| Author | Message | ||
     LibraryLady(ncjanow) Supporter Username: Librarylady Post Number: 3228 Registered: 5-2001  |
Whatever my stance on the installation of the sculpture by Tony Smith, I have to be concerned that the allegations raised by the opponents equating Mr. Smith with anti-semitism. I personally have googled Tony Smith in combination with anti-semitism and have found nothing to lead me to believe he was one. Nancy Janow In this regard, I have been asked to post the following:
| ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 751 Registered: 5-2004  |
The accusations appeared on MOL relentlessly? (I didn't count, how many times makes relentless?  ) In any event, I, for one, appreciate this being cleared up. Thanks! | ||
| Pizzaz Supporter Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 3412 Registered: 11-2001  |
I thought the accusation was far fetched. The guy named a kid Seton.... how bad can he be?  At least I'm happy that issue is resolved too. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3769 Registered: 5-2001  |
I believe the quote from slate.com was posted on MOL by ONE PERSON and then it was asked once or twice if there was any ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. None was found or presented, so I don't think anyone dwelled on the issue very much, based on a SINGLE reference online. Thanks for confirming that there is no additional evidence. However, that doesn't minimize the fact that the Board of Trustees LIED to the public REPEATEDLY and held NO PUBLIC HEARINGS on how OUR MONEY should be spent, especially in a time of fiscal crisis. THAT is the reason this project should be terminated. | ||
| Lizziecat Citizen Username: Lizziecat Post Number: 1139 Registered: 5-2003 |
Why did they have to ask LL to post on their behalf? Why can't they do it for thenselves? | ||
| susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1458 Registered: 3-2002 |
Obviously the writers of this letter are actually not very familiar with the debate here on MOL if they think that accusations of anti-semitism have been widespread among the critics of the project. If they had avoided the last two paragraphs of their letter, I would applaud them for laying this rumor to rest. However, I'm incensed by the last two paragraphs. Their attempt to use this issue to discredit the broader opposition to the project (as currently financed and sited) discredits them and their efforts. If they do not understand why the actions and explanations of the BOT have created such a stir, then they need to do their own homework more carefully, rather than go online to accuse their critics of shoddy research. As I've said before, I could be a supporter of this project, if it were managed properly. I like the idea of having the sculpture in town, although I dislike the chosen site, and the financial bait-and-switch by the BOT. In truth, I haven't signed the online petition because I don't like some of the language. However, if the supporters of the project go forward with unfair broad-brush accusations, accusing good and concerned citizens of trying to "to use anti-Semitism to manipulate the situation to suit their pre-arranged agenda of torpedoing this project", then I'll change my tune. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 274 Registered: 1-2006 |
The quote was verbatim, and the original on-line incorporation of the quote was referenced to the source. For those who don't care to read the original, that's fine. Maybe you like to make cutesy swastikas when you doodle. Maybe you don't. But, for the self-proclaimed arbiters of good taste to argue that Google is the final word is startling, and for them to claim the role of victim is reprehensible. Try reading the original, make up your own mind, and tell Google about it. I googled the minor artist's name, and followed the yellow brick road to the article. In any event, the metallic copy is ugly, and a financial dagger into the taxpayers overtaxed hearts. | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 22898 Registered: 6-2001  |
! | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 275 Registered: 1-2006 |
Gee, nine-self proclaimed arbiters. Maybe they will fund the project. One of the annointed arbiters plays the religion card in signing off. Nauseating. jd | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 22899 Registered: 6-2001 |
I feel so at home. Not | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 276 Registered: 1-2006 |
"All people of good conscience...," blah, blah, blah. Sanctimonious bilge. "Beneficial to SO," as in financial bait and switch by BOT to taxpayers, and large, looming black monolith replacing a light and airy gazebo. The town has conspicuously turned off the fountain at the site, but we remember the pleasant sound. Good night. jd | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 277 Registered: 1-2006 |
