> So let's try this one: suppose one were to explain to the Christos that
> plant and animal life entirely dependent on access to full sunlight and the
> river for the few scant months in the Rockies when everything isn't encased
> in snow will inevitably be harmed. We don't know how severely they will be
> harmed, but there is a risk that it could be very severe indeed, perhaps
> permanently so, at a time when all ecosystems, especially those in
> unforgiving environments, need all the help they can get. Do you think the
> Christos would say "Of course you're right, let's call it off?" Or would it
> be "You're right, but think how liberating!" And how liberated would you
> feel, as a hiker of remote landscapes?
Mind you, Mark - whatever that phrase may mean - every Christo project goes
through review by local and state boards, including environmental impact
reports. When the local public gets involved -pro and con - that can be very
lively and snuff a project or radically control it. What, I suggest, if you
take the opposite view that the project (the way it may visually enhance the
awareness of the river) will work to support projects and controls that
honor the environment. We're not talking anything analogous to 'clear cut
logging' here - au contraire.
Remember, please, as you read the above, that I really liked it (tho "the
Gates give rebirth and a public acknowledgment" is a pretty drastic
overstatement of what I in fact said). It's a question of the admission
cost.
I have heard several people say that the gated trails the cross cutting
patterns variously looping through the Park -
Have rekindled the awareness of the incredible bounty of the original
design.
He who will not kill for poetry, but almost...
Stephen V
Blog: http://stephenvincent.durationpress.com
|