Regenerate, Disintegrate, Create: The Role of Temporary Public Art in Regeneration

way, as well as a traditional public sculpture, with

The purpose of temporary public art in

regeneration is an amalgamation of reminding the

, bringing people together,

looking after and maintaining our environment

through creativity, as well as to surprise, engage,

provoke, and to

REGENERATEDISINTEGRATE

CREATE

ELEANOR SHIPMAN

THE ROLE OF TEMPORARY PUBLIC ART IN REGENERATION

Plans

Blueprint:

This thesis is created from two separate texts; this first section is the stand-alone essay,

and the second section is a large appendix of my first hand research to which I refer

throughout this main writing. It is not necessary to read the latter in detail, however it

provides the opportunity for an appendix of particular interest to be read in full if required.

Foundation ........................................................................................................ 2

Supporting Structure............................................................................................. 3

Ground Floor: 1 ................................................................................................. 7

1.1: Disintegrate – Community and isolation in the contemporary British city ............ 7

1.2: Purpose - The reasons behind temporary public art ........................................ 11

Mezzanine: 2 ................................................................................................... 17

2.1: Regenerate – Creating again, privatisation and people over place.................... 17

2.2: Authority – Exploring hierarchy in temporary public art................................... 18

Top Floor: 3 ..................................................................................................... 22

3.1: Create – Reclaiming the city through art........................................................ 22

3.2: Success – Definining the success of temporary public art ................................ 23

Roof and Topping Ceremony .......................................................................... 29

Reference List .................................................................................................... 31

Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 33

Image Appendix ................................................................................................. 35

!

Regenerate/Disintegrate/Create: The role of temporary public art in regeneration Eleanor Shipman, Stage 3, Group 3

! "!

Foundation The contemporary British city is in a constant state of metamorphosis. It shifts and

changes, sharp shards of glass and metal push up through the pavements, forcing the

surrounding structures to shuffle aside and cower in awe of their growth. Architectural

cast-offs: gradually abandoned as the city sheds its skin. Yet, amongst these remnants of

transformation, hundreds of spaces remain unused. Abandoned and forgotten, patches of

scrub strewn with scrawny Buddleia bushes and scattered with crisp packets and empty

beer cans, these disintegrating spaces are entombed in chipboard and swathed in ‘Do Not

Enter’ signs.

The new increasingly privatised buildings, the old crumbling buildings and their

surrounding patches of land can have isolating side effects on the people who use them.

The right of a person over a place has disintegrated in recent years, with changes in

regulations and the limitations of the public use of the public realm imposed by Thatcher

now snowballing across the successive governments, splitting up communities and

resulting in inaccessible public spaces. Yet, some of these places hold a potential to

reconnect and re-communicate with the people and the city, through their own kind of

regeneration: regeneration through art.

The art involved in regeneration that I will discuss is that of temporary, socially engaged,

community-based public art. Temporary public art is not a monument, memorial or statue,

but a durational project, event or idea which is not carved in marble or cast in bronze, so

will not physically last forever, but has the potential for a different and perhaps more

effective type of legacy.

Using first hand research from interviews with contemporary artists and art organisations

such as Grizedale Arts and Commissions East, as well as artist/architect collaborations

such as muf and somewhere I will explore the purpose of temporary public art in

regeneration. Referring to Anna Minton’s Ground Control: Fear and Happiness in the 21st

Century City (2009) amongst others I will look into whether temporary public art can

provide a solution to increasing lack of interaction in British cities, from bringing art and

architecture together to produce something socially-engaging, to how the success of this

temporary public art is defined, to what regeneration really means. Ultimately I will


! #!

question the role of temporary public art in regeneration in contemporary British cities,

whilst considering whether the community needs art or if art needs the community.

Supporting Structure Temporary public art is an interdisciplinary area which touches on art, architecture,

sociology, anthropology and politics, whilst constantly engaging and involving real people,

rather than specifically revolving in circles around itself. Within current political and

financial situations, as well as the onset of the 2012 London Olympics I am curious as to

where contemporary, temporary public art will find itself when the dust settles, as well as

how it will be endorsed during the current and ongoing chaos. As funding for the arts is

cut under the current Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition as well as the effects of the

recent recession, will art, which previously sat on the fringes of the public sector, be

forced to take the leap (alongside community-focused funding) and cross over into the

‘real world’? As ‘good’ public art should ideally both critically engage in

social/contemporary debates whilst involving the public, or local community, this new

public art would already be serving a function, as well as promoting voluntarism and

philanthropy within the coalition’s idea of a ‘Big Society’, whether that set of ideals is on its

agenda is another matter. Could, this added functionality cause new public art pull in more

funding than similar projects which may have previously just addressed the art world?

And, if so, would this be right?

Artists who practice socially-engaged work are very much aware of the dangers which can

arise as a result of the changing political situation. In Bob and Roberta Smith’s manifesto

for public art, he declares: ‘Artists are not a quick fix political tool either for community or

regeneration issues. Art is not a sticking plaster for social ills’ (p. 125, Smith, B & R, 2007).

This highlights the concerning possibility, as voluntarism in the public realm is promoted,

that art projects could be being taken advantage of as cheap ways to regenerate an area

or engage an isolated community: essentially doing the work of the council on their

behalf. However, this can also been interpreted as providing a new challenge for socially-

engaged artists, and Grizedale Arts director Adam Sutherland suggests that ‘[…] artists

might work more usefully within a given social context, an approach reflected in a growing

dissatisfaction with the traditional model of the artist’ (p. 11, Griffin, J and Sutherland, A,

2009). Indeed, Clarke states that:


! $!

Artists come from a tradition that has variously entitled them not to know, not to

care, to care to the exclusion of everything else, to know and not to speak, to

speak with absolute authority, to act on contingency or to predict the end from the

beginning. (Clarke, K in ed.

Fernie, J, 2006)

Clarke’s somewhat cynical view is

rather strong, however I have

repeatedly met those who would

unfortunately sit comfortably

under these projections. Can

public art also offer a broadening

of the artist’s role?

In No Room To Move: Radical Art

and the Regenerate City (2010),

J.B Slater and A. Iles explain the

background to our contemporary

‘Creative City’, and therefore to the art which currently inhabits it, as being based on the

exchange and promotion of knowledge, culture and data rather than production of

material goods to trade, which stems from the post-war period of the ’50s (p.9, 2010). For

example, in 1951, to mark the 100th Anniversary of the 1851 ‘Great Exhibition’, The

Festival of Britain took place on the South Bank in London. The Festival of Britain was to

encourage Britain to celebrate its land, architecture, art, design and culture. The

government film ‘Festival of London’ released to promote the show describes the

attraction ‘Dome of Discovery’ as being ‘as vast as a city square’, subtly nodding to the

beginnings of the importance of culture within local community and human interaction.

Throughout the ’50s, as the remnants of the disintegrated cities of Britain were

regenerated, open space were planned, and industrial areas moved to the peripheries, the

city then became a place for culture, people, community and social interaction – and for

the public. This meant creativity could once again become an integral part of the city and

culture could flourish.

Figure 1: Aerial view of the Festival of Britain (1951)


! %!

The ‘Creative City’ continued to develop throughout the ’60s and ’70s, but creativity even

within the public sphere often either took the form of institutionalised festivities or

conceptual, site-specific art aimed primarily at art world viewers. Miwon Kwon describes

how Benjamin Burloch’s ‘aesthetics of administration’ that became popular in the ’60s and

’70s as it was adopted by conceptual and post-minimal artists such as Robert Morris and

Piero Manzoni (p.118-119, [internet]), ‘converted to the administration of aesthetics in the

1980s and 1990s’ (p. 51, 2004). This artist here fulfils a number of different roles, and is

not just the creator, but ‘facilitator, educator, coordinator and bureaucrat’ (p.51, 2004),

and most importantly, the artist in these positions has begun to engage with those

external to the art world, as Sutherland suggested.

In our contemporary city these roles become somewhat metamorphic, as the artist

working externally from the gallery has found their role to shift architecturally to become

as site-specific as their art. In contemporary art organisations and projects such as

Grizedale Arts and Commissions

East the artist as multi-faceted

contributor with a diverse range of

skills almost expected, as artists

increasingly take roles more akin

to project manager than studio

recluse.

