accepted the original version of the work, with correct spelling. This is not what they paid for, and not what they're likely to want in a library. Even if other people are being horribly terribly mean to you, you still need to act like an adult.
Then it's their fault, isn't it?
No, it's not. It is her fault for not being more careful with her work. Nobody stood with her as she worked and made her mess up. She did that, all on her own.
By doing what? Continuing to hold on to what turned out to be a lousy deal anyway? She didn't enjoy working with the city, and she's got thousands of people around the world harassing her (not to mention calling her names on their livejournals). Why would she want to have anything to do with this again?
By fixing her mistake. If I did something like that, I'd be embarassed to do anything other than give back what I'd been paid, end of it, and fix the work if that's what the city wants. That's why I'm mad at her, not because she messed up (big time) but because she doesn't grasp the concept of "fixing your mistakes", nor of "personal responsibility".
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:55 am (UTC)Besides, this isn't part of her art. Her original sketches had the names written correctly.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 07:57 am (UTC)Oh, she definitely doesn't, but that doesn't matter. No matter what other people do, you always have to be an adult. If you want to be a child, tough, because you can't.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 08:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 08:29 am (UTC)I guess that is the best argument that she should change it. If they paid her on the basis of those drawings she could be thought to owe them something...
But I'm a huge fan of Tracy Emin, who DOES put words that are incorrectly spelled in her wall hangings etc. because that is how SHE spells them. In her case I find it to be a part of the work as a whole...But they probably weren't commissioned in the same way.
It all sounds like a mess and I don't want to defend an idiot...But I do want to say that art isn't worth much consideration if it contains nothing of the artist. Perhaps the basic problem is that they chose unwisely when they chose her.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 09:03 am (UTC)I dunno. I think what gets me, mainly, is the feeling that she's in deep denial. Like, if she keeps saying loud enough that it doesn't matter, she'll convince everyone else, and it's really important to her that she convince everyone else.
When, really, it comes down to the same old thing: not everyone is going to like what you do even if you don't screw it up.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 09:04 am (UTC)It's a mural. Murals do tend to go on walls. Mural is often synonymous with "art-covered wall." It's very understandable to think it went up on a wall. I don't see how thinking it's on a wall affects one's opinion. If anything, it's worse knowing it's around the entrance, rather than some wall somewhere. The more prominent your work, the more you'd expect to check it carefully for errors.
Not that it justifies the horrid calls she received and the insults she got--I don't think she has a learning disability, I don't think she's evil. She's just acting immaturely.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-10 09:07 am (UTC)Also, some web designers do agree beforehand that they will continue to make changes after the site is up; it does depend on the contract.