Comments on: A Little History(?)

By: belyin

belyin — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 05:31:14 +0000

Certainly the Jackson Square “artists” are fame game for satire, but I think in the passage above Ignatius is reacting to the (annual?) art club showing of amateur “art” works along the fence of the yard behind the cathedral that is still held. I know this because I happened to walk by it this year, and the subject matter (and rendering there of) has remained remarkably the same.

As for the painters and drawers of Jackson Square making what sells, how different is that really from most of the music on display at the Satchmo’ Festival. Some of it was well played, and maybe some of it was “art.”

By: Alex Rawls

Alex Rawls — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:37:23 +0000

I’m not sure I see a meaningful difference between hand-made souvenir art and print souvenir art. More often than not, both are making something that reveals less creativity that a T-shirt, and neither merits special protection based on their work.

By: CB

CB — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:50:36 +0000

Thanks – I got to laugh out loud at that passage again! Seriously – there has been a long tradition of on-the-spot portrait artists at the square – some were quite good. It has become mostly “souvenier art” because that’s what sells. So what if they want to ban prints, you can buy thousands of prints right down the street. At least they managed to beat back the invading army of tarot readers. At one point it had to be the highest concentration of tarot readers per square foot on the planet! Only in New Orleans.