A&E

Digital DNA, Go Mama voted out

Art Commission opts to remove sculptures from city's collection

The Public Art Commission voted on Nov. 16, 2017 to remove the Digital DNA sculpture from Lytton Plaza in downtown Palo Alto. Photo by Veronica Weber.

Digital DNA, the 7-foot-tall egg-shaped sculpture made of computer circuit boards installed in Lytton Plaza, will be removed from the city's public-art collection, the Public Art Commission voted unanimously Thursday night, after a report from city staff made the case that the piece is damaged, made of materials unsuitable for outdoor installation and too costly to keep restoring.

Artist Adriana Varella, who's started a crowdfunding campaign to fund restoration and possible rehoming of the piece, counters that the city is actually set on getting rid of the sculpture because of the way the piece encourages reflection upon the darker side of technology.

Varella's attorney requested that the vote be rescheduled for a time when Varella could be present, while two members of the Raging Grannies, a social-justice and activism group, spoke in favor of keeping Digital DNA, including Ruth Robertson, who read a statement on behalf of the artist and the recently formed Friends of Digital DNA group. The statement was written from the point of view of the sculpture itself, and in particular accuses the commission of purposely scheduling the deaccession vote on a date in which Varella was unable to attend, and of censoring art for political reasons.

"The real reason there is a push to remove me is not my state, but instead my content — the political message embedded in me which talks about how our modern technology can enslave us," according to the statement. "When a Public Art Commission starts using tricks of process and bureaucracy to facilitate removal of art for political reasons, it stops being an art commission, and becomes a censorship committee."

Robertson handed out printed photos of a new piece Varella is currently exhibiting in New York that includes photos and biographies of members of the art commission and identifies them as the "Censorship Committee of Palo Alto."

According to the statement, "I was designed to be in the heart of Palo Alto from its conception. I inspired the Twitter egg, and have become a focal point for gatherings in Lytton Plaza. Removing me from this location will rob my message of contextual meaning and be a desecration."

The statement also accuses the city of not allowing enough time for public awareness and comment about the deaccession, although Palo Alto Public Art Director Elise deMarzo noted that it had been a topic of discussion at numerous previous meetings.

"The city of Palo Alto has really tried to find a solution. I do believe the piece is deteriorating and we aren't able to maintain it in a good state for the public to be around it," Commissioner Loren Gordon said.

The big egg is not the only maternity-symbol-sculpture on the chopping block. Marta Thoma's Go Mama, currently located on California Avenue, will likely soon be gone, as the commission voted on deaccession for it as well. The piece, a figure with a doll-like head and a baby's face in its midsection, was originally commissioned at a time when "public art didn't have to go through so strenuous a process as it does now," deMarzo said, noting that the piece has become unstable and structurally unsound, and damaged by years of people climbing and spilling food on it, especially after the California Avenue streetscape redesign. The city, she said, "cannot guarantee the safety of the piece."

Deaccessioned artwork may be returned to the artist at the artist's expense, sold or donated by the city, or destroyed.

---

Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

52 people like this
Posted by Sunny
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 17, 2017 at 10:11 am

I love the egg and will be very sad to see it go. I'm sure there's a way to redo it so that it is not toxic - perhaps coat the different components with a protective coating or place the entire egg under plexiglass, or something. It's the only public work of art in Palo Alto that I actually like.


55 people like this
Posted by Joan Hancock
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:06 pm

The digital egg seemed so appropriate at the center of Silicon Valley. It was a handsome landmark that everyone understood. As for Go Mama we're relieved to see this gimmicky pointless, ugly piece of bronze removed.


17 people like this
Posted by Longtime Resident
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:07 pm

Why can't an art piece here be donated back to an artist so that another community may enjoy the work? Why would the city sell, donate or destroy a decommissioned piece, but to give it back to an artist requires that the artist pay for it? Is it really true that artists need to pay for their own work? Is it a nominal expense, or will City Hall gouge an artist?

When art pieces were installed in Palo Alto, it was with the understanding that it would be at a certain location for years, and as part of a growing collection that were all approved by past art commissions. Only Foreign Friends was a problem, back then.

About the selections of public art, let's remember that over the years, numerous commissioners resigned, due to being undermined by people with different opinions about the art they wanted to see, like Monday Morning Quarterbacks that had no skin in the game.

