April 9, 2006
Recently we asked a group of people to weigh in on a single question: "IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?"
" too much noise in the city old the time
So, make meny spheras filter sound and put on the city
inside sphera habe no noise ( it filter soud from the outside )
habe a caindof sofa for relax if you see up can see the sky o threes o birds
if you wan can sleep a little
for make the spheras and distribution around the city spend 10 millons
the rest money is for pay to the Mayor in government of Barcelona for legalize the graffiti ,street art,
and all connected with art in the streets"
... Lolo
Posted by marc at 8:48 AM in Roundtable |
April 7, 2006
Recently we asked a group of people to weigh in on a single question: "IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?"
First of all I would hire the best lawyers of my country. As I consider that urban art has to stay a free expression for artists it is unthinkable for me to create a kind of "foundation" or urban museum where "good and well known artists" have the possibility to work with. I love the fact that street art is the meeting of "good and bad artists" and an organized program implies a selection between the artists. It is therefore definitely to avoid. So if I had 20 millions of Dollars I would try to corrupt the cops and the politics as "Schindler" did it with the nazis during the ww2. On the other side I would ask the cops to let the artists working in the streets. At the same time I would also create a company to clean up the walls of the city and everybody would be happy: I will create employments for people, the artists will work in freedom in the streets of the city,the cops will get richer,and if I was really cynical I will make some contract with the city to pay for cleaning up the walls....But it is another story...
... Blek le rat
The Live art aspect is closely related to graffiti art. As a lot of graffiti artists run into street battles and controversy with the “control”. The world is moving to a questionable time and we have to concentrate on the voice of the people and its refinement. Along with the rising of our democratic inabilities and the shrinking of the artists’ voice we ask for the 20 mill to win the war with wit. Live art is the new rock and roll with over 75 shows throughout Manhattan and crowds up to 2000 trust the conviction. Artbattles City is the place that will blow the roof of the structure holding us back as a people. The location has been found the agreement has been made. The patron mother of this last art house sees the social need of keeping art in SoHo. I hope you do to. Five floors and the basement of this space have been given to beautification of our culture. We will bring this space to the international community using the fruits of our technological efforts. With a live art open house training grounds in the basement a gallery, bar and performance space on the first floor we will project live performances during the day and show live performances at night. The second floor would be a library from a private collection of the buildings owner. The library will be housed on the second floor of the building, but we plan to remove most of the floor leaving a walkway and the book shelves around the perimeter. The third and fourth floor will be rented as fully equipped artist studios with movable facilities in order to make the place open for a variety of artistic forms. The fifth floor will be made into a luxury apartment for our patron saint, Sue Stein. On the roof, we will make a garden in her honor. This is realer than real because we all need a place to grow.
.. Sean Bono
Posted by marc at 7:58 AM in Roundtable |
April 6, 2006
Recently we asked a group of people to weigh in on a single question: "IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?"
This concept is something I have mulled for several years. Having been a graf artist at one point in my life, one that was ultimately busted and had to pay hefty fines as a teen, I'm always trying to figure out ways to keep other teens from going through what I went through. I'm especially concerned because I teach at a urban high school and have students contemplating traveling the road I once took. I often share the "good" and "bad" aspects of being a street/graffiti artist.
Step one create a Graffiti Coalition in your city to be in charge of the project.
Then we need to address that ..... bottom line is kids want "FAME" they want to be seen and recognized. We have to start with that aspect by giving them the safe and "LEGAL" places to create that aren't hidden.I would start by creating basic concrete block walls about 100 feet long and 8 feet high at every public parkin the city that would be legal for anyone to paint. This could expand to other smaller satellite locations (for smaller throw-ups and tags) dispersed throughout the city on public property. Kids could go on missions trying to get up on all locations in their city in one night, could be fun, and competitive.
Then we address the trash issue and proper disposal of spray cans. I don't know about your city but every place to paint in my city is trashed, literally, much of which is empty spray cans. So I would have my special receptacles (Spraycan Trash Can) installed at the legal graffiti walls and have them emptied at intervals.