By the ’80s architecture had

‘loosened its shackles to

modernism and created a more

dynamic relationship with the

public’ (p. 10, Fernie, J, 2006). This

led to local authorities introducing

a ‘Percent for Art’ programme that

allowed funding to promote the incorporation of art into and around public buildings, in

the form of street furniture or murals. By the 1990s this was no longer a popular method,

as it ‘all too often reduced art to a banal supplementary add-on’ (p. 10, Fernie, J, 2006): a

novelty sculptural addition to a previously sterile environment. Claes Oldenburg’s work,

such as the Spoonbridge and Cherry (Figure 2) consists of high-maintenance, enormous

Figure 2: Claes Oldenburg's Spoonbridge and Cherry (2009)


! &!

sculpture inspired by banal everyday objects, which have seemingly fallen onto the city

from the sky with no concern for where they happen to land. Richard Serra’s infamous

Titled Arc (1981-1989) on Federal Plaza, New York, was a similar unconsidered public

addition and has subsequently echoed through public art history as one of the most

renowned rejections of public art from the people whose space it inhabits. Interestingly,

Kwon argues that, in the aftermath of the removal of the sculpture, the shadow lifted from

the plaza also shed new light on community-based public practices which had been largely

unknown for the previous thirty years (p.82, Kwon, M, 2004).

Those discourses operating in the public realm have since learnt that they are stronger

and more effective working together. Increasingly since the 1990s, for Fernie, artists and

architects have enjoyed a dynamic collaborative practice (p. 10, Fernie, J, 2006), involving

the artist often from the onset of the project – rather than being the sole provider of some

kind of bland, corporate decoration for a building’s foyer at the end. As ideal as this

collaboration sounds, the creation of public art should not solely evolve around the

creators and spaces for public art, as the people – the public – need to be considered. 1

As architecture and the urban environment is less easy to infiltrate with public creativity,

due to the increase of privatisation, ever-tightening contracts and health and safety

regulations, could temporary public art offer an alternative, more grass-roots solution to

encourage public interaction and address and highlight the issues that my ‘IPA’ attempts

to solve and conclude (see Footnote 1)? I will explore and discuss how temporary public

art can be applied to the ever-isolating landscape of our contemporary city. With reference !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"This is where the idealistic view of contemporary public art comes in – I imagine ‘Ideal Public Art’ as a big,

feathery being which comforts, listens, is warm and soft and snugly, yet has a sharp nose, is challenging,

critical, socially aware, and politically sensitive. ‘Ideal Public Art’ can take people under its wing to make

them feel safe, to look after them and maintain the quality of their environment whilst provoking them to

challenge it for themselves, to guide them on social issues, and to ultimately encourage them to interact

with each other and then continue to do so once they have flown the IPA nest. If they do as they were

taught, IPA has ‘succeeded’, its legacy lives on and its chicks are happy. However, effectively generating or

renewing ‘culture’ whilst channelling people’s lives through a certain route is not so simple, or necessarily

correct – morally or otherwise. Ideally, the IPA animal also has a trainer to guide it on such issues, but just

how influential and controlling should they be?

"


! '!

to several case studies and first hand interviews I will address the defining boundaries of

the role of temporary public art in regeneration through the subheadings of its purpose,

authority and success under its main structural elements: disintegrate, regenerate, create,

concluding by readdressing my initial question: what is the role of temporary public art in

regeneration?

Ground Floor: 1

1.1: Disintegrate – Community and isolation in the contemporary British city ‘Above all one thought/

Baffled my understanding, how men lived/

Even next door neighbours, as we say, yet still/

strangers, and knowing not each other’s names.’

(Line 117 -120, Wordsworth, W,

1888)

In ecological terms, a community is ‘a

group of interdependent organisms

inhabiting the same region and

interacting with each other’ (Princeton

definition of community, 2010). The

latter is what Wordsworth has

observed so eloquently as what

human communities often lack -

interaction. In Ground Control, 2009,

Anna Minton argues that our fear of strangers is often a direct result of our immediate

surroundings. She explains: ‘The deeper, more complex and at times counter-intuitive

reasons [of fear of crime and therefore strangers] are rooted in the physical environment’

p. 139. This fear manifests itself physically in the form of high-security gates on every

private house, a council estate built with a vast brick wall around it, and the increase of

Britain’s already 42 million-strong system of CCTV cameras (Minton, 2009). With so much

security, Britain has ended up trapped in its own cage, watching itself with its own

faceless lenses and fenced off from its own risks and responsibilities in a paranoid vicious

Figure 3: Privatised housing (2009)


! (!

circle. It still doesn’t feel safe, and so keeps its blinds drawn, doors locked and security

light on, thus avoiding everyday interaction with others as much as possible.

Jane Jacobs, in The Death and Life of Great American Cities, (1993) discusses the

meaning of the word ‘neighbourhood’. In place of this we might also say ‘community’ or

‘locality’. It is exactly these territories in which temporary public art operates. But, as

Jacobs suggests, ‘sentimentality plays with sweet intentions in the place of good sense’

(p.146, 1993), well-meaning intentions do not always result in a successfully operating

neighbourhood, or indeed a piece of public art being accepted and integral to the

community which it is designed to help regenerate.

The city itself is a difficult place to form a

community, both for a resident and even

more so for artists attempting to involve

themselves in an area. In the film London

Patrick Keiller’s narrator Paul Scofield

describes the potential solitude provoked

by the capital: ‘There is no town in the

world that is more adapted to training

one away from people and training one

into solitude than London.’ (Keiller, P,

[film] 1992) (Figure 4). London is an

enormous and vibrant city that has a

heart beat and life of its own. Despite having lived here for almost three years I still feel

that I haven’t mastered the city, or whether the possibility of taming the city even exists.

London can turn its back on you in the blink of an eye, abandoning you in its concrete

shadow. To the city you are nothing, even when lost and alone. On other days however,

London lifts you up, helps you, its pavements seem to move beneath your feet and urge

you along. Like JG Ballard’s Concrete Island (2008), London is a place which isolated

individuals attempt to conquer; they love and hate it at the same time, they feel trapped

but they don’t want to leave - even when presented with the opportunity, which, as for

Ballard’s main protagonist Maitland, was there all along.

Figure 4: Still from Patrick Keiller's London (1992)

!


! )!

David Wright, when asked about the target audience

of different Commissions East’s projects, spoke of

‘transitory communities’ such as commuters or student

communities, those which would be present for only a

few hours or a few years – both relatively short

periods when considering their impact on the area (p.

55, Wright, D, to Shipman, E, 2010). This idea of

communities which are not fixed by location but by

time or need really stuck in my mind, as I felt I was

part of a ‘displaced’ community, yet perhaps I am

really part of a community in transition, which doesn’t

sound nearly so isolating.

Since the 1980s, the subtle privatisation of Urban

Development has led to a boom in new buildings

shooting up like glinting knives from old industrial

areas such as the Docklands - and with a sneaky change in planning applications, the

shiny, private worlds were built on the basis that they provided economic benefits, rather

than the original regulations of benefitting the local communities whilst remaining in

keeping with the area’s traditional aesthetic, (p.22, Minton, A, 2009). The same can be

equally applied to these new privatised areas of London as to Ballard’s High Rise: ‘Part of

its appeal lay all too clearly in the fact that this was an environment built, not for man, but

for man’s absence.’ (p.25, J.G. Ballard, 2006) (Figure 5).

