[TheForge] Public Art

[Andrew Vida]

RIES NIEMI wrote:

>I am starting to put together info for a presentation at the Abana
>conference next summer on public art by blacksmiths.
>I am interested in hearing from anyone who has done public projects.

	Hooboy... :)

> Public art is a lot like pornography- hard to define, but I would know it if
> I saw it.
> 
> My current working description is:
> 
> Usually, but not always funded by governmental agencies- cities, states and
> counties, or quasi governmental bodies such as rapid transit districts,
> sports stadiums, or libraries.

	How about breaking it into two divisions: that art which is 
	located in public spaces and either officially sanctioned or 
	commissioned, and that which occupied public space and is not
	officially sanctioned.

	A sculpture in a park, commissioned by the city and paid for
	with tax monies would be an example of the former.

	Grafitti on a subway car would be one example of the latter.

	Not all unofficial public art is considered polluting and
	undesirable.

	Not all official public art is loved, liked, or even accepted.
> 
> The artist blacksmith is chosen to design and fabricate the work.
> 
> Original artwork- not reproduction work or work based on historical photos
> or designs.

	How and why does a copy disqualify work as "public art"?  
	Just curious.
> 
> Could be sculpture, decorative ornamental iron, furniture, hardware, or
> other building parts.
> 
> Often integrated with architecture and design, the artist/blacksmith is
> often involved at the earliest stages of designing the building or space.
> 
> Probably not:
> private commissions for houses or commercial buildings
> sculpture made "on spec" then sold to someone who puts it in front of a
> building.

	What about a public building?

> Designs by others- architects, decorators, or clients showing a picture from
> a book and saying "make one like this".

	Why not?
> 
> My idea is to talk about a category of work different from just making
> railings or driveway gates. Instead, this stuff is usually mandated by law
> on public buildings, and they try to make it actually "art" even though
> nobody can define exactly what that is. However, generally speaking these
> jobs allow the artist/blacksmith more lattitude to really stretch out, to do
> more personal or sculptural work, to put high quality work in the public
> arena where everyone can see it, as opposed to in private residences.

	Is this really so?  Consider how such works are procured.  First,
	there is a public call for the work wherein the parameters are
	given.  This then goes to bidding for designs (I believe price
	is usually fixed up front).  Then a choice is made by some body
	of officials... based upon what?  Over on artmetal we just went
	through a whole discussion on this experience of one of the
	members.  He came up with a really cool design for one of the
	municipal airports in  California.  The design they chose was
	comparatively trite, cliche, dull, PC, and I suppose safe in the
	eyes of the officials making the choice.  Compared to his work
	it was a horrible little travesty that gave off the stench of
	pandering cowardice, though I may well be mistaken on that.  
	But they were, after all, deciding an issue that may not have 
	been political in and of itself, but was perhaps turned into
	one by the sorts looking to be mayor or chief dog catcher one
	day.
> 
> Please email me if you have completed or are working on projects like this.
> I will be gathering slides, and talking about the process in general, how to
> get this kind of work, the good and bad points of these jobs, and discussing
> specific projects.
> On the one hand, these are the dream jobs where someone says "heres $50,000-
> make whatever you want. On the other hand, there are all kinds of rules and
> regs, buearocratic hassles, and endless meetings with the requirements of
> dressing up and being social.

	I'm not sure this is quite so, but there are others more tuned
	in to such things than I.  I think you get the money when your
	designs prove the best suited for the application.  How that is
	determined is probably not anything remotely resembling exact
	science or equitability, at least in many cases.

	I think you have a really good idea here, Ries, but I feel that
	maybe you need some adjustments to your premises about public
	art.  I may be way wrong here, but it seems to me that the salient
	concept is "public", as here I mean official public art, though
	I can see some real potential to investigating cases where
	unofficial public art has captured the imagination and support
	of the public.  Perhaps someone plopped an iron sculpture in the
	towm square at 3 AM without permission and it became the joy of
	the public.  Just a thought.  Question as to original or copy,
	is that really relevant.  Not saying it isn't, just askling the
	question.  You listed a few characteristics but didn't really
	explain why you held these as defining terms.  My contention
	is that if you want this to be a truly effective presentation,
	the foundation may need some further fleshing out so that the
	viewer will have a more complete understanding of what it is
	you are presenting and why.  I hope you don't take this as 
	anything other than a most constructively offered criticism.