Letters to the Editor

Nature’s art

February 1, 2007


To the editor:

I read with great concern your article "River art garden proposal on verge of taking shape." Several comments on this:

I write based on my ecological concerns and interest in environmental art. I accept the idea that art can be a force to bring about environmental consciousness. I do not accept that this is done by altering or disturbing one of the few remaining natural environments that Lawrence has.

If art is to be seen as an intelligent and useful force in our culture, then it is the responsibility of artists to respect, not diminish, the natural environment. There are many areas that need to be reclaimed by the introduction of natural elements, and this is where there is a place for environmental art.

I find myself surprised that the students are not thinking about this if they have concerns for the environment. I am very surprised that the Lawrence Art Guild would find themselves in support of disturbing this unique environment.

The area along the river is now used by people who go there in order to not see evidence of destruction and alteration of the environment. To take this away from the community is highly irresponsible and likely will someday be seen as a great mistake. I wonder if this is one of those times when further consideration is called for.

Before there is an "expression of soul" project, there should be consideration for the soul of place, the soul of our river and for the souls that are nourished by undisturbed nature.

Del Christensen,



Commenting has been disabled for this item.