pages: PublicArtCommission/2022-06-27.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PublicArtCommission | 2022-06-27 | 2 | Minutes of the Public Art Commission Monday, June 27, 2022 Jen Krava, Director of Programming Mark Salinas, Senior Project Manager Yarlyn Rosario, Project Manager Mallory Rukhsana Nezam, Consultant Yolanda Cotton Turner, Local Artist Consultant Rukhsana Nezam explained the Group Agreements for the evening's facilitation process, and shared Forecast's Master Plan timeline and engagement plan. After defining Public Art in general, including common locations, sample funding models, and a presentation of the wide variety of existing public art, Forecast facilitated an exercise to gather input for the definition of Public Art specific to the process of developing the Public Art Master plan for the City of Alameda. Questions and a summary of responses are as follows: Where should Public Art be located (concentrated or spread out)? Throughout Alameda; very publicly accessible; the diversity of opportunities within a variety of neighborhoods; art is missing from shoreline and other high-traffic key destination areas: difficult to locate existing public art; continue to expand artwork beyond nautical-theme; historical challenges has been finding sites and working with City to get approval for public art sites; and the importance of equitable distribution. How long should Public Art be installed? Program should support both performance and temporary physical art (temporary) as well as permanent pieces like sculpture (permanent); allow artwork to be deaccessioned so that artwork can represent a diversity of artists instead of the historical precedent of white male artists; increased cost of maintaining long term art pieces takes funding away from new artwork; temporary art can be placed in more locations; set term limits for art which allows a living-gallery feel and fresh art; civic buildings and garages might be a good fit for murals or light installations; Alameda has had no audio installations; and keep art permanently, but move art from key places to allow new art. Should the aesthetics and content of public art be more symbolic or literal? Political or heavily messaged art can be challenging in a public setting; support for a variety of art; the community is the final arbiter of what fits; value of having artwork that challenges people; performance art has been better able to capture more political/challenging topics. Should the aesthetics and content focus on the historic or contemporary? Existing artwork is mostly contemporary; Alameda is quite nostalgic yet constantly changing; encourage a focus on new art; and too much nostalgic artwork doesn't capture the full history (e.g. Alameda is missing artwork about shellmounds and Japanese internment camps). 2 | PublicArtCommission/2022-06-27.pdf |