Sat Nov 3, 2018, 02:59 AM

Blue duck can stay, thousands of other items in man's yard must go, judge rules

ST JOHNS – A blue plastic duck.

That’s all that Clinton County District Court Judge Michael Clarizio says can be left of an outdoor art installation made from thousands of found objects at the home of a Bath Township artist.

Even as he praised the work of artist Robert Park, Clarizio gave him 45 days to remove the items along a pathway on his wooded lot. The duck was the only object that didn’t fit the definition of junk under a township’s ordinance, which prohibits outdoor storage of “cast-off" and other items.

“I have to follow what the law says, not what my heart says,” Clarizio said. The judge called Park a “talented artist” and said he found Park’s art installation “interesting.”

Park plans to appeal, and his attorney, William Metros, said they would press Bath Township officials to back off.

Read more: https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/opinion/columnists/judy-putnam/2018/11/01/bath-township-officials-win-court-case-take-down-art-installation/1806961002/

I wonder if some Republicans complained because they don't like blue?

6 replies, 919 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

6 replies	Author	Time	Post
Blue duck can stay, thousands of other items in man's yard must go, judge rules (Original post)	TexasTowelie	Nov 2018	OP
Land of the free..	Glamrock	Nov 2018	#1
Hoarding can destroy property values.	PoindexterOglethorpe	Nov 2018	#2
Looked like an art project to me.	2naSalit	Nov 2018	#3
I agree. If you read the article & look at the pictures it's definitely 'art'...	WePurrsevere	Nov 2018	#4
Couldn't agree more.	safeinOhio	Nov 2018	#5
Laws & courts can 'try', but IMO no one can truly 'define' what all art is...	WePurrsevere	Nov 2018	#6

Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 03:36 AM

Glamrock (10,767 posts)

1. Land of the free..

Reply to this post

Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 03:39 AM

PoindexterOglethorpe (18,219 posts)

2. Hoarding can destroy property values.

People who hoard stuff haven't a clue that their behavior can adversely impact neighborhood values. It has NOTHING to do with the color blue.

Watch some of the hoarding shows and you'll get a clue.

Reply to this post

Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 04:19 AM

2naSalit (48,081 posts)

3. Looked like an art project to me.

but if it was not a temporary thing, that could get funky. It didn't look like a junk yard or hoarding, it was intentional art.

Reply to this post

Response to 2naSalit (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 06:09 AM

WePurrsevere (24,251 posts)

4. I agree. If you read the article & look at the pictures it's definitely 'art'...

I live near a town in NY state where there are a whole bunch of old toilets set up in a yard on a main road as part of a man's protest art. Do I particularly 'like' it? I find it amusing but I wouldn't say I 'like' it, HOWEVER like it or not, agree with it or not, I'll defend his 1st Amendment right to his artistic expression. The town and artist have fought for years over it and yet it's still there because as tacky as some see it, it's still ART and definitely covered under the 1st Amendment just like this one is.

I hope he keeps fighting and WINS. His 1st Amendment right to artistic expression trumps the towns rules since there's no real health threat.

Reply to this post

Response to WePurrsevere (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 07:07 AM

safeinOhio (22,391 posts)

5. Couldn't agree more.

Perhaps the court can define art for us.

This is the DU member formerly known as safeinOhio.

Reply to this post

Response to safeinOhio (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 3, 2018, 07:31 AM

WePurrsevere (24,251 posts)

6. Laws & courts can 'try', but IMO no one can truly 'define' what all art is...

You may as well try to nail warm jello to a tree or rope the morning mists as they roll off the river. Even if a work of art speaks only to the artist whose imagination gave birth to it, IMO it's still 'art'.

Reply to this post

Michigan (Group)