... Rene Gagnon
Living in DC for a long time I have seen the schools degrade so rapidly. I was ashamed to think we were putting children in these sick dank buildings with little or no stimulation. How much does it take to turn on the light bulb in a young person mind….often so little. Seeing an Albrecht Durer print show at the National Gallery when I was twelve lit the fuse to some amazing fireworks, much less a light bulb. I am still trying to put out the fire…..with gasoline. I have spent the rest of my life working on art and working with some of the most beautiful stuff in the world. It takes so little to get young minds directed toward constructive creativity, instead of plugging into the vapid wasteland of commercial consumerism. Some of my best stuff is borrowed from children’s drawings…..before they loose themselves to video games, TV, computers.….. With the 20 mil I would buy multi storied buildings in marginal neighborhoods and turn them into beautiful and livable studios for visual artist, dancers, musicians, writers, and poets….whoever. These would be rented at low cost or next to nothing. But each artist would have to make a proposal on what they would do for the local schools, with 30-40% of their time dedicated to assisting a school program of their choice, the rest of their time to their art. Their lease would run for 3-4 years giving them enough time to complete their work and establish a relationship in the schools and with their art. They could renew their lease by applying again. There would be a small, always changing, board of community members, mom’s, aunts, granddad’s, neighbors…. who would make the selection of artist tailoring the needs to the schools in their community. Each building /studio would have a sustainable endowment that would allow for some choices, some fun experimentation and ability to survive. I swear if I ever win the lottery that is my dream and goal……to put something back and give young minds a chance to have a choice in how they use of their minds
... Michael B. Pierce, Senior Conservator, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
How would you spend a $20 million public arts fund? Let us know at woostercollective@gmail.com. We'll post a bunch of the responses we receive on the final day of the roundtable discussion tomorrow.
Posted by marc at 7:50 AM in Roundtable |
April 5, 2006
Recently we asked a group of people to weigh in on a single question: "IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?"
Photo Courtesy of Artmaker's Inc.
None of us would be doing this if we didn't believe that public art can be an inspiring form of communication and expression. However, most public art (at least from what we've seen) fails because it divides the public from the art, creating a barrier between what is made and the people who are to view it. Also, the city bureaucracies that run most public art programs select the most non-controversial (bland, sterile, meaningless) designs, and most people end up scratching their heads and thinking art is a waste of money.
To avoid this problem we would take the $20,000,000 and form a non-profit group that would facilitate community-based art projects and programs. The more participatory and hands-on the better. Instead of throwing money at art stars, we'd help community groups and school kids fund raise (writing grants, getting donated materials) and plan projects. We'd set up an office and workspace where people can learn silk-screening and other printing techniques, a computer lab, a design shop, an outdoor graf gallery, the works. We'd focus on building permanent infrastructure for arts production and education.
A great example of how to involve people in an art project--regardless of their artistic background--is through murals. Though murals often rely on a lead muralist who lays out an image and makes it work within a given space, the process of exchange that can occur lets everyone have a voice in shaping the outcome. Everyone helps in the actual painting process. Murals also involve the community in ways that other projects, such as The Gates, simply cannot. Murals invite dialogue; they reflect what is going on in a community, its past and its future. It's a picture of the community talking about where it's been and where it wants to go.
If Bloomberg really wanted to address the "problem" of graffiti in a creative way, he would allocate 10% of the Vandal Task Force money to a public mural program. Philadelphia has done this with great success. Almost all murals in the city are graffiti-free. There is a certain sort of respect for murals, especially ones that involve the community. Its absurd for businesses to pay thousands of dollars to remove graffiti when a mural could just as easily be painted, and probably with a lot less money!
PS: In NYC there are already groups doing similar things, especially El Puente, Groundswell Community Mural Project, and Artmaker's Inc, so maybe we should stop dreaming and just donate some money and time to them...
... Visual Resistance
With 20 million I would place 1000 artists in public schools (that is just about one artist for each public school in NYC). Each artist would be paid $15K (with an additional $5K for materials) for 500 hours of work and be expected to initiate and complete with students a major project. Projects could be anything like starting a samba bateria, painting a huge wall, creating a clothing line, publishing a book, etc.
This would provide money for artists while encouraging them to engage directly with a mostly underserved population. Also, a project like this would get tons of publicity – bringing attention to both arts in schools and to artists as valued member of the community.
