[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Russia
Thank you! <a href="http://cegzygyb.com/nyzd/cqzl.html">My homepage</a> | <a href="http://blzcuoor.com/zisk/ufar.html">Please visit</a>
From: outdoor-art-box@sculpture.net
10 COMMANDMENTS OF PUBLIC ART DIALOGUE II LOIS TEICHER Dear Brian, Public Art - a very complex subject. One of my main concerns is placement of work chosen by non art people, the no.1 problem in my opinion. I don't think there is a solution, only dialogue and education. Lois Teicher EINAR MAR GUDVARDARSON Brian, thanks for what I recieve as a honest, realistic and intelligent argumentation. Most so called site-specific art is what you call site-general or even only +ACI-site-comments+ACI-. Those comments are of different kinds like comments usually are. Most of it I do not even call art because the motivation, or simply the reason for doing those objects is not artistic, although socalled artists may have +ACI-done+ACI- those things. What I mean is, they express, they symbolize, those things are a manifestation, a memory, a ..... of something that some committee has decided is of value for the public to remember. Historical moments, important people etc. Often called staues. Very often the members of those committees are without any artistic upbringing, education or even sense. What can we then expect? I do not think that the socalled public has to be educated about what is art and what is good art and bad art. For me art is beyond the criterium of good and bad. Either it works or it does not. Either it touches or it doesn+ALQ-t. But different things touch different people. Here we come to the background of people, cultural, educational, professional, personal. This is the main reason for why I put weight in my last letter on the argument that sculpture is many different things in different groups and cultures. And that this aspect can not be ignored when talking about educating people in sculpture. So my advice is: Lets make the internet work internationally through a dialogue about public art. Give it one or two years. There is no hurry+ACE- Lets cooperate with magzines in this field, also internationally, by connecting them to this dialogue and by giving them the right to publish what they want to publish from this dialougue. Lets forget everything about copyright and payments for articles if they download it directly from the outdoor-art-box. Drawings, photographs and other digital material could be part of this dialogue and a contribution by artists and others interested around the world. Lets explore this subject together and after a certain period of time make some kind of publication (the material aspect/documentation) and give it to all those committees around the world that have either taken or been given the power to decide what is done in this field and where. Because the site is not less important than the artworks that are made for, in relation, as part of etc. those sites or environment. Therefore I think that the most important is to mobilze and motivate artists, critics, directors of art institutions and everyone who has something to say about this subject. Then the dialogue will be the +ACI-campaign+ACI-. No we do not need any more rules or commandments+ACE- In my Lighcliff project, - in the preserved lava area by the North Atlandic ocean on the SW coast of Iceland and also from this year on a forested mountain in the heart of Kyoto, Japan, I have learned that the common man is willing to to throw away his prejudice about what is good and bad art and go beyond all deffinations of art and personal taste if he can simply relate to the artistic expression.Then it does not matter what category of art some smart guys decide it is. I am also talking about things beyond common imagination. And it is not mainly knowledge and experience of art that is a decisive factor in the art experience but the experience of life and beeing a human beeing with whatever personal, educational and etc. background it is. My experience is also that the power of socalled knowledge is often a very destroying power in the art field as well as in other fields of human existence. Many questions have to be asked when a person takes that power, be it me or you, an art critic, curator, publisher, director etc. and uses it to decide what art is of value and what art is not, f.eks. trough simple ignorance which is a very common thing in the socalled art world, unfortuneately. But because we know that ignorance is a human vice we should only be compassionate and try to support those people by talking to them and giving them good ideas, contacts and hints about what we think is interesting at the moment. Of course we have to do that with +ACI-no bullshit+ACI- but sound argumentation and even documentation TRUST is a keyword in this context as well as in life in general. The life we are living every one of us. And as many of you know who work internationaly, with other words in different cultures, trust and sound personal judgement is what matters. Just look at it from this angle: Why and when do we want written contracts? Although we know f.eks. that the Afghans are also our brothers+ACE- By the way, I have wanted for some years to invite Robert Irwin to Iceland to take part in the Lightcliff project on his terms: to be available in response. Can you Randy or you Brian or somebody else assist me in establishing a personal e-mail contact with him, beacause now I have got tired of finding him through galleries and agents who seem to guard his personal life better than your presidents. Yes, I mean the big guy+ACE- LIGHTCLIFF.COM will be working