As inhabitants how are we supposed to come to

terms with this hard, grey metropolis we find

ourselves within? Does the difficulty in assessing

the need for something other in the city stem

from the fact that the city has regenerated to the

point where our individual imprint can no longer

be recognised within it? De Certeau describes

people in a city: ‘their swarming mass is an

innumerable collection of singularities. Their Figure 6: Worn stone steps in Edinburgh, Eleanor Shipman, 2011

Figure 5: JG Ballard's High Rise cover illustration


! *+!

intertwined paths give their shape to space’ (p98, Certeau, D, 1984). Indeed, at various

points in the City, desire lines can be seen, where humans have worn down animal-like

tracks made over a period of time as an indexical trace of a collective decision. A short cut

over a patch of grass, now a dusty dirt-track, or the dip in the middle of a flight of ancient

stone steps, where centuries of shoes have scuffed away the surface in an unconscious

signature of mankind on its own built environment. Twenty years after De Certeau’s

observations and these desire-lines are now few and far between, as constant

redevelopment projects and urban planning have brushed any traces of the people’s use

of the city under its Tarmac carpet. Rather less poetically, urban theorist Anna Minton’s

lawyer explains how public right of way is ‘a common law right which goes right back to

before the Conquest. It’s one of those things about being a free-born English person’. He

illustrates this with the saying ‘once a highway, always a highway’ (p21, 2009), and

Minton sadly concludes that, alongside De Certeau’s intertwined paths, this right is also

being removed.

Kwon describes how some forms of site-specific art ‘presumed the humanizing influence of

art over the inhumanity of urban architecture’ (p.4, Kwon, 2004). Compared to

architecture, art does indeed seem to be at a grass roots level, appearing easier to

personally engage with and therefore more accessible. Now our environment is built from

the top down, we no longer walk the paths we decide to build on; we view them from

above - from a satellite or even virtually. We have eyes everywhere, security cameras

monitoring our activities,

satellites recording our

environment, a ‘bird’s eye’

view now a pathetically

unacceptable term as we

have grown accustomed to

mass-observation on a

universal level (Figure 7).

However, architecture too is

born of a human mind and

although often appears as vast, aggressive and unobtainable as Ballard’s High-Rise

(2006), it is interacted with far more regularly than art. We trace the city with our steps,

Figure 7: An abandoned plot on a road I lived on, both physically and virtually inaccessible, seen here from Google Earth satellites


! **!

interacting with it on a subconscious level as we go about our daily lives. Despite these

invisible pathways still being unseen on the hard and impermeable concrete surfaces this

regular and necessary architectural interaction surely denies the suggested inhumanity of

urban architecture. The labyrinthine pathways of this ongoing dialogue between people’s

collective and isolative use of the city is one which is irresistibly fascinating, so perhaps for

that reason the multitude of creative responses have been inconclusive - leaving the

question open for the next curious flâneur.

1.2: Purpose - The reasons behind temporary public art The purpose of temporary public art could be to creatively remind our city and ourselves

of our humanity, working in small groups and units as people used to. We need to

remember how to communicate in the most direct way possible, the way we have from

the beginning of time until only very recently, and how to interact with each other and

with our environment face to face, surface to surface.

The purpose of temporary public art, argues director of Grizedale Arts, Adam Sutherland,

is ‘to be a constructive influence’ (Sutherland, A, p.186, 2009). It is to recreate adventure,

and certainly to surprise, provoke curiosity (‘…curiosity is the first step towards a

conversation with the public’ (p.13, Bohm, K, to public works, 2006)) and to encourage

risk taking and the unexpected in an increasingly controlled and sterile environment. This

is made possible through projects like Lottie Child’s ‘Street Training’ (ongoing) whereby

members of the public are taken on walks around the city and encouraged to look at it

and use it through play, amateur Parkour and interaction with others. This allows small

connections to be initiated, which in turn provoke a network of human to human activity,

and a feeling of acceptance

of the city and it’s

architecture from a grass

roots, and very human, level.

Artist/architect collaboration

muf sit in the grey but

vibrant area between art,

public art, community projects, architecture and landscaping. They suggest that ‘Art has

become the regenerative force of the 1990s’ (p.124, 2001), whilst ‘their gaze also lights

Figure 8: Muf Falcon Road Bridge Project, 2006


! *"!

upon the underfunded and the uncared for’ (p.40, 2001). In a project for Wandsworth

Council in 2006, Falcon Road Bridge in Clapham was regenerated. muf incorporated new

paving and safer walkways into their proposal, as well as cleaning the walls and

redecorating them with a pattern inspired by workshops with the local community.

Combining a critical artistic practice alongside improving the urban environment, whilst

providing a communication link between the local community and the commissioners, muf

have developed a successful public practice. This method could be problematic if

commissioners use art budgets to simply clean and maintain an area. However if the

artists, like muf, coincide regenerative factors with the concept and process of making the

piece, then it becomes a successful example of one role of temporary public art in

regeneration.

Projects such as these can easily be engaged with from an un-critical perspective. This can

lead to both increased participation, as well as a dilution of conceptual artistic debates.

muf also realise this:

‘muf’s approach is to proactively involve a range of individuals and groups […] in a

critical evaluation of what it takes to create art works that are relevant and valued

within their communities but which are also inspiring and enable unexpected

experiences.’ (Channel 4, 2010 [Internet])

Grizedale Arts, who attempted to address this issue, found it was not so simple. For a

billboard project in the Grizedale Forest for two-dimensional work, they received huge

opposition from local people. To encourage the locals to share their views, Grizedale asked

them to put forward their own proposal for the project. The locals proposed to burn the

billboard, which Grizedale accepted. The residents came to burn the billboard, yet in doing

so, by proxy, they became directly engaged in contemporary art, the billboard provoked

questioning of their own environment as it presented something they didn’t feel fitted with

their forest, and further united them as a community in their opposition. The purpose of

temporary public art is to problemetise and complexify, as well as question its own

purpose, as Grizedale’s deputy director Alistair Hudson explained to me:

‘[…] there’s a function for art and artists which is about doing things that might not

work or doing things that do work but might throw up problems… They’re


! *#!

complexifiers, [and] the purpose of complexity is to encourage development –

throwing up options and, in creating a problem, you create a solution.’

(p. 26, Hudson, A to Shipman, E, Appendix B, 2010)

In less politically charged situations, its function can be to simply allow an organisation to

understand its surroundings, and connect to the community it belongs to. For example,

Lang explains ‘We were commissioned […] (by a gallery curator) to allow Gasworks to

understand their local potential as a cultural

organisation’ (p.24, Lang, A, to public works, 2006),

which certainly does not sound invasive to the local

people; the process involved was simply to talk to

people as they passed the gallery space, similar to

Corinna Dean’s project Bankside-on-Call (Figure 9)

which I assisted with (Appendix G).

The purpose of Bankside-on-Call was to interview and

communicate with the local people about the

regeneration of Bankside, including Tate Modern, and

how it had affected them. Many curious viewers were

from the tower block across the narrow street outside.

A few women I’d spoken to had lived there over thirty

years, and watched Bankside change from their own

front doors: from the construction of the Tate Modern to £4.50ph parking charges.

Surprisingly many people were very supportive of large changes like the Tate, but I was

shocked to hear on more than one occasion the desire for a large supermarket or

shopping mall on Bankside. Again, Jane Jacobs’ wise statement applies: ‘Sentimentality

plays with sweet intentions in place of good sense’ (p.146, Jacobs, J, 1993), as this

confirms how the perceived community need as seen by a cultural institution or individual

can often be a far cry from the real, every day need of the local people, highlighting the

importance of thorough research and grass-roots communication.

Figure 9: Bankside-on-Call Poster (2010)


! *$!

The purpose of temporary public art in regeneration is much-debated, if there is one at all:

‘There is a lot of purposeless art about’ (p. 25, Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, Appendix B,

2010). When discussing the subject the opinions gradually revealed have been tentative

and cautious, as if uncertain of their own validity in community-based public art’s

treacherous and unstable terrain. ‘To engage and sustain’ was offered as a definition of

public art’s purpose, by curator and community-engaged artist Fozia Khaliq; but she

quickly suggested that this was ‘obviously idealistic’ (Khaliq, F to Shipman, E, 2010 [own

sound file]). In offering this

suggested ideal apologetically,

clashes with critical public art

obstacles are avoided, yet said

with confidence could simply

demolish them.

Temporary public art can arise

from other outlets and resolve a

purpose of its own. Artist

Beatrice Jarvis spoke about the

Bogside Artists, a group of mural

painters working in Ireland, in

the post-conflict community of

Derry. Although not entirely

regeneration in the sense I have

been discussing, the murals did

indeed help to temporarily

‘create again’ the war-torn area

they inhabited. Beatrice described

them as ‘one of the most

wholesome projects’ as they made art ‘by the people, for the people’, (p.28, Jarvis, B to

Shipman, E, Appendix C, 2010) whereby the local community provided paint for the artists

and their canvases were the sides of people’s houses. This resulted in a temporary,

community-based public art project which did indeed ‘engage and sustain’ as well as

acting as a way of communicating a collective feeling to each other and the outside world.