It was difficult to find men and women to serve as art commissioners in Palo Alto back then. Several never served out their terms, resigning from frustration and the lack of appreciation by the city and the public, for all the time they spent.

Palo Alto is not like Los Altos, where public art is mostly on loan to the city, and for a period of time that could become years, and then given back to the artist to do whatever he/she wants with it, such as the horse that could be seen from Foothill Expressway by Main Street at the park.

All of the above was reported in the newspaper, when it was news. Let's not forget history.


62 people like this
Posted by Don
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:26 pm


Go Mama: send it to the shredder


14 people like this
Posted by Member
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:27 pm

It seems you have to. protect our public art from the public. Put the egg in a glass egg carton.


47 people like this
Posted by DT dweller
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:32 pm

Go Mama I never liked. I really like the egg though must admit had no idea it was any kind of political statement. I think it is pretty and appropriate for silicon valley


51 people like this
Posted by I like that egg.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:35 pm

I like that egg. is a registered user.

Glad to see "Go Mama" go.

The egg, however, is one I liked very much. I was rather hoping they might be able to repair and coat it and find a home under a roof for it--maybe under one of the Cubberley eaves at an entry point where the breezeway ceilings are high and there is lots of space for viewing?

Sad to lose that art.


7 people like this
Posted by Marking the art community at Cubberley?
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:36 pm

Marking the art community at Cubberley? is a registered user.

It would be a nice addition to the exterior spaces near the art studio community that is there.


9 people like this
Posted by Sigh...
a resident of Palo Verde
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:43 pm

I won't miss the egg, but I like the "what?" that Go Mama invokes, each time I see it. I'll miss it.


17 people like this
Posted by Vlad Teichberg
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:53 pm

Watching the livestream and speaking to the the commenters that tried to speak to the art commission about the decommissioning, it felt that the commission did not really let their voice be heard, refused to engage in dialogue and basically rammed through the proposals without talking to the community.

This is something to think about - it seems the city administration and relevant organs are not working for citizens of Palo Alto, but rather for the moneyed interests who are trying to control the city.

This is evident in not just how the public art debate is handled, but also in how they are going about evicting semi-homeless people living in RVs in east Palo Alto.

I think we should start thinking of creating a coalition that addresses this fundamental problem.

Should we organize a full on occupation of Lytton Square? bring the voiceless from East Palo Alto to the center?

This is how Zuccotti started, and you basically have an attempt by the government to erase the memory of a hope for a more equal city. Digital DNA came to be as result of huge protests in 2005 against gentrification...

think about it.

If you want to get involved, join the Friends of Digital DNA group mentioned in this article.


22 people like this
Posted by Elizabeth
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 17, 2017 at 1:03 pm

I've given up on trying to understand the minds that manage our city.

Go Mama, weirded me out at first, but I've come to love it and will miss its presence.

Loved the egg...awesome piece totally appropriate for our area.

No doubt they (the governing parties) have been enticed by other deep pockets so the community looses again.

Not surprised. They'll always do extensive studies to prove their neutrality and then do what they damn well please because they've got the power, but not the integrity.


8 people like this
Posted by So Sad
a resident of Community Center
on Nov 17, 2017 at 1:25 pm

Another voice that is sad that the egg will not grace our public space. Perhaps a similar piece could be commissioned that would solve the tactical and logistical problems identified with the current iteration.

The idea/concept of the piece is absolutely perfect for our community.


54 people like this
Posted by Midlander
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 17, 2017 at 1:31 pm

Midlander is a registered user.

I am really glad that both these pieces are going.

Go Mama in particular is strikingly ugly.

The sentiment that art should be "striking" or "provocative" may be OK for art where one can encounter it and move it on, but for public art where people have to walk by the same darn thing every day for years, then "provocative" is no longer good enough.


45 people like this
Posted by Brian
a resident of Menlo Park
on Nov 17, 2017 at 1:39 pm

"the city is actually set on getting rid of the sculpture because of the way the piece encourages reflection upon the darker side of technology."

Not even close. How about the fact that it is expensive to maintain and is ugly? I think those count for more than trying to misdirect people with the falsehood that the darker side of technology is to blame.


13 people like this
Posted by Judith Wasserman
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Nov 17, 2017 at 3:01 pm

Judith Wasserman is a registered user.

