Guest Opinion: Another personal view on public art -- don't plop eggs Guest Opinion: Another personal view on public art -- don't plop eggs (August 24, 2005)

by Ken Alsman

I tend to agree with the general idea expressed by many members of Palo Alto's Public Art Commission in a recent article that everyone has their own taste in art, a sense of what they appreciate and enjoy.

This is obviously true for a private collection, art for one's home and choices of exhibits and galleries to visit. But I part company with this idea for public art -- especially permanently sited works -- where commission members express their personal views as if speaking for the entire community. I have great respect for the devotion to art and time spent by commission members. Unfortunately, sometimes we can almost hear a superior voice whisper, "The commission is going to educate the you, the public, to cause you to think."

I am a strong advocate for public art and enjoy several of the works in town. However, I believe permanent public art should be uplifting and positive. The pieces also need to be part of the setting; an artistic and aesthetic component of the location; incorporated into, not fighting, good urban design.

The work cannot just be dropped into a space -- generally referred to as "plop art." It should be designed to help "make" a space, define it, complement it and be part of it -- not an object just plopped down because we can afford it and have it.

Ideally public art is approachable, loved, touched and admired, and it is most rewarding when it engages children. There is a large bronze "piggy bank" at the Seattle market -- not high art by any means but great public art -- with a snout and tail that shine from the hands that constantly caress it as people pass by.

Many cities in Europe commission major thematic pieces to depict and identify their communities. The artwork might evoke an historic event or perhaps a legend -- a town with a legendary dragon may commission a major piece for a plaza, civic entrance or park incorporating the dragon as a bench or entrance piece.

A few months ago an article said that with a budget of $55,000 per year Palo Alto has bought 20 pieces in the last three years. That's an average of 6.7 per year at $8,250 each. At that rate we will have 66 more pieces of "art" in the next 10 years. Are they needed? Where will they go? Is there a plan? What are the guidelines?

Ideas?

1) Stop buying awhile. Instead, devote resources to identifying needs and settings. Coordinate with the Planning Commission, Historic Resources Board, staff and citizens concerned about the Palo Alto's urban-design needs. Set positive, specific guidelines for what new works should accomplish. Coordinate with major public works projects.

Then, and only then, seek out talented artists, explore their ideas and acquire work that fits. Budget the money, but spend it only after spending the time and then buy one really fine piece every two or three years.

2) Set a reasonable and recognizable theme or program for art in a district. Greg Brown's work has been a great success in downtown -- recognizable, fun and never boring. While I appreciate the efforts on California Street, its lack of continuity or rationale is a bit unnerving. Maybe that was the goal but is there a better way to help define this district?

3) If there is still a desire for more artworks, the city could invite artists to submit work for temporary display, pay the artists a stipend to display their works in parks throughout the city or perhaps a central sculpture garden, with a promise to purchase one or two at the end of the exhibit.

Then let the community be the final jury, pick the winner and select its destination. Mountain View held a similar competition when it kicked off its arts program several years ago. City officials asked for proposals, selected 20 pieces for a year-long outdoor exhibition around the Civic Center, involved residents and students as docents to give tours of the art, and selected three works for their permanent collection. Palo Alto purchased one of the other pieces.

4) Palo Alto could also consider a program such as that in Los Altos. Their Art Commission invites proposals, juries submittals and contracts with artists to display work for a specified time. After a set time, the city or private parties may purchase the work. The program is relatively inexpensive, provides a range of fresh art each year and doesn't mean the city has to keep and display the works forever. Maybe Palo Alto could decommission and offer some its collection for private sale -- if pieces sell, the funds could help implement a more comprehensive program.

One last thought on the recent addition of the egg in the middle of Lytton Plaza downtown: Eggs should never be plopped. And, in my mind, redesign of the plaza is long overdue and not measurably helped by its new addition.

Ken Alsman is a Palo Alto resident, a former Mountain View city planning official and is presently a co-owner of a new antique shop on Alma Street at the south edge of downtown Palo Alto. He can be e-mailed a kenalsman@aol.com.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]