Can we call the people who make public art, artists?
For some theorists, the idea of a public artist is contradictory.
In Jane Rendell's exploration of the relationship between art and architecture she suggests that public art is not often without function and also is hardly ever public because it is generated by corporations and other organisations. She suggests abandoning the term in favour of 'critical spatial practice, 'which allows us to describe work that transgresses the limits of art and architecture and engages with both the social and aesthetic, the public and the private."
( A place between, Art and Architecture p.6
http://www.janerendell.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/Art-and-Architecture-prepublication.pdf)
Despite the myriad social and cultural contributions of public art, it has
never gained credibility as a fine art discipline. There seems to be an unspoken
consensus in the fine art establishment that public art is synonymous
with compromise, dilution, and dependency.
Cameron Cartiere and Shelley Willis (Introduction, The Practice of Public Art)
http://emc.elte.hu/seregit/PracticeofPublicArt.pdf
what does art practice mean?
The word practice implies repeating and also doing the same action over and over in order to learn and to perfect.
The idea of pure art is that it is not subject to external forces, such as political correctness, anti-vandalism strategies, maintenance programmes, designed to suit a particular environment or idea.
One could say that public art is not made, it is designed. Or because it has so many rules which serve to make it more functional, perhaps it could be called a craft.
Can an artist practice public art, if she cannot make an artwork in public space without taking into consideration things such as permission, aesthetics, community input, safety, the permanence or maintenance of the materials etc. How does onedevelop and practice the use of permanent materials in public space. Public art practice is not like other art practices. Sometimes an artist's usual practice can be adapted to public space, often with the assistance of engineers and architects. Does this mean that it can be authentically an art practice?
It could be argued that it is a less rigorous artform because of its limitations.
The only way that public art is truly practiced as an artform is illegally or interventionally. Our idea of an art practice, is that the artist continues to make and develop their work as they go, and by making, they discover new things and develop their ideas. This typical art practice rarely happens in the genre of commissioned public art, unless it is done more than once and has the opportunity to develop over several placements. Craftivism, grafitti and street art could be seen as more authentic art practices in this field as they usually are part of a repeated and developed practice of making that evolves in public space. It could be argued that many genres of street art and graffitti have their own rules and restrictions, but the opportunity to develop work by practice is available in these forms simply because they do not conform to the general requirements of commissioned public art.
There is another way of looking at the public art dilemma, and that is with unabated joy that it does not form part of the fine art world. That it has no relationship with traditional ideas about art practice, that what is done is not art, perhaps can be seen as an edifying thing, a desired attribute. In public space you operate in a new world without rules or a long tradition.
The artist's role.
Have I been herding People?
I ask myself.
why am I doing this?
In one sense the role of the artist in public art is also changed from the norm. When operating in public one has to consider the audience. when you leave the studio and practice in public space, you need to respect that it belongs to more than you. Shrigley said in one of his cartoons, that when an artist makes the work at home he can do what he wants but when he hangs it in an exhibition he has to consider the audience. It changes what he does. The movement of the art from a private space to a public space takes on a burden of cesorship, polical correctness, engaging and pleasing the audience, being careful not to offend, playing a new role. Shrigleys exhibition played with these ideas by being a little naughty. He has a life drawing model set up in one room, a plaster man with no clothes on, that can intermittently pee into a bucket. I winced when I walked in and felt for the children, who of course loved the opportunity to take up pastels and draw him. (find quote)
organics
one of the qualities of art is that the materials and the art work together. Design is where its decided whats happening and then thats what happens. In art practice, there is a tug of war between materials, the ideas, and then the accidents and what happens when the artist gets involved. often by the practice, which is making over and over, the artowrk devleops.
Public art practice does seem to require the artist to look outside themselves, instead of deep into their own souls. It is not an internal practice, it is about the public space. one has to ask what right have you to put the work there and what its relationship is to the audience who are forced to put up with it. these questions are not asked of the artist when they dabble in their studio alone.
again this role changes even more when the artist acts as a facilitator of community members making art in public space. Here the artist can take on many roles:
- aesthetics control ( where the artist uses different means to keep the artwork appealing)
- quality control ( where the artist tries to make sure the artwork is technically proficient and also of good quality. They might do this by setting rules about how the artwork has to be made or rules abotu what gets included inthe final presentation).
- keeping to plan - artworks are usually organic things, so the artist can keep this organic process on track so that the final result will appear to be what had been discussed. There might be some leeway for the artwork to take on a life of its own, or there may be not.
- keeping to the timeline
Well here is a little sketch of my public art practice. Repeating processes so that you can go sideways in small steps and improve on areas that you were unhappy about previously is a very important part of any art practice.
And actually there are some areas where this drawings doesn't tell the truth. These artworks on the sides are rewalked around several times, each time I plan and execute a new artwork in the same vein. If you go back and stroll around (in my head) then you can think about them and what it means for the new one. What do you not like about the old one and what can be done better ( more importantly what better actually means and why its important to do better). tangle tangle.
so if I did draw all of these paths of the mind, back and forth, it would look like a proper tangled piece of knitting that the kitten had got hold of.
relationship between public art and street art
curly
both are public art practices. As you put your art on the street, you might develop it further, considering how the audience responded, how it worked physically in the site. by actually practising and doing it, you may develop some insights into what would make it better. Street art is more often intervention, than commissioned. when comissioned it has the same layers placed on it that public art has, except for perhaps the considerations for permanency. Very rarely is a street art practice used to make permanent art.
An example of this, however is the baby Guerilla paste up on Victoria University.
many people talk about this artwork, it is much loved. but included is usually the question, is it permanent?
aspects of both street art and comissioned permanent public art
street art permanent public art
usuallu small due to cost. apart from murals is hardly ever discreet and small
( challenge, make some large street art)
is often a series of small things is usually one big thing
free usually paid for by somebody or some organisation
not owned by anybody owned by a council, or landowner
not preserved protected until deaccessioned
what they both share
both regrded as art
both are made for an audience
both have creators or artists
both are expressions of culture.
they usually take up physical space'
both can be an eyesore.
they won't please everyone
perhaps an interesting challenge would be to make something that lies in between the two, to break donw the barriers.
how about a photogrpah of the goldfields sculpture!
I must go and take that for you!
No comments:
Post a Comment