Nancy: Why don't you invite those you front to join these conversations, go to BOT meetings, and not shrink away from the debate. Joel | ||
| Jonathan Glasser Citizen Username: Zoro Post Number: 5 Registered: 12-2005 |
I have always felt that art exists separately from the artist. Certainly the lives lead by artists are not always mainstream and their thoughts and causes are not always ones we would personally endorse. None of us has personal knowledge of Tony Smith's innermost thoughts about Jewish people, and I for one am not particularly interested in finding out (though if he were alive, we could just ask him . . . .) I like his art, I am hoping we can put it on Sloan Steet in South Orange. What happened at the Board of Trustees' meetings is certainly a fair subject for debate, of course. As I read it there is $250,000 of taxpayer $$ at stake here, not a small amount of money, but anytime we spend on something, can't someone else say, what about the other ways we could have spent it? I guess my point is, if you like the art, want to see something special in town, $250,000 in the grand scheme of things is not that much money. I am in favor. Am I pleased with the way the trustees appear to have handled this? No. Will I vote for them next time? Perhaps not. But whether they handled this correctly does not detract from the rightness of doing it in my view. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3773 Registered: 5-2001 |
Joel, There are still at least 210 people (and growing) who find this expenditure extremely appropriate. (http://www.petitiononline.com/SOtaxes/petition.html) If the 20 people who actively support this project each put up $12,500, this whole charade could go away. How badly do they really want it? At OUR expense...pretty badly. At their OWN expense....not so much. | ||
| Jonathan Glasser Citizen Username: Zoro Post Number: 6 Registered: 12-2005 |
It is at my expense. I live in South Orange. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 753 Registered: 5-2004 |
With all due respect, it isn't just $250,000. It is a $250,000 bond which will be repaid with interest over time. And that, while they gazebo and fountain, paid for with a previous bond, have likely not been paid off yet! (I'm still researching this fact and the amount, which is not simple since it was part of a $3 million dollar improvement according to Bill C. Apparently paper trails are elusive in government.) | ||
| Jonathan Glasser Citizen Username: Zoro Post Number: 11 Registered: 12-2005 |
Pdg, important questions. Maybe a per capita calculation would be illuminating. My tax bill attributable solely to this project will be $______. I guess it would have to be per assessed thousand? (What would be the cost to the town of calculating this for each household, though?) We also need to know how long any debt service would be for and at what rate. I assume the term of the loan would be short? Do you think the town will move the Gazebo somewhere else, preserving its value, though adding additional installation costs? And the fountain will probably have some salvage value, at least. (Personally, I am not fond of the fountain, but I know some people really love it). I guess I am not sure of what to make of the money issue, though. Are there people who would be happy to have the sculpture at $250,000, but cannot stomach the concept of $440,000? I just know I like the sculpture and would love for it to be in our town. I bet we can afford it. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 280 Registered: 1-2006 |
I like, ... I would love for it to be here, .... So, your dreams, (my nightmare), are to become my reality, and I pay for it! Keep your dreams, but don't force me to pay for them. jd | ||
| Bailey Citizen Username: Baileymac Post Number: 204 Registered: 3-2005 |
The argument is really about how this process was handled. 250,000.00 divided by roughly 17,000 residents is about $15.00 each. Not a lot of money. I think many of us feel lied to. Many believed for whatever reasons, that this would not cost the taxpayers, and would be funded privately. As we all look around our downtown, the frustration of "coming soon" has caused us to scrutinize this project, and I suspect every dollar this BOT decides to spend from now on will be subject to similar scrutiny. This is a good thing. | ||
| John Galt Citizen Username: Johngalt Post Number: 1 Registered: 4-2006 |
I agree with Mr. Glasser. The trouble is people don't understand real art and need to be tutored on its history. I'd much rather have a serious artwork like Tau than another restaurant. It will inspire the few in our society that all the detritus that surrounds them can be escaped. Money should not be an issue when true Art is being invested in. The masses have never made good choices about art investments. They can't be trusted. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3776 Registered: 5-2001 |
