Christo Called “Eco-Terrorist” Over Arkansas River Art Project

Christo Javacheff, the artist best known for draping entire buildings and New York’s Central Park in fabric, has run into opposition over his next project. Over the River, a work that would cover a 42-mile stretch of the Arkansas River in Colorado, is being called eco-terrorism by Rags Over the Arkansas River (ROAR), the main group fighting against the artist. Christo, 75, has already spent $7 million and 18 years on the project.

But that’s nothing new for the controversial artist. In the early ’80s, he spent several years assuring fishermen and environmentalists that he could safely wrap 11 islands in Miami’s Biscayne Bay in floating pink fabric, a project that he called Surround Islands. It took 24 years (1971 to 1995) of campaigning to be able to wrap the Reichstag, a historical government building in Berlin, in fabric.


Wrapped Reichstag, Berlin, 1995.

However, Christo always fought these long, entrenched battles with the aid of his wife, Jeanne-Claude, who took charge of the day-to-day red-tape issues. Sadly, Jeanne-Claude passed away last November, but Christo pushes on. “She just has a chemistry with people that I don’t have,” Christo told the Wall Street Journal, referring to her in present tense as he has continued to do.

Check out the proposed plans for Over the River below, and let us know whose side you’re on.

Click Image to Close
Collage using pencil, enamel paint and wax crayon by Christo, photo by Wolfgang Volz for Over The River.

Click Image to Close
Drawing by Christo. Photo by Wolfgang Volz

Click Image to Close
Drawing by Christo. Aerial photo by Wolfgang Volz

Filed Under:

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Have any of you supporters ever been up that canyon? It is a trecherous, narrow, 2 lane highway with natural rock walls that go straight up. The river is on the other side of the road. Thousands of people live up there. Along with all of the environmental impacts, it would be VERY VERY dangerous to do this project. Firefighters and emergency medical vehicles could not get through in the event of a forest fire, sooner day to day emergency vehicle needs. The traffic will be backed up for miles. The local residence lives will be entirely disrupted for the 2.5 years it takes to build this Frankenstein plus the exhibit time. The local fishing, hunting, and river rafting businesses will not be able to get up and down the pass in anywhere near a timely manner. Forget the fishing because those people will not want to deal with Christo's circus. Christo owes the tax payers of Colorado for all the money spent by the BLM and all of the other government entities plus people's valuable time for having to fight this BS nonsense. Think about how much government money (the people's money) has been spent on this thus far, plus the private individual's time. If you don't live here and have never visited then you have no idea of what you are talking about in supporting this "project". It would be best if you just shut your mouth until you come out here and see first hand of what you are talking about. Christo is not welcome here.

This "art" project is a huge waste of fabric, steel, fossil fuels, time, and money. Also, it'd make an otherwise wild river look ugly as sin... not to mention the impact on local wildlife. We get the point Christo: you're a rich, not-that-talented sensationalist. Sure, you're a visionary but so was Hitler. If your vision is flawed it needs to be mocked out of existence lest your bad ideas spread. Planet Earth is not your canvas. Here's a real idea from some grand scale art to help you piss away your excess riches: plant $7 million worth of trees or put $7 million towards studying/fighting the pine beetle infestation thrashing Rocky Mountain forests. In the world of today, wasting $7 million on something like this pretty much guarantees you a footnote in art history under "completely disconnected and irrelevant lunatic". Stop celebrating wastefulness and stupidity.

First time the wrap was wonderful, crazy, wildman, do it, do it. Afterward the effort seems hardly worth the millions. Why not just draw a "wrap" on good paper. Life is too short to do the same sort of thing over and over, especially when the artist prefers not to be bothered by the work of finding patrons. Maybe this why some people go ballistic when public funds are used to create something ephemeral. I am a decade or so younger than Christo, but now I am begining to feel like a much older crank.

Christo has done a few awesome works--but this is awful. Bad bad bad idea. Good for the enironmentalists. Yes, his wife took on the thankless admin role women/wives always do, and the "chemistry" excuse is just a euphemism for "I'm a big ego male artist who can't be bothered to condescend to negotiate respectfully and patiently with people and communities who will be massively impacted by my grandiose and rather vapid concoctions." Bah.

I agree, while I have in the past loved Christos projects (as an art history professor), I do think there comes a point where it does interfere with the immediate natural environment and its eco-systems. Perhaps the scale is too large, perhaps the site specificity should be rethought, but I am in favor of wildlife on this one. We have enough landscape art, environmentally unfriendly textiles, waste, and other interventions in an already diminished landscape. Its one thing to clothe Buildings, but another to disturb natural and delicate habitats, out of the desire to further a career or hypothetical conceptual exploration at the expense of things that may no longer be around much longer.

Love him or hate him, this is terrible idea. Generally I don't have a problem with Christo's projects, but blocking out the sun on a river? Draping a beautiful canyon with anything is wrong headed, arrogant and indicative of the sorts of manifest destiny and shortsightedness that guides human's environmental interactions throughout history. It is really, really stupid.

The Bureau of Land Management's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Over the River was released in July. Here is a link to a website where you can find out more. http://www.overtheriverinfo.com/index.php/get-involved/review-the-draft-eis/ The BLM subsequently held four public meetings inviting comments on the project and its environmental impact, three in the Arkansas River Valley and one in Denver. These meeting last from 1 - 1.5 hours, which seems to indicate very little opposition to the project on environmental grounds.

Most of ROAR's oppositional complaints seem rather trivial or even wrong-headed, but there is one very important concern they raise: "Disruption of wildlife and interference with their watering, feeding, breeding, etc." While most of Christo's projects are installed in urban or semi-urban settings, the river piece would certainly negatively impact wildlife; it's just a question of how many species and individuals would be negatively affected, and how negatively. It looks to be a stunning project, but unless the environmental impact statements give a green light - and I can't see how a project of this scope wouldn't be rather problematic - I encourage Christo to head back to the city.

Way to him.... ROAR is just looking for something to nag about! Why don't they roar about something which does not carry the talent, skill, imagination of an artist like Christo. I don't know, maybe 'global warming' - or maybe they're bored with silly things like that already!? Carry on, may Christo create this and many more wonders in the future! Perhaps wrap all these environmentalists in rags wouldn't be a bad idea.