Before commenting, one might read the conditions for deaccessioning public art. They specifically state "review shall be deliberate and independent of political pressures, fluctuations in artistic taste, popularity and public opinion." In other words, "I don't like it" is not a criterion.

The conditions for deaccessioning include: excessive maintenance, threats to public safety (e.g., it may fall on someone), damage or deterioration of the artwork, etc. There are 13 conditions, none which can be interpreted as an aesthetic consideration.

So, if you think it can be repaired and maintained, let us know how.


9 people like this
Posted by Simone kaplan
a resident of another community
on Nov 17, 2017 at 3:09 pm

What is happening to this art piece is a “crime” against art and a public disrespect to the artist and the community of Palo Alto.

I do agree with the idea that there’s censorship happening on the behalf of the committee. It seems like that this committee is not really made of informed and trained art specialists who can truly weight the pos and cons of this piece and its historical impact in the community, nor can they make a educated decision about the future of the work.

I hope the community of Palo Alto, a wealthy one that has supported the arts thoughtout decades, will find the means to make sure the piece stays as it is and where it is when commissioned, and that the city and private sectors will provide the financial means to support its restauration and maintenance. It’s a beautiful work and t should be cherish now and the years to come.


51 people like this
Posted by Old Palo Alto
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2017 at 3:36 pm

So relieved that Go Mama will be taken away at last. We cross the street to avoid looking at this perverse and ugly sculpture.


10 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 17, 2017 at 4:23 pm

Art in my opinion is something that should give the onlooker cause to ponder, to wonder, to provoke emotions and be pleasing. As with so much public art, it can memorialize a time in history. I tend to think the Digital Egg does all of these things and I am sorry that it may have been given a death sentence. I would imagine that if a piece by Da Vinci was in need of repair or causing toxic something or other, a cure would be found. The trouble with contemporary art is that if it is always being destroyed there won't be 20/21 century pieces for future generations to enjoy and to treasure.


17 people like this
Posted by Member
a resident of another community
on Nov 17, 2017 at 4:41 pm

In addition, this is a public work. It stands for over a decade. It seems to me that this current commission formed by women who have absolutely no authority to judge what art is and what an artwork represents to the community is doing everything they can to remove it, destroyed it, instead of putting their energy in restoring it and guaranteeing its longevity.

As most of the public art stands, it is the responsibility of the commissioner to maintain it. That said, someone's argument above "The conditions for deaccessioning include excessive maintenance, threats to public safety (e.g., it may fall on someone), damage or deterioration of the artwork, etc. There are 13 conditions, none which can be interpreted as an aesthetic consideration" should not be taken into consideration as an argument to get rid of the piece. Who commissioned it? Was it a gift of the artist to the city or was it a commission?

As excessive maintenance goes, there are many amazing fabricators in the area who could easily figure out a, effective and long-lasting solution to repair the artwork. We do live in a culture of disposal‚ if one thing doesn't quite work properly as before, we don't fix it, we put on the sidewalk as garbage. I hope this event around the "egg" will also allow the city to re-evaluate their own values.


I truly hope the community organize themselves to protect the integrity of the work. It is a beautiful piece, as many have shared before. Beyond aesthetics, the "egg" is a meaningful work as well, created to make one's imagination wonder and reflect about the impact of technology in our daily lives. All these qualities make the work powerful. It is a shame that some believe that it is not relevant to the community and excuses are being made to get rid of it.


39 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 17, 2017 at 5:47 pm

Ms Varella sold her creation years ago. She got her money. She's done with it. She should can her sour grapes and leave 'em in their cans.

Or...she could buy it back and resell it on the collector's market for a maybe huge profit. If da Vinci can do it centuries after he died, why can't Ms Varella do likewise while she's very much alive and kicking.


"Go Mama, weirded me out at first, but I've come to love it and will miss its presence."

I bet you can buy it at a very good price if you act right now, cash and carry.


22 people like this
Posted by Sad
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 17, 2017 at 8:16 pm

It detracts from the quality of life when people‘s values and sentiments are not taking into consideration. It makes one feel is if something is being done to you instead of with or for you.

Frankly, there have been so many decisions lately that have little by little made living in Palo Alto less pleasant. For example, monster houses, draining the water table to build basements, high-rise buildings, dangerous blockades that narrow the streets making it dangerous for kids to bike on the street (Ross Road), chopping down all of the beautiful trees on California Avenue, and now taking down a piece of art that is meaningful to the community.