Figure 10: One of the Bogside Artists’ murals in Derry, depicting a petrol bomber in Battle of Bogside


! *%!

Interestingly, the Bogside murals were not vandalised or destroyed – a sign of respect and

pride from the community they inhabited as well as those passing through. In more stable

societies though, art can rely more heavily on the external community:

‘The notion of creativity in post-conflict societies is a social healing, in a way, and

that can generate a sense of forward motion. Whereas public art in, say, middle-

class, middle-England doesn’t have the same void, or gap which needs to be

compensated for’

(p.28, Jarvis, B to Shipman, E, Appendix C, 2010)

Art certainly needed the community in Margate, which we went on to discuss in relation to

a new contemporary art gallery. There was huge opposition to the gallery as well as no

public transport system to link it to the town, so there was no way of the gallery being

physically accessible let alone mentally. It had already been built with a seemingly vague

idea to regenerate the area just outside the town, but with complete avoidance of a

genuine public consultation process. Instead there had been a ‘slightly novel’ liaison which

was instigated much too late to have any real effect (p.29, Jarvis B to Shipman, E,

Appendix C, 2010). In contrast to the community in Derry, the people of Margate had no

real need or desire for cultural regeneration. Whether the authorities did is of course

another matter.

The project Art U Need in Purfleet in the Thames Gateway, combined the existing

community and newer, city worker residents and meet the needs of both. Representatives

from each group were asked to be

involved with the project, not only

allowing each to be heard separately

but also allowing them to meet and

combine their own communities

together. Here, the community didn’t

need art as such, which in fact

coincided with the project’s purpose

being to ‘encourage debate about the

role and impact of artists working in Figure 11: Spitalfields public seating and lighting - a computer render


! *&!

the public realm’ (p.5, Wright, D, 2007). However, the people of Purfleet have benefitted

from it, which I will mention in Section 3.2: Success later on.

Function is the main purpose for almost everything. When considering functional public art

in London various takes on lighting, seating and paving spring to mind, for example this

sterile yet functional seating area in Spitalfields (Figure 11). Yet surely public art’s purpose

is more than functional? I spoke to art producer and editor James Smith, who described

working on a project with Simpark, which was a new skate park, including a 20ft high

wooden full pipe, and a bowl:

‘You could walk underneath the bowl, so you could hear the skateboarders moving

above you. It was really wonderful. So although it was in an arts space, because it

sampled so heavily from the public realm, and we had this community of

skateboarders there, it was a nice mix between the two.’

(p. 42, Smith, J to Shipman, E, Appendix D, 2010)

A cross-audience dialogue created by the Simpark piece resulted in the artwork being

appreciated by the art world, the passer-by and the specific community of skaters. The

piece then functioned as a skate park - its primary

function, as an installation, as you can walk

underneath it and experience it in an alternative


its beauty and skilled craftsmanship.



city of our humanity, bringing people together,



communicate, heal and provoke, and to

complexify. 2

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#" If temporary public art projects also seek to question what their purpose is, then a critical dialogue emerges which can lay the path for the elusive creature, the potential Ideal Public Art."

Figure 12: The arched spines of the diggers, Eleanor Shipman (2010)


! *'!

Mezzanine: 2

2.1: Regenerate – Creating again, privatisation and people over place Regeneration: the word itself comes from the Latin ‘regenerare’, literally meaning ‘create

again’ (OxfordDictionaries.com, 2010). Sadly, when it comes to urban regeneration,

‘creating again’ often results in the demolition of traditional and historically important

buildings to make way for privatised, sterile and bland shopping malls, plazas and offices.

On a recent walk around Elephant and Castle, currently in the process of being

regenerated, I watched the arched spines of the diggers contract and expand as they

climbed over each other in a feeding frenzy, their jaws deep in piles of delicious rubble

(Figure 12). I walked around the fences surrounding these vast landscapes of no man’s

land, separating it from the rest of the city as uninhabited terrain – a limbo space which is

neither private, nor public, domestic nor corporate, nor even a non-space. Those places

have no identity: they are in the process of becoming whilst undergoing their own

destruction - resurrected space, resurrection space, recreation space.

A key and tragic example of this

cyclical process is the erection of

Liverpool One (Minton, 2009).

Liverpool One is a huge shopping mall

built on the site of Quiggins, once a

cultural hub of activity that was home

to playwrights, designers, artists and

musicians, as well as shops, boutiques

and small businesses. This culturally

rich and diverse area was demolished,

and replaced with Liverpool One (Figure 13), ironically yet deliberately coinciding with

Liverpool winning 2008 Capital of Culture (pp. 23 – 24, Minton, 2009). Public art can be

also be enlisted to ‘create again’ the communities that once inhabited sites like this, rather

than erase all traces of their creativity and existence. Of course, this throws up a different

set of problems, as Minton suggests:

Figure 13: Architect's illustration of Liverpool One

!


! *(!

As for artists, the government tries to harness their energy by insisting that new

developments employ artists to work with local communities. For residents […] this

seems like a patronising way of diluting their opposition […] (p191, 2009).

However, there must be ways public art projects can be successful, all inclusive projects

whilst regenerating an area, maintaining rather than replacing the local vibe and

community without institutionalising creativity, patronising the local residents or

misguidedly authorising an ‘injection of culture’ into a community. 3

2.2: Authority – Exploring hierarchy in temporary public art 4A non-hierarchical system seems as idealistic as previously discussed public art which

‘engages and sustains’ (Fozia Khaliq to Shipman, E, 2010 [sound files]), however I believe

it is possible and can be successful in certain situations. Hierarchy in temporary public art

comes in many different guises and can shift structurally for different projects, involving

commissioners to councillors, urban planners to architects, curators to artists, and

volunteers to local residents. Often commissioned projects appoint a mysteriously titled

‘lead artist’. As a ‘lead artist’ Bob and Roberta Smith in Art U Need was responsible for the

overseeing of the other four artists, as well as the people involved in the project. But

should he have had this authority? Of course, in order to organise a project, there needs

to be a facilitator, or instigator, but throughout the course of the process this could be

spread out on a level with the local residents and others involved in the project.

The Bogside Artists employ a non-hierarchical structure for their work, as the community

is productive and sustainable, illustrating its shared history through their murals in a

cyclical and restorative process. Thus, they avoid the tensions of bringing an external

artist into the community, the hierarchical process of such a decision, as well as the forced

involvement of the local people. Of course, the artists are very much part of the

community with which they interact and represent, so the process is smoother and more

natural, force being the worst operative and downfall of much public art.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!$"Is the IPA beast capable of this?

%"So who is in charge of the IPA beast? Can it exist alone, or does it need someone to control and train it?"


! *)!

From the Bogside Artists in Ireland, who have literally come from the community in which

they work, to Grizedale Arts, who are residentially and institutionally based in Cumbria

where they produce work and involve the local people, there are ways to get around the

issues of hierarchical authority in public art. ‘We’re there as people who live there just like

everybody else’ (p.1, Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix B) - as Hudson suggests,

Grizedale view themselves in the

same light as those they work with, as

both colleagues and neighbours,

running local wine tastings, harvest

festivals (Figure 14) and open

gardens: ‘We create a framework of

taking part in the village and being

residents’ (p.9, 2010, Appendix B) he

explains, which helps maintain an

open local attitude towards external

artists and curators doing residencies

at Grizedale.

