services and materials

Public Art Conference Archive—2001

Panel Presentation: Turning Up The Volume: Increased Visibility Of Public Art

• Moderator: Glenn Harper, Sculpture Magazine, Washington, DC
• Panelists: Alice Aycock, Artist, NY, NY, Casey Blake, Professor, Department Of History, Columbia University, NY, NY and Jeffrey Kastner, Writer, Brooklyn, NY
• Notetaker: Jessica Bluebond Langman

Summary
Public art tends to make the news only in times of controversy. This roundtable discussion will focus on ways to increase the visibility of public art in the media and in the dialogue on contemporary art. Questions for discussion include: Are public art projects too complex for the media to deal with? How can we get the attention of writers and publications? Why does the art press pay so little attention to public art? How can we increase the level (as well as the volume) of critical discussion on public art? How can we deal with controversy more effectively?

After introducing the three panelists, Glenn proceeded to talk about the issue of public art and visibility. He noted that the problem of media visibility that artists and art administrators face is often the opposite of the problem that the audience faces because what each wants can differ. Glenn then began the dialogue presenting a few questions to the panel, followed by questions from the audience.

Jeff Kastner said that ironically there was an article in the Friday, July 27, N.Y Times about public art. He noted that it raises the interesting question of what we want when we talk about visibility. The N.Y. Times article was a series of capsule reviews under the heading public art. Is that the right type of press? The annual public art article is a bit of a gilded cage as it ghettoizes public art and neglects to recognize each piece as its own artwork.

Artist Alice Aycock responded that she works in the genre of public art and doesn't know what her colleagues are doing, what issues they are grappling with. This round up review is an annual article, which is only published in the summer when there is a lag in gallery exhibitions. Alice posed the question, how do we get enough money to pay the people to get interested in public art pieces? She is tired of talking about the process, saying, "We need to do the work and focus on the art." Alice stressed the importance of good photographs. She also stated that we must prioritize and show only good work, she is tired of the bad.

Casey proclaimed himself an outsider to the field, but expressed his interest. He reiterated what was said by the other panelists and added that he thinks there is a problem of over visibility with the usual controversial works. He said that we need principled refusals to playing the roles assigned to us and we need to think about new ways to educate the media, politicians, suggesting off the record meetings to familiarize the press with public art.

Glenn seconded Casey's comment. He also defined two types of writers, those for art magazines and those for mainstream magazines. With art magazines there is some coverage but it is not regular and the photographs are not always great. He expressed the need for funding and sponsorship of new types of magazines. With PAN and other web sites, you have to be a member so it is not public.

A: Jeff expressed a concern for even having specifically public art magazine, challenging the separate but equal notion. He was interested in incorporating public art into the existing press. As public art consistently receives Metro Section treatment, Jeff asked, how do we move public art into the broader context of contemporary art? He suggested taking risks during the commissioning process, hiring artists who are qualified but don't necessarily have experience in the realm of public art. One of the questions on his sheet, he explained, was is public art in a parallel world. Jeff wondered why it had to be. He thinks of Alice, for example, as an artist who works in public space.

Alice responded that she would like Art Forum to do a great article on public art, but as a friend said, the art world responds to money and thus reacts to commodity works. Sculptures and installations have always had problems. She has enormous awe for Frank Gehry, but she noted that he only got a large amount of attention when he associated himself with a museum. This is the world we live in now, she said. Artists have to solve a myriad of problems – community design, code regulations, computers. How do we get light to shine? Galleries put ads in magazines to get coverage. We need money, she said, we have to face the issue.

Glenn agreed with Alice to a certain extent about the need for ads. Getting information to the magazines is also a key factor, he noted. He thought that a public art magazine that was published more frequently (on-line too) would help to start the buzz.

A: Casey explained that there are people in society who have a vested interest in perpetuating this controversy. Art wars, culture wars, we should be conscientious objectors to these controversies, he said, and instead try to approach the public art process in a thoughtful way. We need to question ourselves and be our own tough critics. Casey worries about the question of publicness giving way to publicity.

Alice drew a distinction between mass culture and the public. In the movie industry, with surveys and polls, the industry determines the masses' desires. It is time for artists to think about this. We just had an election, many of us don't think that it is fair, and then as artists jump on board and do cliché work, shill for government. Let's be honest, she said.