I find this level of insensitivity to the values of the people who live here to be frustrating, maddening and disrespectful.


35 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2017 at 8:24 pm

A lot of "art" is simply ugly toxic trash.
Get rid of it along with other rusting metal art located throughout this city.
Make the artist pay to remove it and recycle it.
Stop spending our money on this stuff, PLEASE


14 people like this
Posted by Dave
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 17, 2017 at 10:45 pm

Did any of the people opposed to removing the Egg read the actual report in the link? The Egg was installed in 2005 after its completion by Adrianna Varella, stored offsite for about a year during the 2008-2009 rebuild of the plaza, and by 2011 was already in need of restoration, which the Varella was willing to perform for the low low price of $82,400. The city was unwilling to spend that kind of money in order to maintain the piece for only a few years.

Any new protective coating applied to the statue has lasted less than 6 months. Over the 11 years it's been in place, it's cost over $11k in major repairs as well as countless minor fixups by regular city crews, and it's still in a pretty sad state of disrepair. A number of alternate sites were surveyed but no takers found. The group that funded the Lytton plaza rebuild constantly complains to the city that it's falling apart.

While you may like the piece, and be sad it's being removed, that doesn't mean the people approving that decision are doing so for nefarious reasons. The regular drumbeat that 1) Palantir is bothered by this statue and wants it gone or 2) even if they did, that anybody on the art commission cares what Palantir thinks is completely unfounded. Personally, while I appreciate the piece and its message, I'm realistic about what it takes to build art that can survive the elements and I look forward to see what other artwork for these locations the city can sponsor with the funds saved.


9 people like this
Posted by cvvhrn
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 18, 2017 at 2:01 pm

cvvhrn is a registered user.

So I liked the egg and disliked Mama. But one of the functions of art is to get people talking and sometimes polarizing art does just that.

On the other hand, I would also love to see new art featured in locations. These installations should not be considered a "lifetime" placement in one location or another.

Also, while I 100% support artistic freedom, if an installation is going to be outdoors, then the design should reflect the realities of weather, wear and tear, etc.


8 people like this
Posted by cvvhrn
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 18, 2017 at 2:22 pm

cvvhrn is a registered user.

I just wanted to add I went to the fundraising site.

Its perplexing that she wanted 82K a few years ago to restore it but now wants 15K to both restore and relocate. Thats a huge difference. Also they are not going to make it. They have raised $507 of the amount to this point with 20 hours to barring some angel investor


5 people like this
Posted by context
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 18, 2017 at 5:46 pm

@Judith Wasserman - "before commenting one might
read the rules for deaccessioning public art".
Yeah, and I also read the goals and purposes
of the ARB to "promote orderly and harmonious
development" and "visual environments which are
considerate of each other" as I walked by
The Cheesecake Factory on University Avenue.




32 people like this
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 18, 2017 at 8:27 pm

Somehow, I feel compelled to state once again how much I have disliked the hideous Go Mama.
We Can Do Better.
(With our public art dollars)


5 people like this
Posted by stanhutchings
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 19, 2017 at 8:52 pm

stanhutchings is a registered user.

My recommendation: make a VR recording of all the art around Palo Alto, including the Rodin sculptures at Stanford, and make them available for Free online, and DVDs for sale to the world. That way, those who appreciate them can enjoy them and everyone else can ignore them.


10 people like this
Posted by Varth
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 20, 2017 at 1:40 pm

I, for one, would be fine seeing “Rrrrun!” go with them.


10 people like this
Posted by Andy
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Nov 20, 2017 at 2:59 pm

I liked Digital DNA and especially enjoyed looking at the various boards and analyzing what they might have been. I think it was very suitable for Palo Alto. However there is little question that the artwork needed protection from the elements, and after reading the article I went down to take another look and it definitely is in need of work.

This piece would actually be a potential fit for the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, although it is heavy on the PCB (printed circuit board, not the chemical).


6 people like this
Posted by the_punnisher
a resident of Mountain View
on Nov 20, 2017 at 8:24 pm

the_punnisher is a registered user.

