Is that the sculpture that falls on you and traps your hand so that you have to saw it off?

If it didn't have those support wedges showing, I'd totally love it.

Maybe it's because I've been remodeling my place by myself for the last 6 months and I've become hyper-aware of all the shoddy workmanship I can't not see around me... but those grey braces just keep pulling my eyes back to them, reminding me the boulder isn't precarious and limiting me from imagining some spectacular occurrence where this could have all happened naturally. Instead I see cranes, and t-squares, and liability insurance forms.

I do like the lacma in general, for what it's worth.

Reminds me of this:
File:Lions-Gate-Mycenae.jpg">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lions-…

@3 Derp.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycenae

@2 I'm with you, with out those braces it would be MUCH better.

The transportation (via 196-wheeler at 7mph) of that big rock took a few days and was covered on the local news here in Los Angeles..."it's going through Anaheim now." Rec'd a lot of free publicity (I guess it was free) and arrived at LACMA already a celebrity.

It seems to me that you have to accept the "price tag and media spectacle" in the first place. If we are going to talk about the work in those terms, we should think about and define them.

To me, I could care less how much someone spends to ship a rock. I've seen enough $150k+ cars in Bellevue to not care about money. Jay-Z brags about buying a $250k watch. Who cares what people decide to do with their money (or other people's money). The "price tag" is not relevant to me.

The "media spectacle" is another thing I will not hold myself to. Sure, we all read an article or two (or more) that made it all the way back to the lowest common denominators of publishing about the rock. Guess what, so did Kim Kardashian's divorce (and to a much more significant degree). I don't thing taking this trip really qualifies you for anything but wide exposure. It certainly doesn't make your art piece better.

So I am going to respectfully reject these foundations for a conversation about the piece. I'm not accusing anyone of saying "we have to talk about the piece in these terms" either; I'm just saying, to me, the "price tag and media spectacle" are not relevant.

With that aside, I totally agree the braces are unfortunate but I would consider going slightly out of my way to see if it I were in the neighborhood. The main thing I like about it is that Easter Island/Stonehedge vibe of "fuck you nature we'll do what we want", but then again those dudes used ropes and trees or whatever. I'm sure hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of modern equipment and professionals were involved putting that rock there, and that takes away from it to me.

And Jen, the troll in me is coming out, and I have to wonder: How differently would you feel if the rock was sitting at our Olympic Sculpture Park? Maybe I misread (and I know I haven't read enough about the piece), but I'm getting the vibe you aren't a fan.

If you want to see a naturally-occurring version of this, go down by Mount St. Helens, hike through the "Ape Cave" and look at the "meatball." It's not as big a rock, but it's cool, no media spectacle, and no sunscreen required.

(At least a couple of good flashlights and a warm jacket ARE required. It's dark and cold down there, all day, every day.)

Hmm, a big rock held over a pedestrian path in earthquake country. What could possibly go wrong?

Big rock or not, you should definitely go see the La Brea Tar Pits.

I fail to get any kind of levitation vibe out of this. Looks a lot like a couple of concrete bearing walls with heavy duty brackets holding a rock that was hoisted up by a huge crane. And the magical part is what?

@11 It's like a Chihuly. When you label it "art," the magical part is that it ceases to be stupid and becomes really expensive.

This makes me think of "On, Near, and Beside", or whatever name was given to those three pairs of stone slabs down near the waterfront here in Seattle. However, this looks like some actual thought was put into it. It doesn't make me swoon, but at least the first thought that comes to mind viewing this isn't "waste of tax dollars," as in the other piece.

Nora Ephron is dying and all you can think about is rocks? You're fucking crazy.

Adjacent, Against, Upon (1976), also By Michael Heizer, sits just north of Pier 70. In context, it's worth another look.

I live 400 yards from this sculpture, and lately, when I stand on the corner of 6th and Fairfax (after I've bought a bottle of dishwashing soap or some La Barata brand batteries at the 99cent Market on the other side of the intersection) I simply slap myself in the forehead and wonder what the trustees of LACMA were thinking. Perhaps: "let's put something in this space that is a monumental waste of money...something that reminds us of Eli Broad's taste and style."

[FYI, Eli Broad is LA's most famous "gotta hate-em" billionaire. He had LACMA's board build an open patio in '08, ostensibly to exhibit his Koons puppy dog (you know, those chingalavista metallic balloon sculptures). Well, Broad put his doggy on the patio for a whopping two weeks (guarded round the clock by two security officers), took a shit load of publicity pictures and then promptly pulled his $4,000,000 piece of chrome. What a douche...you think he ever genuinely intended for the sculpture to be out in a public space where everyone could enjoy it?]

The fuckers could have put in a beautiful sculpture garden with a lot of foliage into this two acre site, but instead made an expensive eye sore that simply creates a lot of glare and reminds me of my childhood squinting in the Arizona desert.

@12--Excellent analogy.
@15--I agree, it's definitely grown on me over the years.

@9 Newsflash--Engineers working in earthquake country are highly skilled in designing for "what could possibly go wrong".

There was a Skyspace Bouncyhouse?? And I friggen missed it!!

@15: Ah, that was it. Thank you. I'll look it up and give it another look if I'm in that neighborhood again.