Shared Blog Post Public Art: Andy Menzel, Emmalee Warren and Luke
Shared
Blog
For
our shared blog we chose to talk about a big topic that has really blossomed in
the past few decades, public art. This has had massive implications not only
how we as a society make art but also understand its impact around us and our ever-changing
urban landscape. For this post we wanted to stick to larger outside landscape
style public displays of art, but keep in mind that most art especially in
todays, museums and colleges would qualify as “public” art. This is just art
that’s open to the public, but for a long time that wasn’t the case. Art was
reserved for the wealthy aristocrats. As the artist Banksy puts it “you don’t
have to go to college, drag around the heavy portfolio, mail off transparencies
to snooty galleries or even sleep with someone powerful to become famous”
(Jones, 2013). In a way he’s absolutely right, social media has allowed artists
to essentially become famous overnight, we see this trend especially on
platforms like TikTok.
Other
forms of public art that can be visually stunning and appealing to us is large
scale sculpture, a great example being something like Jeff Koon’s balloon dog, however
the epitome of large-scale sculpture would really be the husband-and-wife duo
of Christo and Jeanne Claude. These two have been working together for quite
some time and they have pulled off many large-scale art installations as a
result. Of course, this can cause a few problems mainly due to the art and its
effect on the surrounding nature and how its viewed. In our modern world, with
less and less nature, people go to nature and parks to escape the gray looking
urban jungle that they live in to reconnect with nature. New York Cities
Millenium Park is a great example of this. The pair actually spent years
working on project and when it was eventually installed in the park it was met
with criticism by many. The work, a series of large orange square shaped
“gates” essentially ran the entire perimeter of the park, however viewers noted
that it clashed heavily with the nature of the park. The arts bright colors and
jagged unnatural edges creating a visible eyesore to some viewers.
Perhaps
one of the problems of public art is that it often doesn’t consider all of the
data of the surrounding area it’s in, rather its viewed as a simple solution
instead of the more experimental idea it meant to be. A good example of a
public work that many would consider does enhance its environment would be Jeff
Koons flower dog. This massive structure is built right outside the Guggenheim
Museum in New York and this fact actually helps the statue in a few significant
ways. The first and most obvious way is the clashing aesthetics at play. One is
a steel structure with very sharp inorganic lines (the museum) while the other
is a structure that is covered in beautiful flowers with very soft lines and
curves. In an interview, Koon’s goes on and explains why he created the piece
as well as why he chooses the specific dog breed, however in the article he
makes another intriguing point that perhaps many of us have forgotten or simply
never realized. In the modern-day art has sort of become obsolete, not in the
sense that it doesn’t matter anymore and that everyone who’s an artist should
quit their job. Rather, in a sense that the environment has shifted, and the
wealthiest people are the tech people (Solomon 15). The artist states that he
wants to make art that pumps energy into people and that you would want to
rescue if you were in a burning building. Perhaps many artists nowadays,
especially younger artists must ask themselves questions like these. They are
important and perhaps many artists who make public art have asked themselves
questions along those lines as they made or designed their works.
One
of public art’s main aspects is that it is in direct communication with the
public landscape. Compared to artwork that mainly exists in a private gallery
or museum space, public art has a much larger audience and interacts with a
multitude of communities. Being located in communal spaces allows for diverse
interpretations of the both the pieces formal elements and intended messages.
Such closeness to the public will inevitably cause public art to fall under
controversy. Public art demands public participation. Public participation can
be general engagement, such as appreciation and discussion, as well as
assisting in the installment or maintenance process of the piece. How the
public chooses to interpret and engage with a piece of public art can determine
its permanence and how future viewers interact with it.
A public work subject to constant debate is Kalamazoo’s Fountain of Pioneers. The fountain was
designed by the sculptor Alfonso Iannelli and constructed in 1939. At the west
end of the fountain there are two statues that form a tower together, ones of a
settler and one of a Native American facing each other, with the Native American
statue standing outside the fountain.[1]
The fountain has a direct physical interaction with the public, as it affects
the park’s design and how people move throughout it. The lights within the
fountain illuminate the water at night, providing the public with a unique
aesthetic interaction during the day and night. While the formal elements of
the fountain compliment the park’s layout, the intention of the fountain has
been under constant criticism since the 1980s. Many of those who call for the
fountain’s removal claim it is a show of racism and white superiority. The
position of the Native American statue is lower compared to the statue of the
pioneer, making it appear as though they are kneeling as the pioneer continues
his westward expansion. Many have also pointed out that the headdress on the
Native American figure is inaccurate to the local area and question whether
Iannelli was referencing local history or displaying a stereotype.[2] Those in
favor of preserving the fountain argue that its removal is similar to erasing
local history. The piece remained a controversial topic until 2018, when the
city commission voted to finally have it removed.[3]
The Fountain of Pioneers doesn't just
demand an aesthetic appreciation, but also a deeper discussion about the
artwork’s message and local history. Inevitably, the discussion around the
fountain’s controversy is what led it to be removed.
One
thing about public art that is for certain though is that it's here to stay, and
as our landscape changes so will the art that’s made to occupy that space.
Advances in technology, material science and economics may allow for bizarre
and even weirder public art displays to be shown, the only limits are those of
the artist’s imaginations.
[1] Larson, Catherine. “Fountain of the Pioneers.”
Kalamazoo Public Library, 2013. https://www.kpl.gov/local-history/kalamazoo-history/parks/fountain-of-the-pioneers/.
[2] “Recent Controversy · Controversial Public Art ·
Public History.” n.d. Hst4080.Omeka.net. Accessed December 1, 2023. https://hst4080.omeka.net/exhibits/show/controversial-public-art/fountain-of-the-pioneers/recent-controversy.
[3] Larson, Catherine. “Fountain of the Pioneers.”
Kalamazoo Public Library, 2013. https://www.kpl.gov/local-history/kalamazoo-history/parks/fountain-of-the-pioneers/.
Comments
Post a Comment