But Is It Art?

I'm a dues-paying member of the Birmingham Arts Alliance, but I'm no artiste. So maybe I'm not seeing how in the world a big honkin' billboard can be a "Random Act of Art." I liked the whole RAA concept, except the billboards, and here's why: billboards are inherently blighting. No matter what is on them, they are a visual assault - basically grabbing you by the throat and yelling "look at me!" So if you're promoting the arts and using a medium that makes a community look worse, is it really art?

Here's another point: the billboard isn't even a work of art! If it was just a giant painting with maybe the title and the artist's name, you could at least argue that it's no different from any other public art. But when you slap a big "surprise!" on it, and when you have to tell people it's art, then it's not art, it's an advertisement for art. There's a difference.

I don't think any arts group should be putting its name on billboards. There are better ways to market and promote the Cultural Alliance and all the arts groups. "Cool Cities" don't have billboards cluttering up the skyline, and cool arts groups and venues don't serve as enablers for the uglifiers.

What do you think?