Calgary has had some issues/controversy
with their recent purchases of public art.
Here’s what I would like to say not only about municipal public art but
also provincial and federal art in general.
I feel that if the government is going to buy art whether for a museum
or public art that there should be a few important considerations. I think ALL public art (i.e. in open spaces)
should definitely be by Canadian artists only.
I think if it is a provincial purchase that all efforts should be made
to use a provincial artist but absolutely it MUST be a Canadian artist. We have really great artists in Canada and I
think it is disgraceful to buy art from foreign artists when we are using
taxpayer dollars. I would hope that Canadians
can agree on this.
When it comes to local /
municipal art I also think that if it is public art there should be some sort
of consultation with Calgarians / Edmontonians and any other cities and towns
that have public art. I would suggest
that there should be an informal or formal poll set up on the city’s website and
people could simply vote or comment. It would be a good sounding board and people
would feel that they had some input in the art being chosen.
Art being purchased for museums
should have another criteria, because foreign art can be valuable assets and I
don’t think they all need necessarily be by Canadians. But some of the recent federal purchases have
been extremely bizarre. I think one
painting was a red stripe on a white canvas and I can’t remember now if it was
$2MM or $5MM they paid for it. It was
beyond absurd. I am not a fan of
abstract art but I know that is subjective but honestly some things just aren’t
worth that kind of money. If it was a Jackson
Pollack I’d still have a problem with as I don’t like his style at all . . .
but that’s me. I think some public input
into art that is going to cost that kind of money would be a good thing. At least if we can give an opinion, if there
were some choices – say 5 different pieces, then tax payers would be satisfied
even if their choice doesn’t win. 
At the end of the day there should
be transparency and tax payers should have a little input into some of this “frivolous”
type of spending. I don’t mean to
disparage art as frivolous but it’s not the same sort of spend as nuclear
weapons, airplanes and so forth. At
least its something we can participate in without rocking too many boats.
What do you think?
I think you're quite right, that public space art should reflect national creativity, and the more local the artwork is distributed, the more local it should be acquired. I'm the curatur of one of the larger galleries in Aarhus, and we promote local artist all the time. When showing local photography I normally thematise with a (smaller) panel of international photographic art, but bias is certainly on the local artists. You are right, that museums here and in Copenhagen have a broader responsability to show Sally Mann, Annie Leibovitz, Cartier-Bresson and so on - and my gallery may devote i.e. one month pr. year for broader exhibitions, but that will be the exception to the rule. So, Sanne, your argumentation is very sound.
ReplyDelete