Triforium Relit

I hazard a guess "amazing old technology that is doing things you never thought possible" probably requires components that aren't even made any more. Does anyone remember when your local supermarket had the machine you could test vacuum tubes on?

I stand by my original comments.

last night i walked down to see the triforium in action, and i was amazed. it was like a Popular Science vision of future sculpture circa 1957. i was looking around for personal hovercraft but all i saw was a rat.

i thought about the electronics underneath.

i wish they'd give me a crack at 'em :)

interesting blackie - i wrote on my blog that the piece looked like a 1955 version of what 1975 art would look like

It seems the old technology was so specific to the piece nothing may be availabe to replace the nonfunctioning elements. But hopefully all possibilities will be explored.

Thinking the tri-cement structure should be lite as well. It would keep the colored lights from looking like they are some kind of a low floating orb. Union Station is a great example of structural lighting that really sets off the architecture.

e said "I don't want new technology. I want amazing old technology that is doing things you never thought possible. I understand the need for low-maintenance and the need for reliability..."

I own a 24Track Recorder (used for making records... in the old days...) Circa 1978. The CPU needed to be replaced a few years ago. I thought it would be hard to find the 8088 processor... That same year, NASA sent one to Mars in the Sojourner Rover! A friend of mine at JPL said it was used because they would bet their life it would work. Now THAT, my friends, is reliability!!!

It looks like a psychedelic Denny's sign. I kid, but I do like it. Reminds me of the 1964 World's Fair (oh no! Another New York comparison! Arrgh!)

I think it could be yet another piece in the puzzle of "oh that wacky Los Angeles, land of fruits and nuts!" that unimaginative travel writers love to obesess about. If it's another thing to attract people to downtown, it's worth fixing up to its most functional state, whatever that entails, even if it means updating the innards. The sculpture itself would be about the same. This could be part of the "grand promenade" connecting the civic center with La Placita via a freeway cap over the 101 freeway.

the most interesting part about the triforium is that it's actually a musical instrument with a keyboard...one of a kind. my guess is that it is repairable. most solid state devices are available either as surplus or can be cross-referenced to modern devices with the same spec.

if a 1960's theremin can be repaired...why not the triforium?

I remember the Triturkeyum from when I used to walk around Downtown late at night over 20 years ago - I always thought it was a most bizarre thing, though it was dark and silent all those years. Like a lot of public art, it has survived much maligning only to see itself still standing, and getting a whole new bit of attention. I am not into "old tech" if new technology can replace it more efficiently and for less cost... especially something like this application. Remember when those "blob fountains" were all the rage? (Those fountains that tossed up blobs of water like gigantic raindrops usually with musical accompaniment)... well, the Triforium always struck me as similar, but far more original and of course, massive. OK, it's not "pretty", but art doesn't have to be pretty.

I still don't understand the mentality behind building a huge subterranean mall in Downtown LA though (or for that matter anywhere south of the frigid winter zones). Keep the Triforium but bring the mall stores up to street level and get rid of some of those "Fortress LA" facades like the Bonaventure's Fig side... or the Caltrans Building's massive wall around its base...

I was there for the early days, when it was lit. It sucked. Sorry. Even at age 6, I could tell that it sucked. Music played, but the sound system was so lousy you couldn't tell what was playing. At sunset, the lights weren't that impressive.

A new computer, with software sensitive to the needs of contemporary classical music or new music would probably be best for this peculiar white elephant of public art. Divide the brains into a controller for the lights, and a way to plug into the system from a laptop... and let the new music play.

Kenarch wrote: "OK, it's not "pretty", but art doesn't have to be pretty."

In the case of public art, I disagree. In my opinion, public art should definitely avoid being ugly.

Believe me, I understand and support the use of art to express and expose ugly truths and give voice to alternative opinions. As an art consumer, I am glad to attend art shows and purchase art for my home that functions to enlighten.

But to me, public art is a different animal. When art is placed permanently by the city -- in public where everybody has to look at it every day -- I think it should be pleasant to see. There is plenty of reality in the city that is unpleasant, I don't need to see any more. I certainly don't need the City adding to the ugliness.

Bottom line: the City should be trying to beautify the city, rather than trying to "enlighten" me against my will. If anything, they should be focused on fixing the real ugly problems that are so pervasive in Downtown and beyond.

And please, don't give me the "ugly to one person is beautiful to another" argument. Yes, art is subjective. But again, public art is supposedly intended to serve the public. Therefore, it should be targeted toward pleasing the broadest spectrum of the public.