THE IMPERMANENCE OF LEGOS (COMMENT)
THE IMPERMANENCE OF LEGOS (COMMENT). More on the use of Legos in conceptual art. Elmer commented here that “plastic is less erodible than stone, but … Legos seem less permanent because they are less massive, seemingly poorer at load-bearing, more toy-like.” I would add that Legos also seem less permanent because they are usually used in temporary structures. Lego constructions are torn down and the Legos are reused. I was in New York City a couple days ago, and I went to the intersection of 32nd Street and Seventh Avenue to look at the Lego patch to the building that is shown in the third to fifth photographs here. Sadly, most of the Legos had disappeared. In any event, the scale effect would be more dramatic than in the photographs even if all the Legos remained. The building seems enormous, and the Legos that are used are small Legos. Passersby paid the Legos no attention with the exception that Mary Jane noted that a crowd had started to gather while I was on my knees studying the Legos.
The legos patches are delightful and whimsical. It’s strange to see photos of the completed patches when we witnessed in the flesh one that was only partially there. Phil kindly says, “Well, they could have fallen out.” But, guys, this is New York. They were taken. Perhaps as souvenirs, but taken nonetheless. And that’s too bad, because the perfect precision of filling the space in question is part of the beauty. The corner is no longer empty; it’s perfectly filled with joyous color.