As individual artists rather than arts organisations, being local can be a grey area in terms

of how involved one feels they can become in their own community. For these artists, the

life/work balance is enveloped by their artwork, resulting in blurred boundaries and

difficult decisions. Fozia Khaliq, artist and curator, worked as an artist for her own

residents’ association, which meant running projects in the building she lives in. Fozia felt

she became ‘a bizarre social PR person – I became an art person in my own community’

(Khaliq, F to Shipman, E, 2010 [sound files]). In an opposite situation, Beatrice Jarvis

spoke of an artist she knew living and working in Deptford, who was approached by the

council for a project as someone who knew the area and people, and was part of the local

community. The artist refused the project as she felt it would be exploiting those she had

got to know; as she had become more of a member of the community than an ‘art person’

(p.37, Jarvis, B to Shipman, E, Appendix B, 2010). The employment of a local artist can

also be viewed as tokenistic, as well as not always relevant to the particular project. Of

course, the local people are often given authority or responsibility for temporary public art,

as an attempt to reduce the hierarchy or even reverse it. Miwon Kwon critically argues

Figure 14: Grizedale artists and volunteers share a meal at a Harvest Festival


! "+!

that ‘the engagement of “real” people in community-based art can install new forms of

urban primitivism over socially neglected minority groups’ (p.138, 2002). This is rarely the

intention of the project, yet must be appreciated as a potential interpretation of the

situation in order to avoid stereotyping under-represented groups.

The authority of an artist is also questioned in terms of a displaced artist, someone who

has been commissioned, or effectively parachuted in to a community and is expected to

work with the people there. David Wright said that Bob and Roberta Smith as ‘lead artist’

was incredibly engaged with the project and everyone involved and stressed that it is

important ‘not to have templates’ (p.53, Wright, D to Shipman, E, Appendix E, 2010)

therefore allowing a collective questioning of the artist’s role throughout the entire process

and giving the authoritative role room to move. Home Grown – Art and the Cultivation of a

Neighbourhood which coincided with the actual construction and development of new

houses, Patricia Mckinnan-Day led the project. The role of the artist here was to create a

framework in which the project could exist (p.54, Wright, D, to Shipman, E, Appendix, E,

2010). Katherine Bohm describes a similar process: ‘we just hang out on site and people

decide for themselves whether we have authority or not’ (p.24, Bohm, K, to public works,

2006). This process seems ideal, and is again strengthened as Bohm explains: ‘We

establish infrastructures that allow for social situations which then, very often, drive

themselves’ (p.13, Bohm, K, interview to public works, 2006). Similarly to David Wright’s

suggested loose framework rather than set template, this appears an ideal method for

face-to-face communication and interaction with the public, allowing the project openness

afforded by the presence of the initiators.

The authority of commissions is removed from the artist and instead rests with the

agency. For David, this responsibility is applied when both working for public and private

agencies, which are both good, interesting and provide different opportunities for

creativity (p54, Wright, D to Shipman, E, 2010). CB1, a new developer-led art project in

Cambridge, made artist’s space available for free for five years and artists such as Dryden

Goodwin on their residencies. Just as public projects can lead to sterile and in-accessible

projects, privately funded opportunities can be extremely exciting and creative, and vice-

versa.


! "*!

Wherever you go, however, there are ‘powers who are people who want a particular

version of a community to grow and manifest itself’ (p.22, Hudson, A, to Shipman, E,

Appendix B, 2010), leading to the push and pull of ideals across projects, often resulting in

one extreme or another, or simply a mish-mash of suggestions which leaves no one

satisfied and can even lead to the parting of company. Grizedale experienced this as a

large funding body divorced itself from them but have since signed up to criteria for public

art that was largely derived from Grizedale, which the external company has failed to

accept (p.20, Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, Appendix B, 2010).

More recently I discussed debates surrounding hierarchy in temporary public art with artist

Nina Pope. Nina’s work with Karen Guthrie in collaboration somewhere appeared to

promote fair and non-hierarchical methods of working with people. Nina explained that

this was not always the case, and it changed in every working situation. Hypertext

Journal5, had a format which worked in a non-hierarchical sense, but Nina explained that

since then somewhere’s work has moved on to documentary and film making (such as

Bata-ville which I will discuss later) which has inevitably led to the need to direct others –

which is of course, hierarchical yet necessary (p.58, Pope, N to Shipman, E, Appendix F,

2010). In this sense however, the participants, the actors, know that they are entering this

structure, and are fully aware of their position in it. This, I believe, is where the key lies

for working successfully in a hierarchical situation – if everyone involved is aware of their

position prior to the event then tensions are avoided when perceived responsibilities are

crossed or dismissed.

Initially my ‘IPA’ (see footnote 1) proposed a completely non-hierarchical format for

temporary public art, however I now believe that a fair, partly hierarchical structure is

most beneficial. Whether the instigator is based in the community, or simply works on site,

authorial barriers can be broken down to form accessible and inclusive pathways by

communicating the structure for each project, and allowing participants to find their own

place within it. 6

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!5 Hypertext Journal, 1992, was a virtually documented walk along the route of two famous 18th century travellers around Britain.

6 The IPA animal is therefore tame but not completely controlled.


! ""!

Top Floor: 3

3.1: Create – Reclaiming the city through art Authority in temporary public art is also entangled in the sticky web of legislation and

legalities surrounding both shiny new and crumbling old buildings. These legislations have

often isolating side effects on those surrounding them. An Act of Parliament in 2004 was a

disastrous catalyst to this situation as it ‘altered the definition of ‘public benefit’ by placing

far more importance on the economic impact of a big new scheme, rather than taking into

account the effect on the community’ (p.22, Minton, A, 2009), which new, big-bellied

economic developments have greedily taken advantage of. Yet, some of these places do

hold a potential to reconnect and re-communicate with the people and the city, through

their own kind of regeneration: regeneration through art.

As mentioned in the introduction, ‘pop

up’ spaces are becoming an

increasingly popular way to

regenerate unused spaces in the city.

With rent prices rocketing, the use of

empty retail and office space as

galleries or project spaces is a cheap

alternative to hiring a gallery for

artists, and offers landlords a way to

lease large spaces for a short term,

and put a temporary plug in the

money quickly draining out of them (Figure 15). The Internet has also provided easy and

accessible ways for creatives to find spaces like these virtually away from the physical

muddle of the city’s streets and multitude of glassy eyed, vacant lots available, through

sites such as Meanwhile Space. They explain: ‘Empty spaces are a blight to communities,

a financial drain to owners and stimulate wider civic problems. To us they are an

opportunity.’ (Meanwhile Space [Internet] 2011). Not only does this way of reclaiming the

city through art help to solve financial problems on both sides of the arrangement, it can

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Figure 15: Vacant shop unit as advertised on Gumtree


! "#!

also stimulate creativity and external involvement with the local area, as well as

decreasing crime by occupying spaces which could potentially have been used by

squatters or drug-users.

A Lambeth youth radio program called Southside Radio was reported to ‘significantly cut

youth crime in the area’ over the summer it ran, (police spokesman to London SE1,

[internet] 2009) highlighting the importance of creative initiatives to involve and engage

others, and that they have not been forgotten. Steve Chalke, the founder of the Oasis

centre which runs the station, explained: ‘Crime reduction should never be the sole

motivation for giving your time to developing young people; they need to feel they belong,

that they are in the community’ (Chalke, S to London SE1, [internet] 2009). The project

has now run every summer for the past four years, and other similar projects have begun

to spring up across the country.

The difficultly in genuinely effective projects such as these are the temporary nature of

them. Often due to a lack of funding, or the need for a different use of space, their legacy

exists in the documentation, memory and one-off change that they produced. Self-

initiated, self-sufficient and community-serving projects like these are ideal for the

government’s vision of a ‘Big Society’, whereby communities structure and maintain

themselves, taking the pressure off the government and potentially ‘saving’ significant

amounts of money. However, if the truly successful projects do not have funding to get

bigger and make more effective change, then they will disintegrate back down into

nothing, and the people they involved would feel forgotten once more. 7

3.2: Success – Definining the success of temporary public art The definition of success is ‘the accomplishment of an aim or purpose’ (Oxford

Dictionaries.com [internet] 2010) which suggests that success is an end result - a final

triumph or achievement. Success for temporary public art projects seems much more

durational, perhaps infinite, so without final triumph or measured result – but success !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7 My initial view of ‘Ideal Public Art’ as a big, feathery being who comforts, who listens, who is warm and

soft and snugly, yet has a sharp nose, is challenging, critical, socially aware, and politically sensitive also

needs looking after.