... Mike Carreira (an art teacher in New York's Public School systems
I would spend it on art (including photography!), music, and dance programs, facilities and, especially, innovative teachers, for youths in the poorest areas of the city. The Point, in the Bronx is an example of the kind of program and place I would fund.
... Martha Cooper
I would buy a few old apt buildings and create artist commune studio workshop joints.
Lace them up with all the fixings and have them available to public access.
20 million can buy a portion of a van gogh, or you could house and provide studio and materials to numerous
artists in a given region. Each property eventually becoming its own thing art wise after the inhabitants have renovated it.
Then place issues, like homeless shelters for one, in the hands of these artists, who
1. seem more inclined to A. care and B. help and
2. have the ideas. The creative, and usually compassionate ones amongst us here in the human zoo.
From a community projects point of view, the public art funds tend to go towards "tangible" art items. A sculpted art in a water fountain or something of this nature.
An investment in the artists (as a whole) of a community will payoff exponentially for the community, especially within
Where as a public fountain sculpture is occupying useable space.
Begging kids to climb it, Tag it, and eventually gets old and becomes a rack for xmas lights annually.
As well as an eye sore for many.
That's the direction I'd head in
... JP
Posted by marc at 7:04 AM in Roundtable |
April 4, 2006
Today we continue our "Wooster Rountable" where we ask a group of people to weigh in on a single question. This week's question is:
IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?
If I was given this amount of money to make Public Art, I wouldn't make art. That would be disgusting. That is 11.4 million Pounds!!! There are so many problems in this country (the UK) that if £11 million of public money was spent on something as useless as art there would be a civil war!! Though, saying that, we've probably spent £11 BILLION on this bogus war in Iraq, and the Houses of Parliament still haven't been blown up, so I guess no one would even notice.
I think art has the power to change lives, but as soon as large amounts of public funds are spent on it, ideas have to be put through committees, and the ideas get watered down until the very things that make art exciting and powerful are lost. Money has the power to ruin anything, and the more money, the more things get fucked.
So here's my solution - make art that is functional. In this case, art that is skateable. Art that keeps kids out of trouble, that keeps them fit, maybe even keeps them aware, balanced, spiritual? It's worth a try. So ladies and gentleman, I present "Chimp's Buddha Skatepark". A giant concrete circle, that incorporates inter-locking bowls and a street areas, which itself features a giant rideable sculpture of Buddha. The street area is smooth black tarmac with a white marble Buddha, the bowls are white concrete with a black speed bump in the largest bowl, so that when viewed from above the park is a giant ying/yang symbol.
This would only cost around half a million to build, so let's make them for all the major religions in London - Star of David shaped ramps, snake runs which say "Allah" in Islamic script when viewed from above, huge indoor parks built in Christian churches, etc etc. Let's unite all religions through skateboarding and art, and hope that mankind will one day realise there is only one true and ultimate power, and it makes no difference what you call it - God, Allah, Buddha - IT'S ALL THE SAME THING!!! And until we stop fighting over which interpretation of this power is correct, we'll never be at peace and we'll never become one with the power again.
If anyone has a few million and wants to build this skatepark, you can reach me through the Wooster cats. I don't need paying, I just want to ride this park!!
peace
... Dave the Chimp
Here is my idea for the 20 million project.... it would be nuts to waste that much money on street art that would be sinful.... BUT if you could provide fold up shelters for homeless people AND do some art on them then I think it would be a worthwhile project.....so I suggest making 10,000's of these shelters out of durable corrugated plastic or something and then just dropping them in all the urban centres and letting people use them as they see fit..... and 100's of artists could decorate them so they would be very jolly.
It would give rise to global street art shanty towns... i think this is a good idea...If the STREET SHELTER owner found a permanent home then they could sell their temporary shelter and make a few bucks.....
Can I have the 20 million now please? and I'll start fabricating and get my pals to get painting...
... PURE EVIL
I think the money'd be spent to build a structure in wich there are laboratories of different type for different kind of arts and tecniques. A structure with also an expositon place for organaizing shows.