Jeff agreed, stating that there are a platitude of issues which extend beyond the political. It is time to allow artists to work the way they want to. Commissioning agencies must run interference to protect artists. It is scary because commissioning agencies are the machine, but it is also necessary. Public art must be allowed to fail as well as succeed, it is time for risks.

A: Alice said that she did more temporary public art at the beginning of her career and she definitely took more risks. She explained that the artist gets a lot of experience from those sorts of projects, but in the end all there are are slides. Alice thought that temporary projects were great, but if that same energy could be brought to permanent work it would be incredible. There is always the concern about maintenance, but in many of these high-tech new buildings, Alice is skeptical of that excuse. She also noted that if all this time and money is being spent on brochures, etc, why can't commissioning agencies pay for great photographers and then send those pictures out?

Glenn responded that they get photos from a mixture of places – artists, agencies, galleries. However, they often don't get photographs or at least not good photographs. Sculpture Magazine receives 6-8 submissions for every one they use, but that's still a lot fewer than has been done. Publicity is important for increasing discourse.

Alice explained that there is a lack of experience, there are lots of things to deal with, it takes time to learn how to do public art. There are artists doing some of their best work in public art, she said, but instead of an anonymous committee, we need a private sector that supports art and is on the artist's side. Alice said that although she does not want to be a publicity hound, you can't up the ante without it. There isn't necessarily a university setting in which to discuss public art, but there needs to be some sort of forum created which can overcome geographic distances which impede discussion.

Jeff felt that the process of commissioning public art can compromise the artist's work. The commissioning agency needs to make space around the artists in which they can work, he said.

Casey asked whether there are spaces that could serve for useful art criticism. He has discovered that artists find that they lack a critique vocabulary–how to measure success. He wonders, how does one create this critical vocabulary?

Glenn commented that he has done substantial thinking about mapping vocabulary and thus thinks that the lack is not from lack of trying. Glenn wants people to go to see public art at an airport, for instance, as a destination not a pass through.

Glenn responded that he thought the question had already been answered.

Audience Q: How can we change the structure to include press coverage?

Glenn said that part of the budget needs to go towards creating a space for public art.

Alice added that she knows project managers work hard, but it's time to rethink this system a bit – everyone is getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop. She does know some of her colleagues, she said. But when she reads a ten page contract she realizes that there is no money left at the end for publicity. People worry that if they gripe too much, all the money will disappear.

Glenn referred to the Fairmount Park model, which has published a book.

Jack Becker stood up and defended Public Art Review Magazine. He said that they need more money and more letters to the editor. He gave a call for submissions. Jack also suggested calling local media and arranging a tour for them.

Glenn noted that his magazine is planning a special on public art because they realized that everything they were putting in the issue was public art.

Alice noted that she has seen people on cable stations doing wonderful interviews with artists and others. Of course, though, not everyone is going to look at those stations. She has had pieces in movie backgrounds, which helps. Barbara Kruger sends buses through New York.

Jeff sited Mel Chin's infiltration of Melrose Place, a television drama. Did the audience know or notice Mel Chin, he's not sure. An audience member who had run Cow Parade, revisited the question dismissed earlier by the panel. He said that while no one says it was the best thing, it received tons of press, employed lots of artists, got businesses involved, and started attention. It was a tool, not an end. While it may not be critically successful, the masses loved it. He found the panels refusal to discuss it elitist. A huge amount of good came out of Cow Break as it really did reach the people. It has also led to more projects and they didn't have to pay a dime for publicity.

Glenn asked if the local media is now calling about public projects in general?

The audience member replied yes and said that the media now pays attention to them when they call. He also mentioned that in Chicago they have a television show on public art. The people here are talking about reactive press, we need to be proactive.

Jeff wondered if the publicity that surrounded Cow Break could have worked for a more sophisticated theme?The audience member talked about the public's embrace of the project. They are currently going a chair display, which includes some of the artists' own work. Although this exhibit is quieter, they're still happy with the response.

Jeff asked if New York would be comparable.

The audience member thought that they were different.

Casey spoke of the need to lay infrastructure, possibly through something like Cow Break.