Art and Public Space

LOOP PROFESSIONAL MEETINGS Date and hours: Friday June 3, 17.30 – 19 Venue: Hotel Catalonia Ramblas, Carrer Pelai 28, Barcelona Title: When it comes to public. Reflections on art and public space Moderator: Miryam Rubio, Public Program Coordinator at MACBA Participants: Andrés Vial, Curator & Artist Melle Smets, Artist Miguel Ayesa Usechi, Artist, Curator Paul Ardenne, Professor, Curator & Writer Ziba Ardalan, Curator, Founder of Parasol Unit 1

Meeting report by Danja Burchard Reflections on art and public spaces The question of audience in art is a rather ancient question. In the 19th century and even more in the 20th century especially during the Soviet Union art became a political tool. Politics started to use high level artists for the regulation of thought, acting and moving within their nation. In France the question for the audience of art is important, because it is related to control, an important issue for the french society. Combined with the idea of fluxus, the topic art in the public and their audiences becomes an option of control. A decision like “I don’t want to collect, I want to give an option of thought” therefore is a decision of control. To be out of control, or in control, or out and in control, the same happens with fluxus.

What is the appropriation of public art?

What is the relation between art and space and art and contemporaneity and art and public? Who is addressed by public art?

Since public art does not address only experts (Artist, curators etc.), what language do we use to prevail the message of art?

How do we address the public in a way that no additional education or a specific language is needed to perceive the artwork?

Does the experience of art change the perspective?

With this interrogative introduction, through the vision and experience of the participants, an appropriation towards public art and spaces was formulated, representing a variety of cultural profiles, such as artists, directors and representatives of institutions and theoretics. The conversation was structures through a number of keywords related to the conversation.

1. Public as common, Social political needs, Public as audience as people, Which is the return to the community? Common area? Permission no permission? Place? Institutional, Public, New audiences, Public Opinion

1

The present report aims to provide a summary of the discussions that took place during the meeting. It does not aim to be a transcription of the conversations, so we emphasize its summary character.

The secret window, a project by Andres Vial and Miguel Ayesa played with the main issues and problematics of the return of art to the community. A public screening of young local video artists in the city center of Barcelona, from one private space to the facade of a house was organized for an audience that could not be calculated or provisioned.

• Does a public screening answer to social and political needs?

• Do you approach a general public or rather a certain invited audience?

• What is the impact on people, that suddenly become audience?

What is the need of public art. Does a society need art to be given to them, even though normally they don’t have an access to it, or would they rather feel it as an intervention within their private space. Public art can be adapted in various ways. It can generate conversation and being seen as an experience. At the same time, since it is intervening and changing a daily routine, protests and disgust might be a possible perception as well. It is an action, that suddenly changes a usual situation into something unexpected and changes the concept of a public and the audience.

Public as common related to public art is in so far a difficult concept, as the public audience is hard to be defined. The tools of communication and definition of context are limited and the perception is due to the visitor. No filter of knowledge can be adjusted so the esthetic or political input it creates on the public is completely subjective.

Public art executed without a permission of the authorities faces different difficulties within the announcement and the communication of the event, which later has an impact on the success of the event and the public that has been approached. Never the less, this conclusion rises the question for motives of the public art. Is it to reach a certain number of visitors in order to have a successful event, or is the approach a more social and political one.

If so, how does that affect the perception and the maintenance of the project?

Meanwhile in Institutions the approach to the public and the audience can be defined thought a specific communication, educational activities and after all the conceptual background and narrative that gets created for specifically for the presentation of art works. Therefore the approach to the audience within a public context is to be distinguished from the public as audience within a context of public art.

2. Institutional, Public, New audiences, Public Opinion, Responsibility - to do things together - Relationship Public opinion has a big impact on artistic projects. Since the content can not be controlled or is set changing the daily context of the public and converting them into the audience, the possibility of opponents are always existent. Especially when an artistic project extends into the confort zone of the public. A vivid example is the project „Walk the line“ by Kate Gilimore. (Footnote with the link!) Since the artwork was closely related to the audience deriving from the offices in the surrounding, people protested and tried to stop the project. Only during the performance a change of opinion towards a higher level of reception could be seen. In this case the experience of the artistic project might have changed the opinion of the unwilling spectators, which can be counted as a success. If an interaction between public artwork and the public as audience takes place, the artwork even though not permanent maintains in the memory in format of an experience.

In a public space you loose the control of the audience, because the group can not be targeted and influence can not be taken. In order to target the artistic impact better, the analyzation process the public should be planted in form of a long term research. Otherwise you are addressing a micro audience with very small outreach.