from the 1. of April this year. Untill then it is only e-mail contact: lightcliff-art+AEA-islandia.is Warm regards to all of you with the hope that we will have a stimulating and interesting dialogue+ACE- +ACI-K+AOY-rar kvedjur til ykkar allra med von um ad vid munum eiga orvandi og ahugavert samtal+ACI- (samtal: talk together) Einar Mar Gudvardarson lightcliff-art+AEA-islandia.is SAM SPICZKA Randy, just thought I would add my two cents to this debate. There must be a truly systemic revulsion towards "rules" and confinements of any sort amongst us artist types to chafe at such benign suggestions of conduct as these "commandments". I don't really see anything revolutionary or controversial about them and nor do I think there will be a police force imbued with the authority to arrest any artist not conforming entirely to the letter of law. I think the greater point is just one of a responsible interaction with the public, which few could object to. Flexibility and accomodation to the needs of the community/site while maintaining artistic integrity should always be the goal. To move away from the conduct of artists for a moment, I think more attention needs to be paid to that of the public and their expectations. We are still just artists after all and I think the expectation that a single object placed outside will heal the divisions and spiritual unrest of a community is unrealistic. If that is what they want, get therapy, not art. Also, the public's reluctance to commission work by artists because they believe we will come in over-budget and over-time would be rather humorous if it were not so dangerous. Every single contractor that works with cities, from the plumbing installer to the building contractor, seems to routinely cost more than expected and take too long. So, why are artists maligned across the board while everybody else just tallies up the bill? One final thought and potential topic for a future discussion concerns the increasing options and techniques for presenting ideas to a commissioning board and the public. With the proliferation of photoshop and 3d imaging, the lowly sketch/drawing as a vehicle for conveying an idea is falling out of favor. We are expected to create presentations that require no imaginative effort on the part of the viewer at all. This would not bother me so much if these new technologies were as easy to use as pen and paper, but I propose that an increase in technology requires a similar increase in the time to study how to use that technology. I believe Kenneth Snelson pointed this out as well in his interview/web-special for ISC. It is not hard to imagine a day when artists will spend so much time learning how to manipulate the software that they no longer have any time to actually think and make art. Is it too much to ask of a commissioning body to study my past work, look at at a proposed sketch and make that slight imaginitive jump to envision the new work? But I have gone on much too long. Sam Spiczka http://www.angelfire.com/mn2/sculptorsam CLAUDE DEEGAN Please foreword to Brian and any other Total Artists who also paint etc, for some legalese, or a pseudo dictionary look at this overworked subject.: BRIAN You are such a pro, and generous contributor of valuable tine and information especially as evidenced by your concern that contributors are met , recognized ,and their inputs validated. My head fairly swims and am amazed at the amount of ink and professional time already expended on this seemingly 'ethereal subject which is of such little academic, or practical value, and which contributes naught to the general well being , professional growth, or achievement of any purveyor of 'three dimensional imaging',( and others) , It may be a sad state of affairs that the truly dedicated sculptor has the time or inclination to get involved with explaining to the lesser or intellectually effete that : " Public Art is the existence of three dimensional images of various dimensions, and of various materials in places identified as sites, and that objects whose display is two dimensional are named drawings, paintings, or related terms of expression denoting the lack of a third dimension . Other forms of "art such a music, theater , film, and dance may be considered in this category. These categories are offered to the general population , and are not considered restricted or private , or out of the public sector, Location, Time, Quality, Subject, Value and or Limitations depend on sponsoring and / or governing institutions ." Too broad ??? Best kind Regards CC Deegan MARY HETRICK-VECCHIO Truly it is exciting to even imagine this dialogue happening! Brian McAvera's apologies for un-polished responses was astounding. Perhaps by not being so polished allowed for a right to the point honest response, not sugarcoating what he wanted to say. He is so thorough in his thinking that I applaud him for raking over every avenue of hurdles that one would expect to happen upon in this endeavor. Without putting uneducated communities down and seeing the potential for reaching them and attempting to create dialogue is perhaps too idealistic, in that I grew up in such a place. The attitude toward anything less, or more in my opinion , than conventional art is downright sinful in many Amer. rural communities, so the idea of innovative public art is restricted to more cultured areas where public schools are still teaching art history and able to supply students with appropriate materials to give them hands on learning . Sorry to be less than hopeful, but even in those areas there are those who have a need to see more, be more, experience