John, When are you going to buy the Mona Lisa for South Orange, since "money is not an issue" and you would like a "serious artwork"? | ||
| Lizziecat Citizen Username: Lizziecat Post Number: 1141 Registered: 5-2003 |
"All the detritus that surrounds them..." Maybe if some of the detritus in our downtown, eg. the "coming soon" supermarket; the Beifus vacant lot; the hole in the ground rug store; the crumbling town hall and the still uninhabitable fire house were cleaned up, we ignorant masses who can't be trusted would be more open to a huge piece of public art. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 283 Registered: 1-2006 |
Who is John Galt? Again, those whose arrogance leads them by their noses, tell us lumpen proletariat, unwashed at that, what is "real art." Most township residents never heard of the dead mid-twentieth minor modern welder-artist. Although I have visited art museums in LA, NJ, Boston, Toronto, Montreal, DC, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Capetown, Atlanta, and even read a book or two, college courses, etc., the name meant nothing to me. But, a few here have a vision, just like Calabrese's visions, and together they don't need mescal buttons to live their visions through us taxpayer. jd | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 759 Registered: 5-2004 |
John Galt - Who is suggesting another restaurant as the alternative to the TS sculpture? You say "people don't understand art." And you, presumably one of "the few," apparently are the one to educate us whether we wan't it or not? Some seem to think themselves highly superior, yet can't function economically without forcing others to bend to their will. | ||
| Agrackle Citizen Username: Agrackle Post Number: 30 Registered: 2-2004 |
I agree with John Galt, the masses know nothing about true Art....thank goodness we have our esteemed BOT to educate us and, more importantly, to save our collective empty souls. Are you kidding me? Here's how I would edit Mr. Galt's memo to the masses... The trouble is the BOT doesn't understand real finance and needs to be tutored on its history. I'd much rather have a serious balanced budget and lower property taxes than yet another capital project "managed" by our BOT. It will inspire the many in our society that all the detritus that surrounds them can be escaped with an effective and transparent BOT. Money would not be an issue if half our downtown wasn't razed and sitting idle for years on end. The majority has not made good choices about BOT members in South Orange. They can't be trusted. | ||
| Jonathan Glasser Citizen Username: Zoro Post Number: 19 Registered: 12-2005 |
Everyone is going to have to look at this sculpture so everyone is entitled to their opinion on it. I think it is going to be fantastic. Some people like it but are really mad at the BOT and are having trouble separating their anger from the project itself. Others think the sculpture is ugly. Sounds like we have a full spectrum. The BOT will be deciding what happens here, though they should be made aware of people's feelings about the project, and about perceived misconduct or mistakes on their part. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3779 Registered: 5-2001 |
Jonathan - Have you watched this video clip: www.howard-levison.com/Sculpturequotes.wmv Are you aware that the BOT made this decision based on NO PUBLIC DISCUSSION and false information that the money would be coming from a grant? Doesn't that make you wonder what other improper financial decisions have been made? | ||
| susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1461 Registered: 3-2002 |
Jonathan, Respectfully, I do not think that this is a case where the end justifies the means. So, you can call that "having trouble separating my anger from the project itself". I call it holding the line and insisting on good government. The BOT can either proceed as they have, and have my opposition to this project, or they can back up, return to appropriate process and honest communication, renegotiate timeline with the Smith estate, and look for my support for a more properly debated and communicated plan which is honest about the costs involved. We were sold this statue on a network of lies and misrepresentations about the cost. I don't think it is bad citizenship to dig in our heels and expect this to be done right. Again, I ask if you have gone back and watched BOT meetings and the way that certain trustees treat anyone who chooses to question them. The BOT will indeed make this decision. We the electorate will make decisions about the BOT. Increased publicity about this decision and how it was made is likely to increase the visibility of the next election. | ||
| Mayor McCheese Supporter Username: Mayor_mccheese Post Number: 1118 Registered: 7-2004  |