3. Designing our environment, Permanent versus contemporary,Terrain, Urban, Suburban as Landscape, Periphery, Responsibility - to do things together – Relationship On what institutions or research could an artistic approach towards the invisible spaces of the city within the urban landscapes be based? When art happens in the periphery, how can you approach the audience?

Within the public the big, the monumental gets treated. What usually vanishes is the usual, the common, the ugly. The consciousness about these marginated objects is very small, even though the space occupied wide. To generate a conversation about the „invisible“ landscapes in public spaces, first a language needs to be developed, a narrative that creates a sort of curiosity and collective consciousness and allows to talk about what you are actually surrounded by. Artists have the possibility to introduce a conversation and a language to talk about things, that others might not address.

Public art and space also means to talk about materiality and what surrounds us. How come some objects get called art or culture, others not? The characterization of culture through selection of objects or topics can be opened to new thoughts through artistic approaches, inviting audiences to review culture or their daily surroundings from a new point of view, through a different narrative. Artists therefore carry the responsibility of intervention with the public as audience.

Looking at the downside of our culture, habits and society and following the thought to the end.

Once a narrative stands, a project can grow and people can intervene, people need to intervene. This is the responsibility of the project.

4. The place in between, Contextual -participation -situation -intervention, Experience, Participation and change, Conversation The approach to art through the public can be seen as the concept of “en clave” - a space, in between the spaces, a working in between. If a project gets supported by institutions, it has a relation to the real, but it is not direct collaboration, that would make the project institutional. In financial terms it means, that projects usually start without funding and depend on an idea, the narrative and out of a certain sense of responsibility to share the project with a community and to engage them into a conversation. As soon as a project moves away from the community and the outcome gets transferred into a museum as artwork, the project becomes a different social impact. The object created, as soon as it is in the museum, is no object of daily use anymore, since it becomes a different value.

This change of value happend e.g. to Krystof Wodzicko’s Homeles Vehicles and was neglected

by Melle Smets for his Turtle 1: the african car.

The concept of “en clave” of working in the between results in micro politics, which is problematic. As an artist a certain support is needed to cover your necessities. Weather it is a public support or an institutional one - it brings a dependency. Therefore the concept “en clave” is a dangerous approach for artists. If an artist creates a product and denies its application to a museum, on a ethical level it is supportable and understandable. But that means, that e.g. the support needs to be covered from other directions.

The contemporary society is not about freedom, it is about control. This adapts as well for the artists. Or you are inside of a controlled system that supports or the development of an artistic project has to be carried by the artist. The system of art is complicated exactly because of the interlaces of control and power. Within the art field the idea of friendship rules the negotiations.

If you are talking to a friend the language of negotiation gets changed, without stoping to being

one. For an artist to overcome this contradiction and to find a way to get far without money and without the counterpart is a difficult challenge, because the system that they are facing is the cultural industry.

The cultural industrie is an edge machine. It moves a lot of money dedicated to a specific culture of entertainment. As artist you are involve. A discussion about art, audience and the public space proofs the involvement. Until what extend can independent spaces really be independent, if they always depend on public support? One of the major tools to work with it is media. As soon as a project gets communicated via media, it becomes real and it takes place.

Parasol Unit, a nonprofit organization operating purely for public benefits, fills the place in between from an institutional side. Working without a collection, the concept of the space is to bring visibility to arts and young artists from an intellectual point of view. Outdoor installations in this context contain certain possibilities of visibilities and of a wide public audience. Since no idea of profit is followed, a wide range of public can be addressed. On a urban level, an cultural institution as well influences the gentrification of neighborhoods.

The conversation created or the message communicated therefore is not only important for the close public, it as well has an impact on the urban level. The difficulties of working in public spaces, is that the interpretation of the artwork or installation can’t be controlled. In the institution the context on interpretation until a certain level can be lead. Working with art in the public or in a institution therefore is a political decision. An independent and private institution has the freedom to select and work with the artists and concepts that she find appealing in an intellectual point of view. As public institution works and shows mostly have to include famous artists to attract visitors. The range of experimentation in a public institution is not as high, even though the people working in them are in search for the same thing. Experimentation with concepts and approaches towards public, space and art.

Art outside of an institution is a intervention and an punctual experience for the people but an experience that cant be conserved. Maintenance of outdoor installation of outdoor video installation is a topic, that often misses discussion. Who commissions outdoor installations? who later on keeps the responsibility of the artwork? Video art as public art rises the question about the conservation of art in the public space. What is the importance about conserving? The original does not matter, what matters is the message. What is about archiving? everything is art, everything gets archived. Imagining a live without Museums in the occident is rather difficult, while in other parts of the world the museum and archiving is a new experience. Therefore the approach to art and conservation is different.

Â