Sigh. Evergreen, CO handles this issue by having " rotating sculptures " that can be relocated every 6 months or so. Commonly made mounting points that allow the sculptures to be seen throughout Evergreen. Heck, I can build a copy; I have plenty of old circuit boards in storage from upgraded equipment.
An easy solution ( pun intended )is to spray a clear, conformal coating over the " egg ". You rocket scientist can come up with the answer. The proper coat discourages both vandals and the weather. I'm surprised this was not thought of before the censorship began.


5 people like this
Posted by stanhutchings
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 21, 2017 at 12:03 am

stanhutchings is a registered user.

I wish they would spend the money on more universally enjoyable art, like the art work in the California Ave Caltrain underpass. And interactive art in the parks and playgrounds.


26 people like this
Posted by thank the lord that scary baby head will be gone
a resident of Southgate
on Nov 21, 2017 at 8:10 am

That hideous baby head in a scary doll thing is the worst piece of public art in America today. It is frightening to small children. I am so happy it is being removed.


16 people like this
Posted by Sue Robins
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 21, 2017 at 9:10 am

Wish Palo Alto planted Valley Oaks instead of Art made of concrete, metal and glass.


14 people like this
Posted by Gus L.
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 22, 2017 at 7:52 am

Thanks for getting rid of those eyesores, Now stop spending money on Doo
Doo art and get rid of the ugly RV's on our streets.


14 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 pm

This is a start in the right direction.
Can we do something about getting rid of that car with legs now?
As you can see from this post dated in 2006 - our community has suffered long enough.
People wanted a lot of this "art" removed.
And when a city has too much "art" it actually begins to look like TRASH.

Web Link


8 people like this
Posted by Dangerous blockades on Ross Road
a resident of another community
on Nov 23, 2017 at 4:14 pm

"... blockades that narrow the streets making it dangerous for kids to bike on the street (Ross Road)" — Sad, above.

^ ^ ^ Off topic but agree 100 percent.

The blockades are also potentially dangerous to drivers. I have barely missed accidentally hitting the blockades during several nights of the last week, although I am a habitually slow driver. The nighttime visibility in the areas where the blockades are located is poor.

To me, the blockades appear to be a solution in search of a problem.

* * *

"This piece would actually be a potential fit for the Computer History Museum in Mountain View." — Andy, also above.

Good suggestion. I will miss seeing the egg at Lytton Plaza.


9 people like this
Posted by Nearby resident
a resident of Ventura
on Nov 23, 2017 at 8:52 pm

So glad to see "Go Mama" go.


2 people like this
Posted by Larry
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 24, 2017 at 12:31 pm

The egg is a wonderful art piece. Give it a couple of coats of polyurethane, a placard to explain it and let it stay. It gets a lot of up close attention and has some meaning and artistic value. I hate to think of what they would replace it with.


Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 24, 2017 at 2:23 pm

According to the Merc, this may lead to Court. Web Link


8 people like this
Posted by History Buff
a resident of another community
on Nov 24, 2017 at 2:56 pm

Varella has been indulged long enough. The egg has cost taxpayers way too much money. Check out this article from 2011:

... Varella called for complete and urgent restoration of the sculpture based on continued exposure to the sun, rain and human touch. Producer Alex Lage of Ringo Films would sponsor the entire refurbishment process, which would cost $82,400 -- more than eight times the sculpture's original price. In return, Lage asked for a plaque recognizing Ringo Films' support.

The commission has supported multiple restorations of the sculpture in the past, paying to replace circuit boards and recoat the egg in protective resin. In 2010, the commission doubled the maintenance budget for the sculpture and denied the artist's request to "gold plate" the egg.

Web Link


5 people like this
Posted by Mark Weiss
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 24, 2017 at 6:24 pm

It might be interesting to replace the egg with a 20-foot granite boulder like in Michael Heizer's "Levitated Mass" Even for a day or two.


2 people like this
Posted by Eggo
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 25, 2017 at 12:43 pm

Whereas the statue belong to the city the intelectual property of the statue remains with the artist who created it and the purpose for which was created-for public display.
That is the legal standard.

Those who are in charge of public art should be required to have a modicum knowledge of the matter. If they don't their decision is a matter of personal taste and should be put to a popular vote.


4 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 26, 2017 at 1:52 pm

I always wonder when the word "censorship" is used in this context. It is an extremely broad use of the word, requiring me to read the junk mail someone sends, listen to the autodialed phone calls, and peruse every free newspaper that someone leaves on the train. A kind of "censorship" I suppose -- where a committee decides what public art we have, and, we ourselves listen to and read some things and not others, because there is not time or space for everything written by someone or conceived by some artist.

