This morning I was
re-watching a documentary, “Empire of the Tsars”, and was once again wowed by
what I was seeing. Though the documentary is about the tsars of Russia and not
about Russian art or architecture, the film shows the narrator walking in and
among some amazing sights.
Walls completely painted
top to ceiling in golden images. Not sure if this was at the monastery the
first tsar came from, or the private chapel of the last tsar. Maybe both.
St. Basil’s Cathedral, in
Red Square, looking like a fairytale crossed with an Easter egg. (Have I
mentioned that my house interior is pale green, pale yellow, aqua, and peach?
There used to be some pink, too, till my daughter got older and repainted her
room jungle green. Now it’s lavender, and entirely in keeping with the rest of
the house.)
The Peterhof palace, with
its fountains and gilt… lots and lots of gilt. (Have I mentioned my fondness
for shiny things?)
And many other impressive
buildings, with lots of golden trim, ornate carving, and so on.
On the one hand, I was
deeply impressed with this reminder of what human beings can create. On the
other hand, I was reluctantly reminded that many impressive and beautiful
things have been built at great cost to a lot of ordinary people.
But it doesn’t have to be so, does it? We can have
interesting things to look at without being horrible to people, can’t we?
Inlaid linoleum in Indianapolis |
And so I want to say a
few words in praise of the art on display in airports. I really like airport
art. Silver trees spreading their branches up to the ticketing floor, delicate
translucent jellyfish hovering above a concessions area, colored linoleum
inlaid into pictures underfoot, and giant “marble” machines where balls clank
their way past flags, down funnels, ring bells, and then come to rest on a ski
lift for balls, being gently raised so they can start all over again.
I like art in public
places generally, but airports seem a particularly good spot for a few reasons.
1.
Airports have vast spaces that can accommodate art that
is two stories tall, or needs to be well above people’s heads, or runs the
length of a (long) corridor.
2.
These vast spaces are indoors, so no worries about
weather.
3.
Airports are full of people. Not just local people,
either. And while some of these people
are in a hurry and aren’t going to look at the art any longer than it takes to
walk past it, others have time on their hands (sometimes lots of time) and can
stop and stare on their way to get yet another coffee.
4.
Art--some forms in particular--have the potential to
take travelers out of themselves for a moment. I’m thinking in particular of
those tunnels with lights and sounds, which feel a bit like you’ve temporarily
left the airport for somewhere else. Of course, I’m sure there are some
travelers for whom that somewhere else is not an improvement. They would rather
just walk or people-move down another forgettable corridor on their way to
terminal C. You can’t please
everyone. I like the feeling of
otherwhereness.
I imagine having art in
the airport adds to the cost of something—concessions, perhaps, via increased
rent? But given the number of people going through, and the cost of everything
else associated with maintaining an airport, it doesn’t seem like it would be
all that much per person. I’d be happy to pay a little extra for a more
interesting travel experience. Not a huge amount extra, mind, so I suppose the
gold leaf and ornately carved marble are out, and not just because they aren’t
in fashion. (Then again, we are richer than we realize.)
Baggage claim in Sacramento |
So the next time I’m in a
new airport, possibly as a result of a canceled flight (thus going from Boston
to Raleigh via Detroit, say), I will try to notice all the different artwork.
Maybe I’ll take a few pictures as a reminder of what I’ve seen.
It isn’t the Peterhof
palace, but it will give me something to remember on the plane ride home.
No comments:
Post a Comment