Email List

To join our e-mail list, please enter your e-mail address. You can unsubscribe at any time.






Opinion, Letters To The Editor, Santa Monica

City Hall Wastes Money On Needless Studies For Chain Reaction: Letter To The Editor

Posted Jan. 19, 2013, 8:56 am

Letter To The Editor

Dear Editor,

The frivolous debate over preserving Paul Conrad's Chain Reaction sculpture in Santa Monica is just another example of how our City Council wastes money on needless studies that no doubt line the pockets of special interests who contribute to incumbents' campaigns for re-election.

Conrad intended his cartoon as a symbol of peace and an anti-nuke protest, although local reactionary elements who vociferously object to that message can regard it as a symbol of America's military might.

Unfortunately, it looks more like a seal balancing a beach ball on his nose. It should be rebuilt so it looks like Conrad's original political cartoon, and requires a minimum of maintenance.

Such monuments, like the Statue of Liberty, are found in capitol cities all over the world. Chain Reaction symbolizes the now defunct progressive agenda of the old "Peoples' Republic of Santa Monica".

It should be centrally located in the new park at the Village (across the street from where it is now). To restrict children and others it should be raised on a pedestal (like the Statue of Liberty) and surrounded by a moat or water fountain, rather than the present chain link fence.

To raise money the old sculpture should be scrapped and each chain link sold to raise money to erect a larger, more realistic and sturdier sculpture (for higher donations color some the links bronze, silver, gold or platinum).

Jonathan Mann

Santa Monica

Post a comment


Jan. 19, 2013, 11:35:13 am

mangeleno said...

This is one long-time Conservative (a former staffer of Sen James L Buckley) who believes that Chain Reaction deserves restoration. Art, especially public art, is supposed to excite and incite public debate. There can be no question that Chain Reaction does just that. therefore, from a purelyaesthetic standpoint, the work is worthy of preservation. When you add the requirements of the various Landmark regulations as noted in Dave Conrad's letter reported by the Mirror at the decision becomes more clear. Relocating the artwork to the park makes sense, and can most likely be efficiently done in conjunction with the renovation. To simply abandon the work would make a mockery of both the work and our City government - although, our City government needs no help in that direction

SM Mirror TV