more and they do get out. Albeit many of us choose many different routes to find their salvation but I believe that happens to those who are driven and have the talent. Now I am not talking about slum areas where very bright kids with unbelievable hidden talents ever see the light of day and have no chance of being salvaged. Of course in there lies the shame of the nation. I am not sure how far reaching these idealistic dreams are of having fair and impartial Public Art Boards would reach, but its a start and an adventurous one. I am one of those self-taught, with a few lessons from an incredible teacher who was also an agent for me, artist and have struggled with being recognized at all but have a following and have had many successes. I never cared what anyone thought of my art and still do not. I have to create and love it and am lucky to sell it. No, not for thousands but for enough. Never could market myself well enough for a "gallery" , refused to continue with the slide project that all gallery's demand, hate rules, so I made my bed and it is a little hard but, that is a choice I made. The ten commandments were thoroughly thought out and there are some wrinkles but I give Brian tremendous support and hope we can all as artists help with the process in any way he needs it. I need to re-read and re-read the commandments and will hopefully come up with a short, precise input that would be helpful instead of this self indulgent letter which I have decided to send anyway. Thank you Brian Mary Hetrick-Vecchio EDD ANDERSON I would like to contribute a few thoughts to this excellent discussion on public art.I begin with a quotation from George F. Ellis which I found in Scientific American Mag. Oct.1995. "The foundation line of true ethical behavior,its main guiding principle,valid across all times and cultures, is the degree of freedom from self-centeredness of thought and behavior,and willingness freely to give up ones own self interest on behalf of others." He calls this "Kenosis" a greek word meaning,self-emptying. The de-railing of the process of selection of public art that I have experienced seems to come each time from a person or group who have or seek "control" and are not being responsible to the entire community. They may represent a small but powerful faction of the community. They seem to seek personal power and influence rather than being the facilitator. The most powerful person is not the one with an idea but rather the one with the veto or even worse the power to exclude ideas from being presented to the community. when I experience a pub art sculpture project being successful its not usually the unveiling of a fine piece but rather the experience of the process of getting it there and in this process there are few rules that will work every time. It seems to be a process of individual and group growth and maturation that gets us there. When we list the kinds of people we seek in our community to represent us we are choosing titles and labels(artist,arts administrator,critic) in an attempt and a hope that these people who have some training and experience,which we identify by their degrees granted and titles bestowed will also have the maturity and distance from their own self interest to fairly represent the interests of our community. In my experience those members of the arts community whom we seek to be on selection committees are usually engaged in turf battles(to many degrees/to few jobs)and seem to do a poor job of distancing themselves from their own self-interest and as a consequence contribute no more of value to the process than do those without credentials. I believe this is the reason we frequently must choose adjudicators from outside our communities even though they know little about us or our needs. Perhaps if we choose our leaders in all of our political arenas,not just the arts, by the degree in which they demonstrate the values of Kenosis we may just stop bombing each other AND have excellent sculpture to live with. I thank all for this opportunity to struggle,special thanks to Randy for hosting. Edd Anderson SAM NOTO Brian, Thanks for your comments, I don't think idealism is much of an issue when it comes to public art. The ten commandments don't mean much if you are kept out from participating. I had hoped for some comments on qualifications of competing artists. The same well established artist get most of the work. I am sure they paid their dues and went for years working little jobs and building their resumes. That apprenticeship model is still true today. The proposals usually say "must show that individual has completed projects of similar size and scope" or words to that effect. The public art equivalent of "Catch 22" Is there a better way or should we sit on the side lines and watch and hope for a break. The other comment that you made about artists being on review panels doesn't make any sense. What good would it do for an artist who is not qualified to compete for public projects to be sitting on a review panel? Could that artist keep the panel honest and then the competing artists will know that the selection was fair? It has to be a competent artist who knows what is going on and be an active member in the process. But a new problem arises, is that artist bias? Its a cycle! Artist should be able to compete just like architects and designers do with the same level of professional esteem and competence. There may not be a better way! However, our schools should consider offering public art courses, Preparing artists for the rigors of the public art scene. Does anyone know of a school offering a public art