"


! "$!

nonetheless. Seecum Cheung, an artist and curator, suggested that: ‘when it comes to

public art, it has to be done with enthusiasm and genuine intentions and that’s when it

becomes successful, people feed off the buzz’ (p. 4, Cheung, S, to Shipman, E, Appendix

A, 2010).

Philip Ursprung describes the more complex 19th Century German idea of culture or ‘kultur’

becoming: ‘a field of utopian and nostalgic wishes and projections, whenever the identity

of the bourgeois middle classes became under pressure’ (p. 17, 2006). He continues to

explain: ‘most European societies still believe that […] in a way, art has the potential to

save the world.’ Ursprung seems condescending to this ideal, yet Alistair Hudson embraces

it, explaining that: ‘In a way there is actually an ambition, maybe a stupidly overambitious

ambition, to change the world and

make it a better place’ (p.19,

Hudson, A to Shipman, E, Appendix

B, 2010). In contemporary culture

however, are these desires to

make the world a better place still

utopian and nostalgic? With the

increase of globalisation, and the

art world expanding to match the

real one, I believe the desire to change the world through art is a view shared beyond just

Europe, with cross-cultural collaborations and international projects providing a strong

global lattice for the potential of art for change to cling to. Anything that aims to make the

world a better place is surely worth pursuing, including Hudson’s ‘stupidly overambitious’

projects.

Success in temporary public art is highly dependent on those initiating the project.

Ursprung discusses some collaborative projects he feels are successes. These take the

form of Eberswalde School Library in Germany, 1999, the Swiss Embassy in Berlin, 1995 -

2000, and finally Willy-Brandt-Platz, Munich, 2004 as well as Shared Ground Southwark,

(Figure 16) by muf, 19978. Inspired by this selection, I propose that public art

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!8 Herzog & de Meuron collaborated with artist Thomas Ruff (1999), Diener & Diener with Helmut Federle (1995-2000), and art historian Claudia Buttner commissioned ongoing programme for Willy-Brandt-Platz –

Figure 16: muf’s Shared Ground Southwark, 1997, included local consultation and led to widening of pedestrian walkways


! "%!

collaborations should promote the following: an open, un-limiting and imaginative brief or

approach; fluidity; communication; skill exchange over financial exchange; informal

meeting rather than formal selection process; all participants constantly being an intrinsic

part of the project, and as much work as possible done on site, not behind desks and

doors and away from the communities that the project is all about. However, as David

Wright also suggested, ‘it is important not to have templates’ (p.53, Wright, D, to

Shipman, E, Appendix E, 2010), instead encouraging the project’s natural development

which will take different forms and result in different successes depending on external

factors.

Bankside-on-Call, for example, (Appendix G) was successful because it both gave and took

through engaging art, architecture and people in an accessible and enjoyable way.

Artist/architect Corinna Dean interviewed locals about Bankside to add to her research and

the Tate Modern’s archives, providing people a chance to talk and be listened to. The

layout and format of the exhibition space also helped to promote this9. One could also

argue that Bankside-on-Call helped to promote the Tate. If visitors had known this they

may have spoken about the area in a different light. However, the Tate Modern was

sponsoring the research, so without the institution it would not have been possible at all.

I believe that one of the most important aspects of community/public art that makes a

difference is to have a legacy. Something which continues after the project has passed,

something that plants a seed which can develop and grow providing it has the right people

to nurture it.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!with artists Karin Sander and landscape architects Lutzow 7 as the example here (2004). muf collaborated with architects Liza Fior and Juliet Bidgood (2001).

)!In terms of the actual show, souvenir tea towels were for sale and proved hugely popular; a long table was used for free tea and biscuits creating a comfortable and non-intimidating environment. The Audio Stations featuring interviews from locals were straightforward, with no conceptual barriers or artistic jargon resulting in most participants sitting through a whole fifteen-minute interview at a time – a feat many mainstream galleries would find almost impossible.

"


! "&!

Bankside-on-Call has preserved its seed in

the Tate Modern’s archives as a time

capsule of information, ideas and

experiences of Bankside’s 2010 residents.

Lucy Harrison’s Rendezvous Club (Figure

17), as part of Art U Need, led walks

around the local area, sharing stories

about different locations en route and

creating a new narrative through the

process. The local walking group still continue this project now, three years after the

artists left. This in itself, I believe is another successful legacy. Not only has the project

engaged locals during the artist’s time there, but has now become part of their daily lives,

leaving a true legacy of the project and creating a sustainable and engaging way to share

their place, community and stories with others, helping to build relationships between

themselves and promote cultural tourism. Indeed, what works and what doesn’t, Wright

says, decides which aspects of the project continue (p.54, Wright, D to Shipman, E,

Appendix E, 2010).

Nina Pope had worked with Karen Guthrie on Bata-Ville10.

The informal documentation of Bata-ville was screened at

Tate Britain, the small audience provoking the need for a

more finished and polished documentation that lead to the

creation of the Bata-ville film (Figure 18). Nina explained

that, although some participants attended the private view at

the Tate not all participants would actually want to, yet some

had attended lectures of hers over five years after the project

ended. The other long-term effects of this project are difficult

to record, but Nina believes that Bata-ville has, in a small

sense, helped to put East Tilbury on the map. somewhere’s film appears in online

searches for East Tilbury, which immediately promotes the area’s people and local history.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*+!Bata-ville explored the origins of a Czech shoe-making factory in East Tilbury and traced it back to its roots in the Czech Republic via a coach trip with local residents.!

Figure 18: Stills from the Bata-ville film by somewhere (2007)

!!

Figure 17: Lucy Harrison’s members card for her Rendezvous Club, for Art U Need

!


! "'!

Nina said she still visits East Tilbury every year – ‘some people you get more attached to

than others’ (p.59, Pope, N to Shipman, E, Appendix F, 2011). The factory and subject of

the artwork shut down during the project, so the video also became a tribute and legacy

to those who worked there, and the company’s story.

Another constantly recurring theme of a ‘successful’ public art project is the element of

surprise. Bohm believes that ‘there is a strong need […] for space within the public realm

that surprises or encourages you’ (p.24, Bohm, K, interview in public works, 2006). It is

somewhat strange that we have designed out elements of surprise within our cities

(p.198, Minton, 2009) as architecture combined with increased fear and rising health and

safety measures has erased any exciting anomalies of the city, reducing them down to a

mere smudge barely recognisable across its smoggy surface. There is no room for

adventure in a city where every centimetre has been designed and planned, and the only

space for public creativity is made as something else is destroyed. Artangel summarises

this need for inclusive and surprising public art projects:

‘The projects should have the potential to be genuinely inclusive’ [and] ‘they should

have the capacity to involve the knowledgeable as well as the curious, the

dedicated visitor and the passer-by’ [as well as] ‘allowing an audience to feel they

are discovering something for themselves.’

(p.15, 2002)

Alistair Hudson described how ‘the language of contemporary art is quite a closed circle’

(p.19, Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, Appendix B, 2010) explaining how Grizedale instead

adopt a local aesthetic and combine it with a contemporary art language, creating an

interesting two-way dialogue and avoiding isolating either audience, whilst allowing for

surprise.


! "(!

A project’s success can be incredible

when these individual factors are

combined together. A collaborative

temporary art project from The

Architecture Foundation, Bankside

Open Spaces Trust, ProjectARKs

and the Wayward Plant Registry

called The Urban Orchard (Figure

19) that took place over the

summer of 2010 was one such

piece. Snuggled into the railway

arches in Union Street on Bankside, The Urban Orchard was a temporary community

garden and art piece, certainly an urban anomaly and a lovely surprise when wandering

the backstreets of Bankside. Just like the land, everything in the garden had be recycled

and reused, ‘creating again’ the meaning and importance of the site. Fruit trees arched

over the pathways, which gave softly underfoot as thick layers of recycled rubber

chippings covered them. There were green houses, teaching and activity sheds, a bar, and

even a skip that had been converted into a Ping-Pong table. This project was indeed

‘genuinely inclusive’ as Artangel suggest, and also encompassed fluidity, communication, a

loose structure rather than set template, and skill exchange over financial exchange, to

name a few of my initial proposals for success. Afterwards the trees used were replanted

in various estates surrounding the area, resulting in a modest legacy of The Urban

Orchard.