This laboratory should be placed in a big city and the direction of this place should choice every three months a number of street artists ( about 10: the laboratory should have a place for sleeping and eat the artists for this time). During this three months the street artists 'd work in a common project for a show in that structure and in particolar to a common project of street art in a city of the world.
Every three months there is a change of artists, a change of common project, a change of city where the art will go.
But Marc and Sara, if you want we can excape with the money.
... Sten
If I had 20 million dollars to spend on public arts progams in the city, I would definitely alot a good portion of that to arts education in schools. I find it amazing how limited art and music programs tend to be, at least here in Canada unless you go to a specialized school. I'd take the rest of the money and give it to local artists, showcase their talent and at the same time beautify some of the more dreary publicly owned monstrosities that occupy the city. Put some money into the pockets of local artists, give something to the community and tourists to look at and give something to up and coming artists to strive for, to be inspired by. Although beautiful in many ways Montreal can get pretty bleak, especially in the winter time when all of us who didn't make it down to Cuba could all use a dash of colour in our lives. Not the most original prescription and maybe naive from a bureaucratic perpective but there you go.
... Roadsworth
Posted by marc at 7:11 AM in Roundtable |
April 3, 2006
Today we're launching a new series called "Wooster Roundtables" in which we ask a group of our favorite people to weigh in with their thoughts on a single question. Over the next five days we'll be posting the various responses that we've received.
Lartely we've been thinking a lot about "Public Art" funds and how the money is spent. So for the first Wooster Roundtable discussion, the quesiton we decided to pose to our panel is....
IF YOU WERE GIVEN A $20 MILLION FUND TO SPEND ON PUBLIC ARTS PROGRAMS IN YOUR CITY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE MONEY?
RESPONSE #1:
pool together
right now
Over the last few years, mccarren park in williamsburg has seen at least one form of new development on every side of it. the park itself got an astro turf soccer field face lift and with this pending massive influx of new residents, the rest of the park is sure to follow suit. the mccarren park public pool, once the the beacon of the east side of the park, now sits in the shadows of the coming soon Ikon Loft Living. this 1936 structure, somewhere between a bunker and the taj mahal, can't be knocked down because it's on the historic register and its biannual budget isn't enough to restore and maintain it. in fact, its budget is barely enough to keep the trees trimmed and gates secure (there's always a way in, though). over the past 4 years, they must've buffed about 6 or seven times, so every few months you've got a brand new museum.
with 20 million dollars i would restore the swimming pool to be swimmable in the summer, skateable in the fall and spring and ice-skatable in the winter. the diving pool would be unearthed and restored into a bowl which would be skatable all year long. adjacent to it, a skate track would be built and painted.
the students from neighboring high schools would get credit to spearhead various projects to restore and maintain the area. the artists who have painted these walls for the 20 + years the pool's been shut would be offered the ability to realize new work. artists would be invited in from all over the world to paint, lead workshops and take a dip. there would be skate and synchronized swimming workshops, too
... Maya Hayuk
RESPONSE #2
As an artist I am actually moving toward larger scale public projects. These are projects that would be unreasonable (I won't say impossible) to pull of illegally and would certainly require more money than I have in either bank account and more manpower than any of my street-art comrades can muster.
The question is also tricky because in this case you are asking an artist, not a delagated official, and any artist would agree that if they were given $20 million up front, they would probably bank-roll their own projects first, and then split the remaining balance democratically with projects they felt most moving.
This is why artists like Christo and Jeanne-Claude are absolute heroes of public art. They do not accept outside funding of any kind, therefore there are no administrative, beurocratic, or political strings attatched to their vision. They are able to independantly generate budgets in the 10s of millions from the sales of their drawings. However, Christo and Jeanne-Claude do have to bend over backwards to the powers that be for permission, which of couse us street artists never had to worry about.
Above are some sketches I've made for sites in New York City, Paris and Beirut. I plan to execute these projects one day hopefully with permission, but as a street artist I've adopted the mentality that if the front door is locked, I'm checking the back door next..
... Leon Reid (aka Darius Jones)
COMING LATER THIS WEEK, RESPONSES FROM SUCH PEOPLE AS STEN, DAVE THE CHIMP, ADAM NEATE, MARK JENKINS, AND MANY MORE
Posted by marc at 7:03 AM in Roundtable |