Curator’s Statement
Because of the ineffable nature of the processes by which public art projects are realized,
many exciting concepts for art works accessible to the public never come into being.
This exhibition is intended to spotlight
some of the particularly interesting works that might have been, and
should be rekindled.The existence of art works in public places is an
indication that a community cares about the lives of its citizens. Public
art provides us, every day, with experiences beyond the mundane: intriguing,
delighting, educating, even challenging us. It has the power to ignite
our imaginations, to bring us into another plane of being, as we go about
our
routine tasks in the ordinary places of life and work. A public art program
in a community promotes the creation of visual manifestations of our
sense of place, of qualities in our environment, of the nature and history
of our
cultural traditions. The art exists for the people, accessible, not enshrouded
in buildings to which one must pay an admission fee.
Why is there so little
public art out there, to humanize the urban environment? As this
exhibition attests, there is no shortage of rich creativity among
artists in America, or of ideas for projects that might exist – and
this exhibition is able to show only the tip of the iceberg.
Many cities have percent for arts programs, but unfortunately
Boston is not among them.
It is sad to see the original master
plan, “Permanent Arts Opportunities” for the Artery
Arts Program (shown on the entrance wall to the show), and to
realize how few of these locations will in fact have art
(some will).
Many of the projects that “might have been” for
Boston are shown as developed proposals in this exhibition. But Boston
is far from alone in canceling, abandoning, or simply not commissioning
public art
projects.
Proposals and developed designs are also shown from Colorado,
Connecticut, Kansas, New York, Texas, and other parts of our country.
Every one of these projects
should be realized in the world, should be given full-size tangible
form. Why do they not exist? Some projects were abandoned or
cancelled in mid design by the agencies which commissioned them.
Some died from reallocation of funds (and why are funds always
pulled first from art?) Some were ended for political reasons,
such as changes in administration. Some died because the sites
for which they are designed are
not built. Some were abandoned because the scope of work presented to
the artist was changed, so the artwork no longer satisfied. Some will
not exist because they were competition proposals, and another artist
was chosen by
the selection committee – at least these represent the beginning
of a sound process which may result in the eventual completion of public
art at a site. But the concepts of these art works not chosen still deserve
to exist in
some form elsewhere.It is hoped that this exhibition of these few (among
many) proposals will awaken a desire for their completion. Little of
the contemporary built environment possesses any sense of the “essential
quality of the place”. Do we citizens really want barest-bones-lowest-bidder
engineering to create the
urban fabric in which we spend most of our lives? We deserve art in our
public spaces.
Leila Daw, Curator
5/15/2003