From Alistair Hudson’s ‘complexifying’ to create a problem and therefore a solution (p. 26,

Hudson, A to Shipman, E, Appendix B, 2010), to Nina Pope’s embraced ‘potential for

failure’ (p.60, Pope, N to Shipman, E, Appendix F, 2011) the success of temporary public

art is also to make space for failure, allowing the project a freedom and lightness of its

own, which will encourage others to become a part of it, and add to its legacy themselves.

Figure 19: The Urban Orchard on Union Street, Bankside


! ")!

Roof and Topping Ceremony The contemporary British city is in a constant state of metamorphosis. The shape shifting

puzzle of its streets and buildings are continuously rearranging, the powers behind them

endlessly hoping to solve the enigma and reveal the true picture in its correct order.

Between the perfect edges of each tile however, the abandoned land and buildings

squeeze together in the shadows, forever preventing the completion of this game. Look at

this puzzle in a different light however, and there are opportunities for alternative

solutions.

Temporary public art is a medium for these solutions. Coaxing unused buildings to the

forefront of the city’s façade through creative interventions and social interaction,

temporary public art can engage and sustain in short bursts, which can act as a catalyst

for further change, recognition or even result in permanence.

Ideals around temporary public art can become a reality. Grizedale Arts, Commissions

East, somewhere and others I’ve spoken to throughout this research have helped me

confirm that working successfully in the public realm is possible. A combination of an initial

loose structure rather than a set template; to the success of meeting a brief; engaging

wider audiences with contemporary art; reminding the city of our humanness (Lottie

Child’s Street Training); to looking after and maintaining our physical and social

environment through creativity (muf); as well as to surprise (public works); engage,

communicate, heal and provoke (Bogside Artists) and complexify (Grizedale Arts).

Temporary public art ultimately presents creative anomalies in the public realm which are

personal, people-led and unique to counter-balance the human elements which our

architecture, public and private space are losing.

From vastly overambitious proposals, to the smallest legacy, the success of temporary

public art in regeneration is in the eye of the beholder. Those involved, those planning,

organising and initiating these projects have their own aim or purpose to be accomplished,

and their own place or area to ‘create again’11. As the formula for temporary public art is

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"Of course, the project initiator and trainer of the IPA – the artist, architect, council or local people, decides

the purpose, but the disintegration of these authorial hierarchies into loose structures rather than set

templates creates a habitat in which IPA can flourish and multiply.


! #+!

beautifully malleable, these accomplishments may not be realised until years after the end

result. Whether this is as something that has provoked a different type of practice for the

artist (somewhere), as positive statistics or feedback after the event (Oasis’ youth radio’s

reduction in local youth crime), or as a challenging but ongoing relationship with others

involved (Grizedale Arts with local Cumbrian residents and governing bodies) each

outcome has varied and fascinating elements of success.

The role of temporary public art in regeneration for me cannot be summarised in

answering whether art needs the community or the community needs art, as failure is

often key to successful outcomes. Artist-initiated projects could be proposed to help the

community and be rejected such as Grizedale Arts’ billboard burning, just as projects

asked for by the community or initiated by the council to directly aid those in the locality

can be unnecessary or not beneficial. However, as the local opposition to Grizedale’s

billboard burning may have lead to local people vocalising what they appreciate about

their forest, initial opposition can lead to developing multiple layers of a relationship with

the public and those involved, which can ultimately lead to success. 12

Architecture does not make us feel human, but provides challenging spaces for temporary

public art to do so. Disintegrate, regenerate, create: every urban dissolution makes space

for creativity; it is up to us to utilise it.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#"The role of temporary public art in regeneration therefore cannot be forever constrained to the definition

of the original IPA beast. Instead, IPA should take the form of infinite variations of fluid creatures, able to

adapt and evolve in different situations, climates and environments. From my extensive and first hand

research I believe that it is possible that new IPA species will also inherit the original IPA traits – essential

characteristics of such an animal and evolving only to increase in strength. The next generation of IPA will

again take people under their wing to make them feel safe, to look after them and maintain the quality of

their environment whilst provoking them to challenge it for themselves, to guide them on social issues whilst

providing room for debate. The success for these new IPA changes with the genetic make-up of each individual creature. IPA will not grow based on survival of the fittest, but the failures and less successful

beings will be learnt from and adapt themselves. The structure of these IPA will be passed down through the

generations, their legacy will live on and their chicks will be happy. The impossible ideals of my original IPA

are in fact possible and, with adaptation, will survive.

!


! #*!

Reference List Own Interviews and Experience

Cheung, S, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix A, p.2

Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix B, p.15

Jarvis, B, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix C, p. 27

(Khaliq, F, to Shipman, E, 2010 – Sound files only)

Shipman, E, Review of Bankside-on-Call, 2010, Appendix G, p.61

Shipman, E, Review of Bob and Roberta Smith’s Counter Culture, Appendix H, p.63

Smith, J, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix D, p.42

Wright, D, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix E, p.53

Pope, N, to Shipman, E, 2011, Appendix F, p.57

Books

Ballard, J.G, 2006, High-Rise, Harper Perennial

Ballard, J.G, 2008, Concrete Island, Harper Perennial

De Certeau, M, 1988 (trans. by Rendell, S), The Practice of Everyday Life, University of California

Press LTD

Ed. Fernie, J, 2006, Two Minds: Artists and Architects in Collaboration, Black Dog Publishing

Griffin, J and Sutherland, A, ed. Griffin, J, 2009, Grizedale Arts: Adding Complexity to Confusion,

Grizedale Books

Kester, G.H, 2004, Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art, University

of California Press

Kwon, M, 2004, One place after another: Site specific art and locational identity, MIT Press

muf, 2001, this is what we do, Ellipsis, London

Minton, A, 2009, Ground Control: Fear and happiness in the 21st Century city, Penguin

Slater, J. B and Iles, A, 2010, No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City, Mute Books,

London


! #"!

Smith, B & R, (Wright, D intro) 2007, Art U Need, Blackdog Publishing

Ed. Van Noord, G, 2002, OFF LIMITS: 40 Artangel Projects, Merrell Publishers

Wordsworth, W, 1888, The Prelude Book VII ‘Residence in London’, London: Macmillan and Co.

Internet

Buchloch, Benjamin, under Jstor Archive, Feb 2008, Conceptual Art 1962-1969: From the Aesthetic

of Administration to the Critique of Institutions

October, Vol. 55. (Winter, 1990), pp. 105-143

<http://danm.ucsc.edu/~dustin/library/conceptual_art_1962_1969.pdf>, accessed Jan 2011

Channel 4, Channel 4 Big Art Project - muf, [internet]

<http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/B/bigart/latest_news.html> accessed September

2010

London SE1, How Waterloo’s summer radio station cut youth crime in SE1, Monday 2 March 2009,

<http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3770>, accessed January 2011

Meanwhile Space, Introduction <http://www.meanwhilespace.com/>, accessed February 2011

Muf, Falcon Road Bridge [internet] <http://www.muf.co.uk/southwrk.htm>, accessed December

2010

Slater, J. B, & Iles, A, November 2009, No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City,

[internet]

<http://www.metamute.org/en/content/no_room_to_move_radical_art_and_the_regenerate_city>

, accessed September 2010

Unknown, Definition of community, unknown date, [internet]

<wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn>, accessed September 2010

Internet Film

Leacock, P, 1951, 9min 31sec, Festival of London, Sponsor: Central Office of Information for

Commonwealth Relations Office, Synopsis: A documentary re-creation of the 1951 Festival of

Britain South Bank Exhibition, [internet] source:

<http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/films/1945to1951/filmpage_fil.htm>, accessed September

2010

Film

Keiller, P, London, 1994, British Film Institute, Koninck, Channel Four, Producer Griffiths, K,


! ##!

