Student Art: Pavs or Pavesest?

I have to say that since I got to UChicago campus I have been overwhelmed with the amount of low budgetry and pavsness which abounds. Sometimes I'm not even sure what category to put some of the crazy things which I witness. For example: Overheard outside of Reynolds Club-"I decided not to drink because I was on meth." Um. In what logical universe does this sentence exist? If you are making the already poor decision to do meth, what is stopping you from drinking. Your health? Really?

In any case, while leaving the café in the basement of Cobb Hall one day in a particularly pavs mood I came across this:

As you may be able to tell from its low budget nature, this is a peice of student artwork. Not surprising to find on a campus like this. UChicago, perfectly capable of providing its own artwork, is probably loathe to prominently display student artwork unless it is something amazing, so it's not surprising that this particular piece was relegated to this musty basement. What was surprising however, as I looked at the artist's statement was that this peice of artwork was completed and placed there in 1999. That was 12 years ago. I'll let that sink in.

Now, there is always the hopeful interpretation that this peice of artwork is timelessly beautiful or meaningful for the curator of this weird basement art display space. Possible. Not, however, probable. More than likely it was placed there back in 1999 and someone forgot about it. It has been sitting there neglected for 12 years and will probably sit there until someone renovates after a fire or a flood. There is a certain "If a tree falls in a forest..." nature about this artwork. Except for the fact that trees are inherently beautiful and useful even after they have fallen down and this peice of artwork is only pavs.

I wonder if the artist has long ago forgotten that his artwork was ever on display. Does he or she know that it is there? Were they proud or insulted that it was placed there? What are they doing now?

There is something inherently pavs about art to me. We can pretend that art is eternal, but the only thing that makes it eternal is if someone gives a good reason for it to be considered eternally beautiful, useful and/or thought-provoking. There are movies that were never seen, buildings that were never built that are still more important and eternal than the vast majority of the creative output of the entire world.

Suffice to say-this makes me so pavs.