Page 124 - David Bermant Foundation

confused as to the why’s of this hostility, but even more mystified by its rectification.The entire problem can be summed up by Alvin S. Lane’s question during the Serra controversy: “Isthe purpose of public art to benefit the artist or the community?” Obviously there is an ingredient that must be considered in the placing of public art that I believe has been ignored until now: the public! After all, the public space is owned by the public, the art that’s there has been paid for by the public and, most important, that very space is occupied by the public. Consequently, the emphasis on “site specific” should be shifted to another kind of specific: PEOPLE SPECIFIC.Continued disregard for the public’s opinion can result in the partial or entire dismantling of the hard-earned “one percent for art” programs. The author of the Stroll magazine article spotlightedthe recent elimination of the Tacoma, Washington, public art program by public referendum because of the outrage created by Stephen Antanakos’ $272,000 neon artwork for Tacoma’s Dome.That artists are beginning to recognize that consideration of the audience is the one ingredient essential for successful public art is typified by remarks reproduced in the Stroll article: well-known public artist Siah Armajani states, “ . . . if public art is beyond comprehension, then it’s not part of life.” Sculptor Scott Burton points out, “The important thing is to make art that is intelligible to a non-art audience.” And Seattle artist Richard Posner states, “Art in public places needs to speak with (rather than at) the people who live and work there.”This, then, is the challenge. The solution? One can be found in the use of materials by artists that are easily recognizable by a non-art audience, materials that are transformed into aesthetic objects—from the ordinary to the extraordinary. A material quite familiar to the non-art audience happens to be the product of the one feature unique to our society, distinguishing it from any previous society: technology.Today’s technological artist uses the technology of our day to create his or her aesthetic effect.The resulting art form uses, besides technology’s materials, its theories and byproducts; it celebrates, criticizes and even pokes fun at it. The nontraditional materials it uses widen the scopeof the subject matter of the visual arts, incorporating the verystuff of everyday living.How appropriate that itshould be placed in everyday places! (continued on page124)123