Capitol Broadcasting CEO jokes that Raleigh is “stupid” for not accepting downtown light art
A thin, blue light will regularly be jutting into the downtown Durham skyline. The light sculpture by renowned Spanish artist Jaume Plensa is the newest piece of public art in the Triangle, making its home outside the Durham Performing Arts Center. It was unveiled Monday during the ribbon cutting for the new theatre.
The beam of light is not without its critics, including astronomers and other pro-environment types who see it as light pollution. Capitol Broadcasting Co. (which seems to own everything in Durham’s tobacco district) agreed to pay for the sculpture if the city of Durham agreed to maintain it for 25 years. The News & Observer reported that the annual utility bill for the light will cost an estimated $3,350, along with an additional $4,415 being spent on annual maintenance.
Those of you who pay attention to the local art/development scene may remember that this isn’t Capitol Broadcasting’s first attempt to bring a lighted Plensa piece to the Triangle. The Independent’s David Fellerath explained the failure of that effort in this article:
In 2006, Raleigh City Manager Russell Allen, after civic debate and feasibility studies, recommended the city reject an ambitious Plensa project that would have brought a dizzying matrix of overhead water and lights to the re-opened Fayetteville Street. The rejection came in spite of $2.5 million proffered by Goodmon that would have covered a quarter of the initial cost.
So now that you have context for the Raleigh v. Durham Plensa debate, watch this video from the Plensa unveiling.
If you’ve had a chance to see the new blue light beam in downtown Durham, tell me what you think about it.
What I'm Doing
9 Responses to “Capitol Broadcasting CEO jokes that Raleigh is “stupid” for not accepting downtown light art”
we ARE stupid for it. it’s a joke, but there is nothing but truth to his statement.
By mr. cakes! on Dec 3, 2008
It’s beautiful. The beam is thin and blue and seems minimal. Certainly less than the light thrown from the surrounding buildings. A very nice piece by Plensa.
By GOSime on Dec 3, 2008
I am pro-growth and I love change. That said, I don’t like the light and I am one of the folks that view it as pollution. Low light communities are a new thing and once you see one, I think you’ll know what I mean. When you can step out of a lit building, look up in the sky and see stars, it’s a brilliant thing. Unless of course it’s raining.
By Jason on Dec 4, 2008
Light pollution is a fact of our growth. No one will turn off the street lights. There is no argument to be made that I can see that would get me to change my mind. There is green and then there is stupid.
Worrying about trivialities at the cost of art is often the sign that growth is pissing off those who have lived here all of their lives and wish to see things as they once were. Art (of any type) enhances communities and should be encouraged within reason. The costs are minimal for the benefit of Plensa’s work to the community (I’ve only seen it on the videos posted online, but it looks fabulous).
You can whine all you want about the current state of “light pollution” in our area, but that will not slow the progress. Find something useful to whine about, because it will not and does not lower your quality of life in any way.
By Aaron Huslage on Dec 4, 2008
It just proves that Durham is a much cooler place to be, and stands against the stripmall/subdivision culture that is the Triangle.
By Evan on Dec 4, 2008
If I remember the Raleigh proposal correctly, it was a Vegas type “ceiling” of pictures and words, and I don’t know what all. And I was against it. I may be stupid, but I would still be against it. I wasn’t necessarily against it as “art”, but just not for our downtown.
The “thin blue light” in Durham, however, seems more elegant and dignified. Maybe someday Ralegh will be presented with an idea that is just as elegant and dignified that we can get on board with.
By Pam on Dec 4, 2008
Jim’s RIGHT– ( i don’t think we are all stupid) as someone thats investing in downtown real estate i know we need all the attractions we can muster.We missed a freebie & a nice project that could have helped create more excitement & energy in its core.
Bobby Lewis
By Bobby Lewis on Dec 5, 2008
The Goodmans personally and thru charities that they control have given a lot to Raleigh an Durham.And i am reluctant to say anything about a gift that they/he wanted Raleigh to accept.But the lights for Fayetteville St had to of been designed from a roof of a chicken coop.Plus Fayetteville St would still be closed.
Phil Jeffreys
By Phil Jeffreys on Dec 6, 2008
Gee, I think I’ll aim a spot-light into the sky and call it art. They could have easily moved the piece of “art” that he wanted Raleigh to get to an area that pedestrians could have easily accessed. Like in front of the new convention center, where it could have welcomed all that entered. And the Goodmans could have covered all the costs associated with it, instead of sticking the taxpayers with the high maintenance costs. Yes there is a cost, a big one! Including the view.
Sorry it was wrong for the area chosen and the Goodmans can make all the jokes they want - but they risk alienating the Raleighites that watch their station.
By Scott on Dec 12, 2008