I prefer the stricter definition of censorship myself: "the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security." By that definition, nothing is being censored, just de-prioritized.

It makes sense to me that public art generally be conservative and unobjectionable, and leave more radical expressions to private buildings and collections.


1 person likes this
Posted by MyNameHere
a resident of University South
on Nov 26, 2017 at 2:28 pm

"Deaccession"? Is that even a word? Why don't they just say "remove" or "recycle" instead? I like the egg, and hope it stays. It doesn't look like it is falling apart. Is this being done simply to replace the egg with someone else's artwork?

""The city of Palo Alto has really tried to find a solution. I do believe the piece is deteriorating and we aren't able to maintain it in a good state for the public to be around it," Commissioner Loren Gordon said."

That sounds like hogwash to me. The egg presents no obvious danger to life and limb that I can see. How much can it cost to fix a bunch of glued together circuit boards? The city is complaining about cost? Seems rather strange.

Is there any way for the citizens of Palo Alto to vote to deaccession the Public Art Commission? Why not let the people vote on what stays and what goes?


2 people like this
Posted by musical
a resident of Palo Verde
on Nov 26, 2017 at 2:57 pm

"It is frightening to small children." I often sit under Go Mama during the Sunday Farmers Market (particularly on nicer mornings than today) and all the passing toddlers seem mesmerized by this piece rather than frightened. Other artistic endeavors on Cal Ave are largely ignored if noticed at all. But perhaps the response is analogous to adults being mesmerized by a car-wreck.


4 people like this
Posted by Let it go
a resident of Stanford
on Nov 26, 2017 at 3:01 pm

I never liked this piece, but acknowledge that my view may be in the minority. I am a philosopher and have worked ten years in the semiconductor industry and twenty in systems built with them.

This piece always makes me think someone is encouraging its audience to be lazy.

“You don’t have to understand anything about semiconductor technology, how it’s used or how it’s developed, or the meaning of the technology in our lives, economy, military, or politics, or how any of this is growing or changing over time.

“You can just put together a bunch of pc boards or other artifacts somehow representing semiconductors or technology in general into a shape, and the meaning from that is just as valid, or more valid, than careful thought and understanding of the engineering, business, or ethics of the industry.

“The propeller heads inside the industry don’t know or care how their technology affects us. But we artists and others outside get it!

“And we don’t know for sure but it looks clean, and surely no chemicals can leak out of this.”


Like this comment
Posted by cvvhrn
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 30, 2017 at 10:32 am

cvvhrn is a registered user.

@MyNameHere

The artist who created the egg wanted over $80K a few years ago just to restore the piece. That seems like a bit of a cash grab to me. Also, again if its outdoor artwork, the artist should also take that into account. As much as I don't care for Go Mama, its artist took that reality into account when creating it.

This and other pieces were never meant to be lifetime emplacements.


Like this comment
Posted by Exem
a resident of Meadow Park
on Nov 30, 2017 at 1:04 pm

I love Go Mama. The Egg really never did anything for me.
Want to talk about just silly? Body of the Urban Myth over on Sheridan.


5 people like this
Posted by @ Let it Go
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 30, 2017 at 6:24 pm

@ Let it Go. Right on!

I am not sure you are in the minority. Personally, I was actually quite turned off when I learned what the intent of that sculpture was, from the words of the artist. In short, it appears that the "artist" is yet another one of those people, who apparently has no clue about technology, but is gravitating around the wealth generated by technology in the hope to acquire some of that wealth by sending "messages" of moral superiority...


2 people like this
Posted by Old Palo Alto California St
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jan 28, 2018 at 2:15 pm

So WHEN will these sculptures be removed?
The decision was made in November 2017.
It is now January 2018.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Why is it becoming increasingly impossible to open a restaurant on the Peninsula?
By Elena Kadvany | 27 comments | 5,099 views

Firing Judge Persky as a tennis coach was a big mistake
By Diana Diamond | 23 comments | 2,830 views

Electric Buses: A case study
By Sherry Listgarten | 3 comments | 2,185 views

It just takes time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 563 views

Helping Partners Become Couples (vs. Helping Couples Become Partners)
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 463 views

 

PRICE INCREASES MONDAY

On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Register now