Reading into "On The Road"

April 25, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
In June, the Indianapolis Museum of Art will be showcasing the 120-foot-long scroll on which Jack Kerouac wrote his landmark work "On the Road." My question: Is the scroll itself art or artifact?

The scroll -- famously owned by Jim Irsay -- won't be alone on display. It will be joined by 83 cross-country photographs by Robert Frank, who collected them in the his 1958 book "Les Americains." For more details on the exhibition, click here

For a brief history at the scroll – and a look at it -- click here.

Your thoughts?
  • Interesting question. On the artifact side of the argument, the words on the paper are called the defining novel of the Beat Generation, thereby representing a specific historical time period and a cultural phenomenon. The scroll itself represents a period of technology that many Americans alive right now never experienced, and illustrates how one writer adapted his need to this reality; while Kerouac couldn’t make corrections on his “screen,” he could type as continuously as we can on today’s PCs, thereby creating his own crude type of word processor.

    At the same time, the scroll is arresting to view. It’s creative. It’s mind-boggling to imagine a man so involved in his creation that he couldn’t be interrupted long enough even to insert a new piece of paper into the typewriter. And the fact that the scroll was created for a practical purpose doesn’t preclude it from being art.

    I started out convinced it was an artifact. But as I thought about the Native American art I’ve seen at the Eiteljorg Museum – some of which ostensibly was created for a practical purpose – my certainty became shaky.

    What’s your take, Lou?
  • I've never seen it, I would guess that it would be accurate to call it art because it intends to be a creative piece, not merely a documentation.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.