curriculum? Sam Noto DON PARSISSON Randy, The first round of discussion on the "10 Commandments of Public Art" has been very enlightening. Thank you for facilitating it. I'd like to specifically address some of the proposed commandments. #1 - As with buildings, it seems that any piece of public art, while perhaps intended to last forever, may eventually outlive its usefulness. Witness the piles of discarded Lenins in parts of the old Soviet Union or the destroyed Buddhas in Afghanistan. Through physical decay or change of taste, the art may eventually loose its public value. It is tempting to point to surviving ancient art throughout the world to refute this idea, but no one knows how much other ancient art never made it into the modern age. Assuming that public art will or even should last forever seems foolish. #5 - This is a tricky, but I think very important, point. Getting an artistic consensus from any community will always be difficult. However, if the appropriate stakeholder communities are consulted (as in #2), the limits of acceptability should become apparent. However, moving beyond that comfort zone should also be encouraged whenever possible. The trick is to find the right balance between what is safe and what is outrageous. Compiling a catalog of now-acceptable art that was reviled when new might be useful. Photos of such pieces along with excerpts from newspapers and reviews of the time could help people see how comfort levels can change with familiarity. #6 - An educational component is indispensable. Turning the community into vested stakeholders rather than outside observers will boost acceptance of the artist, the art, and the expenditure. It now becomes "our piece of art" rather than "that piece of art." Of course, no public project of any kind ever has unanimous support, but building a sense of ownership helps dissolve the objections. #10 - I find this proposal the most intriguing. In the same way that museums have both a permanent collection and temporary shows, public entities (cities, counties, states) should be encouraged to fund both permanent and temporary public art (TPA). TPA can provide a richer experience because of the larger number of pieces that can be presented. In fact, a collection of TPA could be rotated through a number of public venues to increase exposure. Another advantage of TPA is that, knowing that they won't have to live with it "forever," municipalities may be more willing to fund edgy, experimental work. Now, one last observation (which you should feel free to omit from the public part of the discussion, since I've gone on at such length). Being new to the arena of public art, I've discovered that at least one of my basic assumptions about public art has been entirely incorrect. I have always thought of public art as any work installed in a public space, such as a park, plaza, transit station, campus, or building atrium. For that reason, I was a bit puzzled by the tone of and even the need for a set of commandments. Now, unless I'm still not grasping it, I take it that public art is more narrowly defined as art that is funded by public monies. Placement has no bearing on whether a piece is considered "public." Private(ly funded) art can be placed in public locations (such as in front of an office building) and public(ly funded) art can be placed in private locations (such as a governor's office). This all may seem like one of the most self-evident truths to most of your readers, but it constituted one of those "Aha" experiences for me. In this one respect alone, the discussion has been valuable. Thanks, Don Parsisson NATALIE VON LOEWENFELDT Brian, Clearly there are many sculptists that say they are site specific artists and are really nothing of the kind. My argument is that we cannot decide that NO public art is permanent. Hundreds of thousands of dollars spent is not necessarily a guarantee for good public art however these things should be carefully weighed before a project is begun. Committees need to be educated in what good public art requires and this in turn will provide an excellent environment for fostering the caliber of sculpture which requires permanency.> permanency. We may not be saying that memorials should be permantent just because of their cost but are we saying that we should judge weather it is permanent or not after completion? As an artist I would not invest my time and energy (lets face it after the investment of materials and time public art doesn't pay very well) in a piece of work that may shortly be torn down unless that was my intention. While it obvious that someone should make a determination on the quality of a sculpture (particularly when it is public) who will those people be? Artists? Community members? Business owners? Politicians? Historians? Wouldn't it be better if we avoided building bad public art in the first place? It is the respondsibility of the committees to educate themselves and choose a conscientious artist. This requires some guts as conscientious artists will not change their designs on a whim nor will they succumb to the pressure of politics. It then becomes the artists respondsibility to be an advocate for their own work. This means they have put significant time and energy into site planning and research and can then properly defend the design and help the committee members understand the importance of maintaining the integrity of it. I realize that all of these things do not happen in the real world, but we must continue to strive for them if we are to provide communities with significant and meaningful public art. Sincerely, Natalie von Loewenfeldt