If the Landlord Wants it and the People Want it, What's the Problem?

In the past week, two great new murals have appeared. Both have strong messages and strong Art-Historical pedigrees and both were done with the approval of the landlord. The pictured image (under Belmont Bridge) is NOT however the subject of this post.

In the most recent Spotlight discussion, someone put forth a notion I'll call the Breeden Doctrine. We were talking about what it takes for a piece of renegade public art to last and she said it's quite simple: if it's good, the public will embrace it and allow it to stay. Therefore, if we want more public art, artists need to simply get their stuff out there--a leap of courage--and do good stuff.

Right now in Charlottesville, we see that dynamic playing out in real time.

About two weeks ago, a group of students from a local high school got together with a local bookstore/artspace to paint a huge mural on the exterior of the latter's downtown space, which is located in a fair dilapidated stretch but right in the middle of town.

Literally before the paint had dried, the City's Architectural Review Board threatened to fine the store for modifying the space without a permit. The mural depicts a Native American from Edward Curtis' famous series of portraits from the turn of the last century.

Aside from ruffling the quaintness cops' general aversion to any departure from the Jeffersonian style, the mural sits directly opposite the Lewis and Clark monument, complete with Sacagawea cowering behind the great white men. So the big impressive Indian Chief could seem like a thumb in the eye to some; it's certainly a response.

But you know what? Everyone I've spoken to loves the mural and the creative community seems to have rallied behind it. Even members of the ARB don't seem too upset--they just want their application and fee. So I think it will stay.

Some of the comments I've seen on local discussion fora worry about the precedent: would this not open the door to a monumental portrait of Hitler, for example. I think the answer is no: the public would not accept something they hate. This piece will be allowed to remain because it's right for the location--and a very fine painting.

Of course there's more to it (here| here | here) but it's an interesting question and it's inspiring to see artists inserting their voice into the public sphere, being slapped for it--and defended.

Notes from Spotlight 11.1: Official Public Art

Photo: Art in Place

MCGUFFEY ART CENTER
16 February 2011

Notes compiled by Linsey Mears

Elizabeth Breeden gives an overview of the Art in Place program, funded through the city’s 1% for art fund. The monies were originally designated for art (that was never realized) at the Water Street parking garage.

She explains a rule of official public art: publicly-owned pieces must be maintained in their original form of creation by the owning entity, or they must be returned/destroyed. This leads to a discussion about Tom Givens’ Whale Tail on the 250 bypass, destroyed by a microburst storm. The sculpture was replaced by a new generation of three smaller whale tails, at the time and expense of the artist. Also the notion of temporality of public art and its dependency on engineering and materials. Rick Brown’s tree sculpture [pictured] in McIntire Park, visible from the 250 bypass, is an example: formed from a fallen tree, it is ephemeral.

More practicalities of Art in Place: the artist retains ownership of his/her piece and is responsible for insuring it, generally with a 1-2 million dollar liability policy. There is no formal selection process for the city to purchase Art in Place pieces. Selections are generally based on the number of positive emails the city receives about each piece.

Breeden introduces another program she’s currently working on—a public art project in conjunction with the Jefferson School and Vinegar Hill, an historically African-American community in Charlottesville that was razed during “urban renewal” of the 1960s-70s. The art project is slated to launch on Juneteenth (June 19th, emancipation day) 2012. Also mentioned is a UVA student-made memorial in the works to honor the enslaved laborers

Beth Turner talks about UVa’s commitment to public art. She’s on the advisory committee to UVa’s president. She had much to do with the Calder Foundation’s lending of a Calder sculpture for Central Grounds. Shares that a Henry Moore bronze will be coming to the terrace of the Bayley Art Museum grounds.

Brings up considerations of public art—the effect on and relationship with contextual space of a work. Then there are the “care and feeding” considerations like lighting and security. Discussion about the Sanda Iliescu piece, Lines of Darkness and Light, an installation of black fabric on the columns of the Rotunda. President Sullivan wants UVa’s public art to open up the dialogue for change.