Why do people try and make this thing sound so cheap? $15 per person is not the way to look at it. The total cost is going to be $500,000. The question that should be posed is either should the money be saved, or should this money be spent on something needed. $500,000 would do a lot to improve schools, or fix roads, or buy new equiment for the police or fire or DPW. Don't say "only $15 per person" because it is not $15. It is $15 X 17,000!!! | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 9100 Registered: 4-1997  |
It will end up costing each household between $100 and $200. $200 invested a year with a 6% annual return yields $5,135 in 15 years. That's the cost to each homeowner. | ||
| jeep Citizen Username: Jeep Post Number: 68 Registered: 8-2005 |
Joel in plain English you are out of your mind! | ||
| jeep Citizen Username: Jeep Post Number: 69 Registered: 8-2005 |
Personally I think the family of Tony Smith should file an defamation of character lawsuit against Joel Dranove. Without firm and 100% disputable evidence how dare he make such comments. I am sickened by this. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2754 Registered: 5-2004  |
What accusation did he make? What did he say that was defamatory? | ||
| jeep Citizen Username: Jeep Post Number: 71 Registered: 8-2005 |
read his quote next to the online petition | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 9105 Registered: 4-1997 |
It's a copy/paste from a story on Slate. | ||
| Sitoyan Citizen Username: Sitoyan Post Number: 161 Registered: 7-2004  |
Joel Dranove of Harrison Court wrote on line: "A little known artist with pronounced pro-Nazi architecture and anti-Semitic leanings is not what we should celebrate". This is the kind of the repulsive tactics that some people who protest the sculpture have used on this board. | ||
| bettyd Citizen Username: Badjtdso Post Number: 180 Registered: 12-2005 |
$500,000!!?? At that price, we should have just hired some people to keep downtown clean for the next twenty years. What about Tau makes it "serious" and "real art"? Count me as part of the unsophisticated, unwashed mass that needs to be tutored. I think it's ugly and will look ridiculous in the proposed location. But what do I know about art? | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 216 Registered: 2-2006 |
People clamoring for this sculpture under present conditions are not facing up to the unacceptable and perhaps illegal means used to bring it to South Orange. That is a huge problem. Art at what cost? The town playing fast and loose with federal monies and perhaps getting loans by lying in the open market puts the town in great jeopardy of various kinds. The real costs of this sculpture now are the creeping criminality in actions of public officials. I can't see that anyone who wants the sculpture has really faced up to this. They seem disturbingly oblivious to it. At this point, the only way they could save the sculpture from infamy is to fund it wholly with private funds. Anyone who does not grasp that something more important to the town than art is at stake is complicit with the corruption at the heart of the accounting legerdemain and public deceit. I really hope that clear sighted artists will convince the misguided among their professions and elsewhere who are trying to ram the sculpture through to Sloan Street, to reconsider the gravity of error in the process to date. South Orange needs them more than ever to insist on honesty and integrity and not to allow art to be sacrificed when they are compromised. | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2756 Registered: 5-2004 |
Sitoyan, "this is the kind of repulsive tactic that some have used ..." Can you cite another "repulsive tactic" and identify additional "some" people? I ask because I disagree with Joel on this, but feel that you are painting most opposers with the same brush. This is s single person, with a single issue. You are implying there are similar repulsive tactics being used. I ask that you identify them for us. And do you think it is wrong to explicitly state that an overwhelming majority of the town supports something, when you have done no research beyond a self-selecting group of art enthusiasts and neighborhood groups? Especially when the person making that statement is a professional pollster who should know the difference between a true poll and a significantly biased population survey. Do you think it is wrong to misrepresent the way the town will be paying for the piece? Do you think it is wrong to imply that those opposed to the plan are simply trouble makers? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 288 Registered: 1-2006 |
Sitoyan has a problem with freedom of speech. He or she should read the quote. I did. This town includes several residents with pronounced leanings towards killing the messenger, if the message is well presented and against the reining orthodoxy. Better, in my opinion, to engage in discussion. jd |
