wow, this is really cool........

Very surreal! I was looking for hidden fishing line suspending them... Well done, Clive

Very cool looking piece of artwork! Nice picture.

Now I like these, I think they are fun, thanks for this Bill!!!!

Never really understood pop art Bill ,but saying that I really do like this :o) Mick

Superb photo.

a great idea on the artist's part and also the museum managers! they got a wonderful installation, both ironic and merry!

How surreal and whimsical! They succeeded in taking a few more flakes out of the ivory tower! You know, The Tower is one of my favorite Tarot Cards by the way; it's the destruction of old and limited paradigms, the clearing out of the old to make way for the new, the destruction of delusion, avarice, and spiritual greed. I see that when I see artwork like this. As I've commented earlier, Pop Art is probably the ONLY form of art that truly evokes emotional responses--good or bad doesn't matter. The true meaning of art, I think, IS to provoke emotion, to make a viewer actually stop and think, or think later. There's definitely room for the more venerated forms of art, but what really works about Pop Art is something very profound. From an anthropological point of view, you can actually look at people's reactions to Pop Art and see how liberal or totalitarian their respective societies may be. When I lived in Prague, I saw pigs on diving boards, giant high-heeled shoes, giant faceless babies, enormous human buttocks, and most charmingly, a disembodied pair of chrome legs--a woman's chrome legs, with a pair of panties down around the knees. THAT was situated in the Tourist Central area of Prague...right in Wenceslas Square. What I noticed, however, was that Prague--so classically beautiful a city, understands the true nature of art and realizes that there's room enough for Baroque and Art Nouveau flourishes and chrome panties! Not everyone is into cherubs and naked people standing with their weight on one leg while staring off (as if drugged) into some obscure corner of heaven. Not everyone likes 14th Century fashion, no matter how realistically it is presented; most people can't be bothered to care about angels and demons, and old school soft-porn (which is what quite a lot of Classical art amounts to.) In fact, most people are probably going to remember chrome panties (and feel good about that) when they think of Prague, and the moments of their life when those shiny undergarments were discovered rakishly held up by a pair of knocked knees. The most intriguing thing about Pop Art is its declaration that meaning is differential and therefore, meaningless. This completely unhinges the common human need to be told what to think, what to feel, and how to go through life. Shuttlecocks looming in a garden, panties drooping in a city square, or pigeon poo on a canvas is valid because artists say that it's valid (like it or not) but they don't tell you HOW you should see any of it, or what any of it means, because ultimately, it's up to you, the viewer, to express your own human freedom and apply your own meanings to what you see. It's up to you to accept or dismiss, and most difficult-ly, it's up to you to actually collaborate with the artist. The Old Masters were masters simply because they SHOWED you things that were not open to interpretation, they were masters of your perception, they were masters of your taste, they were masters of what was (and is) considered acceptable. Pop Artists differ because they're not interested in telling you anything; they're more interested in letting YOU tell THEM something, even if you never get the chance to speak or write to them. And this photo, just like its companion piece, is marvelous and a perfect collaboration! You've shown us something surreal in the truest sense, and I'm tickled pink by the idea that you're showing us surrealism and there isn't an elephant on stilts anywhere to be seen! THAT takes some doing! This is a wonderful installation, and a perfect presentation on your part. You see things perfectly, and know just how to capture and present them. Superb!

These look so realistic and are rather nice in the park. Excellent capture.

I like these very much, mostly BECAUSE they're at such a stuffy, old-skool museum! It gives me hope. LOL! And I'm thoroughly enjoying the discussion you've started by posting these pop art pieces. More conversation like this would be a good thing! We're all artists, looking at art, and I'm sure most of us have an opinion or two about art! You've heard mine, so I'll save it ... but thanks again! :D

