`People You Can Read About in Books'

Once again, the phrase “public art” has been proven sadly oxymoronic. Hanging in the lobby of the Bellevue, Wa. Regional Library are 12 enameled-steel panels titled “Historic Portraits.” The figures depicted, a curious mélange of excellence and mediocrity, are Le Corbusier, Marie Curie, Duke Ellington, Gandhi, Frida Kahlo, J.D. Salinger, Golda Meir, Joan Miro, Sappho, Igor Stravinsky, Walt Whitman and Sarah Winnemucca. Obviously, the selection had more to do with identities-du-jour (sexual, racial, ethnic) than with the actual accomplishments of most of the subjects. The library publishes a pamphlet describing the art works in and around the building, and of “Historic Portraits” it says:

“The subjects were chosen because they are people you can read about in books, but who are not necessarily literary figures.”

I’m not certain what that means but the same might be said of Richard Speck, Pol Pot, and Karen and Richard Carpenter. The pamphlet goes on:

“The subjects may not be familiar to everyone, but the library is the right place to find out more about them [Ditto: Richard Speck, etc.]”

Arranged horizontally, the panels measure 45 by 45 inches and resemble wanted posters for obscure cartoon characters. If they had not been identified, most of the figures would remain unrecognizable. The drafting gifts of the artist, Garth Edwards, are severely limited. His bald-headed Whitman looks like Charles Darwin, and Sappho like Yogi Berra after a severe head injury. Le Corbusier is a double for Peter Lorre, and you’d swear Stravinsky was actually Foucault.

Edwards’ work permits bureaucrats with public money to luxuriate in a warm bath of virtuous feeling. The portraits are crude and gaudily colored. The choice of subjects does not represent “the best that has been thought and said.” There’s no Aquinas, Milton, Spinoza, Bach, Pasteur, Dickinson, Proust or Matisse. Library patrons, particularly credulous young people, might assume Salinger, Kahlo and Winnemucca are significant figures – because the library said so. They might also never learn that Aquinas defined beauty as id quod visum placet – “that which being seen pleases.”