I live right down the street from it. It is ugly and a waste of my tax dollars. I would have preferred a bench and trash can or something just as useful. It's 30,000 that could have been used for something better then "art"

Great, another ugly piece of crap that Rockville wasted money on. Remember the horrible whatever-it-was on the corner of Falls Rd and Wootton Parkway? When I first moved in, I thought it was a partially-completed attempt at Noah's Ark by the church next door, no doubt awaiting more fund-raising, but I was outraged to learn it was a $44,000 (back in the 80s, no less) waste of funds by the City of Rockville. It's gone now, unlike real art that would have stood the test of time. Here we go again...

What an absolute waste of money, and it's ugly to boot! Totally out of line with the rest of the area. What in the heck were they thinking????

It doesn't look ugly to me. I haven't seen in person; I wonder how many commenting here have. I look forward to doing so and seeing the Channel 11 piece. This was fully vetted by the neighborhood association and the city's various review boards, including the mayor and council at public meetings. I suggest folks get more involved in the process before casting aspersions on other people's views.

Public funding of the arts is important. As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Use voluntary contributions to fund "art", that way those who want it can pay for it and thus demonstrate their true commitment to enhancing the arts. As for my tax dollars use them, in this time of austerity (?) in Rockville, for say cleaning up the neighborhood drug problems and thus make a real difference on more than one corner.

Rockville’s public art is not funded with tax dollars. It is for the most part funded with developer money (we make them spend it there, so they will have none left over to contribute to political campaigns ;-)

Definitely an interesting, educational (and even witty) discussion here. So, what made this so attractive to some, and so ugly to others? What does it say about our community?

@Theresa
"@Jeff, The people who picked it through a competitive process didn't think it was ugly."

That's fine Theresa, doesn't make it any less "unattractive" knowing that though.

Just because a group of folks say they like something, doesn't mean everybody also has to like it. I have no problem with their opinions, I have a problem with the physical object that was "plunked" down on that spot.

Now I will have to "wear blinders" everyday as I pass by, because it's so hideous :))

Jeff, what I am getting at is that there was a consensus process in its selection. In your opinion, those individuals failed and picked something ugly. All I am getting it is that YOU don't like it. Knowing other people liked it doesn't make it less attractive to you.

Maybe it can serve some other purpose beyond being attractive. Art can be educational, provocative, inspiring, enraging, engaging, etc. Maybe the messages it carries were ones the neighborhood association considered valuable.

Maybe if you heard the artist talk about it you'd feel differently. Who knows?

Contrary to Piotr's statement, much of the art in Rockville is funded with our tax dollars.
Rockville's Art in Public Places program is funded through two City sources and welcomes working with private partnerships.
The "Works of Art in Public Places" project requires the setting aside of $1 per capita in the City's Capital Improvements Program for the commission or acquisition of art to be owned and maintained by the City that is installed in publicly accessible locations.
The "Incorporation of Works of Art in Public Architecture" ordinance requires that one percent of the construction cost of City of Rockville construction projects be set aside for works of art.

This $30,000 piece was funded by the special activity fund within Parks and Rec. It was a controversial piece from the start, and not many in East Rockville were in favor of it. It was not a unanimous choice by M&C, and the selection process caused a temporary rift between East Rockville and Lincoln Park.
My two cents worth...it is not great art.

Good statements all around, Doug. Thank you.

I remember the first time I was in the Mayor and Council chambers, and I was almost completely preoccupied with two sets of images. First, I was delighted by the framed quilted pictures on the wall; as a quilter, I was tremendously happy that quilted art had been commissioned, and those pictures are beautiful and appropriate for the room. On the other hand, when I sat down and faced the dais, I was mesmerized by how hideous and weird I found the city seal, particularly the images of the two creatures, which looked like giant beavers with BDSM chains around their necks. The city seal looks OK on a smaller scale, like on letterhead paper and the city website, but when it's blown up to a large scale it just looks bizarre to me.

By the same token, I have strong reactions to flags. I think that the Maryland state flag is one of the ugliest ones in the USA, way too "busy" and too many colors. On the other hand, I like the county and Rockville city flags.

I haven't seen the structure in question. From the photograph here it doesn't look like something that would appeal to me, but it doesn't look hideous. As the daughter and stepdaughter of professional fine artists, I learned a long time ago to tread cautiously in critiquing art.

CP
Regarding the "Origami Made of Steel" - Now I get It.
Manual orange juicer: http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=manual+orange+juicer&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=iWJ&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&prmd=imvns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=999&bih=840&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=17145333647371567256&sa=X&ei=bVKET8y-EuXA0QGs8JG8Bw&ved=0CH0Q8wIwAg .

I have to say it has been there a while now and it still hasn't "grown on me". I find it unattractive and pointless. I think it is an embarrassment to the neighborhood I live in. I think the location is a perfect place to make a good impression and an opportunity that was missed. It wasn’t even a local artist, at least if it were then the case could be made that the arts program in the city was supporting local artist. Is there anything that says art can’t be functional and still be art?

http://www.angusross.co.uk/index.html
http://www.mendenhallstudio.com/walt/images/PA-MapleLeafBench_lrg.jpg