Well! you did it again, posting a delightful capture, and getting all kinds of emotional responses. And this piece turned some minds---a few of the detractors on Oldenberg 1 are now happy with Oldenberg 2! Bravo! Also, on Chips. (I read his comment on Pop Art #1, and it's also a major comment), love when he takes us on one of his wonderful journeys. Maybe you'll have to start charging Chip & me rent for all the space we've taken up in this series, lol. And as for Andrea loving Oldenberg, bravo Andrea! It's always great to know some of our favorite artists are on your side! (She declared it twice: As the critics say, "Duuuuude! Awriiiiiiiiight!!!") (Ok, critics don't say that...they SHOULD, though. I'd pay to see it, in fact.) One thing I'll put in a different light, from Chip. I fully understand what he's saying about 'old masters', but perhaps he's saying it more of what has been handed down "as" old masters, rather than a real master him or herself. Real masters always go beyond cultural opinion; they're great artists who give us what's deepest inside them. It's the institution of "proper" and "critically accepted" art that tries to master perceptions. Rembrandt is called "master," but he lived the second half of his life in utter poverty, was rejected by almost all of the art world, lived in a very impoverished flat with his beloved Hendrickje (whom he painted & drew in some of the most touching portraits we have); and, in his anonymity---having fallen from "master" entirely---he produced some of the most inward, deeply moving & gentle art we have, deeply touching, intimate & filled with love. In other words, his master-title meant little; whereas his inward vision was everything. (A principle I'm sure Chip would agree with.) Or consider Van Gogh...he lived off of charity of others, barely sold a piece in his lifetime, was way off the accepted path (and was crazed & even cut off his ear and in time shot himself), turned out pieces some thought were kids' fingerpainting, and yet produced work that exploded off the page and, in my mind, blasts right through the cosmos. (Don't get me started on van Gogh. I'll be here for 6 nights, lol.) And yet he was miles from the towers of Accepted Art. Yet---enter the Tower---once his vision was recognized, the Art Establishment elevated him to heaven (!) and his paintings sold for spectacular amounts of money. Yet for the earnest viewer, his work is a journey to the heart of who we are, and that's miles beyond acceptance or non. Again, I'm sure Chip would agree with that, I'm just stating the argument in a different way. As for the shuttlecocks? I love 'm! I'd never seen them, and now I'm gonna have to. Though they're huge, they seem suspended in air! And they're so damned bold in their bright white & big rubbery orange; and they just "float" there. How great to put a big bright toy in the midst of a museum's grounds. See---and people really have to remember this when they (as I do) rebel against the sterile feeling of museums: If we didn't have to preserve artworks from decay, if we didn't have to keep them in special temperature & atmospheric conditions, if we didn't have to protect them from people tearing & touching & gouging them---it's happened more times than we realize---we wouldn't need the sterility of museums. The price we pay to view many paintings in one place. So the curators have to constantly re-shuffle those works, re-display them, find new & barrier-breaking ways of presenting them, find ways of making us see them anew, fresh, as if we were seeing art for the first time, and all that in a climate-controlled highly sterile environment. It's not easy, and that's why displays like the Oldenberg are so great: Tthe NA curators put this delightful airy piece outside so the viewers would remember: Art is about play and dance. It's for the child in all of us. That's why it's such a great installation. And you softened everything around it so the shuttlecocks seem suspended in mid air, and they're as clear as a bell in your capture; so you did Oldenberg real service. Terrific capture Bill. If you'd posted it without any words, I'd love how well you captured the spirit of the art. You shoot art really well, you know that? A tough art, and you seem to have it down cold. Love the shot, love the art, and love this series. We need more like it. (I'll call Oldenberg & have him build a 30 ft high comment, made of foam, with a 40 ft high Rosity logo, drooping all over the page. I'm not sure he'll do it. I'm not high on his list of priorities...)

...and if I didn't know any better - I would have thought for a second - it was two images manipulated or stacked... Not quite my thing - it just seems like something is missing - a giant racket, LOL but your photo is surreal, BB

fantastic picture!!!!!

wowwwwwwwwww this looks cool !

they do seem to have a scenic quality

Incredible what people will make. Interesting capture. Aloha

Haaaa… Life of the giants, not easy my friend. Cheer still and mile thank you for the division ((5++)) Haaaa... La vie des géants ,pas facile mon ami. Bravo encore et mile merci du partage((5++))

Wow! Amazing shot! With so sharp details on the shuttlecocks...