Turner emphasizes the value for artists of walking through an application process. UVa’s public art application exists online and any artist may apply. http://www.virginia.edu/arts/ (click on Resources link). She suggests looking at the NEA application as a model, and making a specific plan to present, then gathering supporters and stakeholders to help see it through.

Peter Krebs brings up the issue of the public artist’s need for project management. Discussion about artist as project manager, Michaelangelo and Richard Serra as models of artist-managers, and the need for education on the subject for artists.

George Sampson, head of the Arts Administration program at UVa, talks about the program. It began in Spring 2006 and has graduated 1000 students so far. He announces the Design Thinking mashup, a symposium at UVa School of Architecture Feb 22-23 2011. Its purpose is “to explore collaboration, creative research, and community in creative problem solving techniques.”

Aaron Eichorst, an artist and arts educator, describes his current public art project involving elementary school students. The piece will be a mosaic covering a bridge at a Habitat for Humanity site. Brings up discussion about artist as facilitator and agile thinker. The importance of the way artists approach and process a problem, and the inherent value of the artist’s thoughts. In Seattle, the city officially places an artist on every aspect of city planning.

Maggie Guggenheimer, director of Piedmont Council of the Arts, shares some of her experiences with public art administration. In 2008, PCA began the Storyline Project in Charlottesville, as an expansive, creative solution to a Cville Parks and Rec bus needing a new paint job.

Since then the Storyline Project has implemented a collaborative public art piece on the free speech monument on the downtown mall, a history walk, a Belmont wall project, and presently a Rivanna river walk. Guggenheimer describes the project as providing transformative experiences for both the participants and the artists/designers involved. She reminds us that the free speech wall is a readily available public resource for anyone—just contact the city.

Brings up an op-ed piece in the Hook about a recent drawing and erasure on the free speech wall that some may consider pushing the boundaries of acceptable speech and of censorship.
Discussion of the artist’s loss of control once art is put into the public context. An example is Nini Baekstrom’s public sculpture Terra Woman, which has been added to by individuals, thereby changing the artist’s intent. Is it an inherent aspect of public art or is it just bad manners? Breeden notes that all vandalism she knows of on the Art in Place pieces has been alcohol-induced.

Discussion of the meaning of official public art. Some ideas: public art as a dialogue between artist/architect and the landscape to achieve a harmonious interaction with a space; public art as the visual expression of a community’s heart.

More about Spotlight | More about McGuffey

Spotlight

Public Art can mean many things beyond statues in traffic circles.

One of the coolest things about being a McGuffey artist is that it places me right in the heart of the Charlottesville art scene. Its central location, large number of artists and open-door environment and long history mean that McGuffey plays a really important part in the region’s cultural development. As part of the Community Relations team I get to be very active that way.

One of our main forms of outreach is our Spotlight series. This year, it will be a series of open, round-room conversations about ways to enliven the arts scene. Charlottesville is an amazing place full of interesting people with visionary ideas and big accomplishments. Yet to judge strictly by its visual appearance, it could seem like a very sedate place.

When I was having coffee with Mayor Dave hashing out the details of the Buy Art Give Art campaign, he challenged us—the arts community—to find a way to get more visual art into the daily lives of residents, and to do so in a way that is visible to visitors. Spotlight will be a forum to get the conversation going.

There will be four monthly sessions, each looking at a different form of public visual culture:

Official Public Art
Wednesday, February 16 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm
The City wants more public art and artists want more public art. What can we as a creative community do to make it happen? [info]

Unofficial Public Art
Wednesday, March 16, 2011 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm
What are the benefits of and barriers to more “unofficial” public art? [info]

Radical Personal Expression
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm
Body Art, Wearable Art, Yard Art, and Art Cars. [info]

From Pocket Party to Fringe Festival
Wednesday, May 18, 2011 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm
What opportunities exist for wider artistic collaborations and celebrations in the public sphere? [info]

We’re not here to give answers, lecture anyone, nor simply complain. Our goal is to bring people with new ideas together to inspire one another and to form alliances. If some kind of creative collaboration comes out of every session, it will be a success.