Narrator: Scofield, P

Audio

Khaliq, F to Shipman, E [interview recording] 2010

Bibliography Own Interviews

Cheung, S, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix A, p.2

Hudson, A, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix B, p.15

Jarvis, B, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix C, p. 27

(Khaliq, F, to Shipman, E, 2010 – Sound files only)

Shipman, E, Review of Bankside-on-Call, 2010, Appendix G, p.61

Shipman, E, Review of Bob and Roberta Smith’s Counter Culture, Appendix H, p.63

Smith, J, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix D, p.42

Wright, D, to Shipman, E, 2010, Appendix E, p.53

Pope, N, to Shipman, E, 2011, Appendix F, p.57

Books

Ballard, J.G, 2006, High-Rise, Harper Perennial

Ballard, J.G, 2008, Concrete Island, Harper Perennial

De Certeau, M, 1988 (trans. by Rendell, S), The Practice of Everyday Life, University of California

Press LTD

Ed. Fernie, J, 2006, Two Minds: Artists and Architects in Collaboration, Black Dog Publishing

Ed. Ghirado, D, 1991, Out of Site: A Social Criticism of Architecture, Bay Press Seattle

Griffin, J and Sutherland, A, ed. Griffin, J, 2009, Grizedale Arts: Adding Complexity to Confusion,

Grizedale Books

Ed. Grosz, E, 2001, Architecture from the Outside: Essays on Virtual and Real Space,

Massachussets Institute of Technology

Hanley, L, 2007, Estates: An Intimate History, Granta Books


! #$!

Kester, G.H, 2004, Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art, University

of California Press

Kwon, M, 2004, One place after another: Site specific art and locational identity, MIT Press

Ed. Mcdonough, T, 2009, The Situationists and the City, Verso New York

muf, 2001, this is what we do, Ellipsis, London

Minton, A, 2009, Ground Control: Fear and happiness in the 21st Century city, Penguin

Slater, J. B and Iles, A, 2010, No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City, Mute Books,

London

Smith, B & R, (Wright, D intro) 2007, Art U Need, Blackdog Publishing

Ed. Van Noord, G, 2002, OFF LIMITS: 40 Artangel Projects, Merrell Publishers

Wordsworth, W, 1888, The Prelude Book VII ‘Residence in London’, London: Macmillan and Co.

Internet

BBC, April 2009, Belief: Interview with Anthony Gormley, [internet]

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/belief/scripts/antony_gormley.html>, accessed

September 2010

Becker, J, February 2002, Public Art’s Cultural Revolution, [internet], Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minn,

Original CAN/API publication,

<http://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/2002/02/public_arts_cul.php>,

accessed September 2010

Benedict, S, July 2010, Welcome to the Big Society! [internet], Mute, <

http://www.metamute.org/en/content/welcome_to_the_big_society>, accessed September 2010

Buchloch, Benjamin, under Jstor Archive, Feb 2008, Conceptual Art 1962-1969: From the Aesthetic

of Administration to the Critique of Institutions

October, Vol. 55. (Winter, 1990), pp. 105-143

<http://danm.ucsc.edu/~dustin/library/conceptual_art_1962_1969.pdf>, accessed Jan 2011

Channel 4, Channel 4 Big Art Project - muf, [internet]

<http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/B/bigart/latest_news.html> accessed September

2010


! #%!

Harding, D, January 2008, What Have We Learned About Public Art? [internet]

<http://www.publicartscotland.com/features/1-What-Have-We-Learned-About-Public-Art->,

accessed September 2010

London SE1, How Waterloo’s summer radio station cut youth crime in SE1, Monday 2 March 2009,

<http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3770>, accessed January 2011

Meanwhile Space, Introduction <http://www.meanwhilespace.com/>, accessed February 2011

Muf, Falcon Road Bridge [internet] <http://www.muf.co.uk/southwrk.htm>, accessed December

2010

Slater, J. B, & Iles, A, November 2009, No Room to Move: Radical Art and the Regenerate City,

[internet]

<http://www.metamute.org/en/content/no_room_to_move_radical_art_and_the_regenerate_city>

, accessed September 2010

Definition of ‘community’, unknown, unknown date, [internet]

<wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn>, accessed September 2010

Internet Film

Leacock, P, 1951, 9min 31sec, Festival of London, Sponsor: Central Office of Information for

Commonwealth Relations Office, Synopsis: A documentary re-creation of the 1951 Festival of

Britain South Bank Exhibition, [internet] source:

<http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/films/1945to1951/filmpage_fil.htm>, accessed September

2010

Film

Keiller, P, London, 1994, British Film Institute, Koninck, Channel Four, Producer Griffiths, K,

Narrator: Scofield, P

Magazines

Acconci, V, ‘Changing Spaces’ interview by Freee, Art Monthly, Dec/Jan 09/10

Audio

Khaliq, F to Shipman, E [interview recording] 2010

Image Appendix Figure:

1. Aerial view of The Festival of Britain, 1951, Science Museum, Science and Society Picture

Library, <http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/images/ManualSSPL/10454455.aspx> accessed

Sept 2010


! #&!

2. Claes Oldenburg’s Spoonbridge and Cherry, 2009, Wac-pr,

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spoonbridge_Cherry.jpg> accessed February 2011

3. Privatised housing, Sean Smith, 2009,

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/joepublic/2009/dec/30/decade-public-spaces-review>

4. Still from Patrick Keiller’s London, 1992, [Online film clip]

<http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/entertainment/watch/v196407193Dhjqr85>

5. Cover illustration for JG Ballard’s High Rise, (unknown date) Hatherly, W, [Online Image]

<http://www.tate.org.uk/images/cms/22617w_hatherley_17_r3.jpg>

6. Worn stone steps in Edinburgh, Eleanor Shipman, 2011 Digital photograph (own files)

7. Vestry Road Google earth screen shot, Eleanor Shipman, 2010 [online screen shot]

8. Muf Falcon Road Bridge Project, muf, 2006 [Online Image]

<http://www.muf.co.uk/southwrk.htm>

9. Bankside-on-Call Poster, 2010, <http://www.artvehicle.com/events/288>, accessed February

2011

10. The Bogside Artists: The Battle of Bogside Mural,

<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Mural_-

_Battle_of_the_bogside_2004_SMC.jpg>

11. Spitalfields seating area, computer render, FreeForm

<http://www.freeform.org.uk/bishopssquare.htm> accessed February 2011

12. The arched spines of the diggers, Eleanor Shipman, 2010, Digital photograph (own files)

13. Liverpool One, an architect’s render, unknown, [online image]

<http://train4tradeskills.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/liverpool_one_grosvenor180408_debenha

ms.jpg>, accessed September 2010

14. Grizedale artists and volunteers share a meal at a Harvest Festival, 2010, [online image] posted

by Maria Benjamin, <http://www.grizedale.org/blogs/o=20>, accessed February 2011

15. Vacant shop unit as advertised on Gumtree, 2011,

<http://sunderland.gumtree.com/sunderland/27/72583327.html>, accessed February 2011

16. muf’s Shared Ground Southwark, 1997, muf, <http://www.muf.co.uk/southwrk.htm>, accessed

February 2011

17. Lucy Harrison’s members card for her Rendezvous Club, for Art U Need, 2007, Lucy Harrison,

<http://www.canveyguides.com/rendezvous.html>, accessed February 2011

18. Stills from Bata-ville, by somewhere, 2007, somewhere, [online image], <http://www.bata-

ville.com/>, accessed February 2011

19. The Urban Orchard, 2010, Dean,

<http://londonist.com/2010/07/the_union_street_urban_orchard.php>accessed February 2011




, bringing people together,



provoke, and to

The contemporary British city is in a constant state of metamorphosis. It shifts and changes, sharp shards of glass and metal push up through the pavements,

cower in awe of their growth. Architectural cast-offs are gradually abandoned as the city sheds its skin.

Amongst these remnants of transformation, hundreds of spaces remain unused, holding the potential to reconnect and re-communicate with the people and the city, through their own kind of regeneration: regeneration through art.

Eleanor Shipman explores the challenges and successes of how creative interventions can connect people to place, suggesting what really makes ‘ideal public art’ in today’s urban environment.

Regenerate, Disintegrate, Create: The Role of Temporary Public Art in Regeneration

Documents

Transcript of Regenerate, Disintegrate, Create: The Role of Temporary Public Art in Regeneration