103
Public Art School (Now) Convenors: Ruth Fazakerley & Fiona Hillary ACUADS 2015, 24 September 2015 University of South Australia, Adelaide Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Convenors:  Ruth  Fazakerley  &  Fiona  Hillary  ACUADS  2015,  24  September  2015  University  of  South  Australia,  Adelaide                    

Roundtable:  Discussion  Paper  

Page 2: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)  Roundtable:  Discussion  Paper  presented  at  ACUADS  2015  

Australian  Council  of  University  Art  and  Design  Schools  Annual  Conference  

24-­‐25  September  2015  University  of  South  Australia,  Adelaide  

acuads.com.au/conference/2015-­‐conference      

Editors:  Ruth  Fazakerley  and  Fiona  Hillary  images  &  text  2015  ©authors/contributors,    

R  Fazakerley  &  F  Hillary  

   

The  editors  would  like  to  thank:  Simon  Biggs,  Deanna  Hall  and  ACUADS  2015,  David  Cross,  Henning  Eichinger,  Agnieszka  Golda,  Sasha  Grbich,  

Trish  Hansen,  Eileen  Legaspi-­‐Ramirez,  Clare  McCracken,  Maggie  McCormick,  Anthony  McInneny,  Ron  Nicholls,  Jasmeen  Patheja,  Marie  Sierra,  Nien  Schwarz,  Tangi  Steen,  Andrew  Stock,  Peter  Walker,  and  Kit  

Wise  for  their  engagement  with  and  support  for  this  event.  

 

Page 3: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Contents:    Introduction          1  

Snapshots          5  

Prompts          81  

Contributors          89  

A  Public  Art  School  (Now)  Reader          95  

   

             

Page 4: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper
Page 5: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Introduction    

1  

Page 6: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

'Public  art'  emerged  as  a  distinctive  category  of  cultural  practice  and  policy   in   the   late  1960s,   linked   to   the  widespread  reassessment  of  the  forms,  functions  and  social  relations  of  art  and  the  emergent  phenomenon  of  art  as  a  special  field  of  government   responsibility.   Since   those   beginnings,   ‘public   art’   has   continued   to   be   castigated   for   its   conservative,  monumental,   and   repressive   tendencies   while   at   the   same   time   reconfigured   as   an   emancipatory,   unsettling   and  disruptive  medium  of  challenge  (e.g.  see  Doherty  C  (ed.)  2015,  Out  of  Time.  Out  of  Place:  Public  Art  (Now),  Art/Books,  London).    

Today,  art  practice   in   the  public   realm   is   increasingly  diverse,  while  art,  artists,  design  and  creativity   feature  ever  more  strongly  as  allies  of  social  change  in  both  local  and  global  economic  and  planning  debates.  

 

How  (now)  are  art  and  design  schools  preparing  students  to  function  in  this  realm?    

What’s  happening  in  higher  education  institutions  to  prepare  students  to  work  in  and  with  public,  community  and  social  contexts?    

What  now  constitutes  professionally  relevant  skills  and  capacities?      

What  are  the  challenges  and  opportunities?    

       

     

2  

Page 7: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

         

In  posing  these  questions,  we  invited  art  and  design  educators  to  contribute  their  ideas,  reflections  and  insights:  examples  of  relevant  curriculum  (programs,  courses,  units,  projects,  partnerships),  from  across  the  diverse  realms  of  art  and  public  (public  art,  socially  engaged  practice,  art  in  social  context,  live  art,  etc);  reflections  on  outcomes,  successes,  challenges  and  future  needs.  

Fourteen  examples  of  contemporary  art  projects,  student  activity  and  curriculum  were  received  from  educators  in  Australia,  the  Philippines  and  India.  These  examples  represent  diverse  institutional  and  personal  approaches  to  public  realm  practice;  to  collaboration  and  co-­‐creation  involving  educators,  students  and  publics;  to  the  contribution  of  artists  and  designers  to  knowledge  and  society;  and  the  role  of  creative  research  and  scholarship  in  the  public  realm.    

The  responses  are  collated  here  to  inform  the  Public  Art  School  (Now)  Roundtable,  held  as  part  of  ACUADS  2015  in  Adelaide,  with  the  participation  of  discussants  David  Cross,  Maggie  McCormick,  Nien  Schwarz  and    Marie  Sierra.      

This  discussion  paper  forms  the  ground  for  what  we  anticipate  will  be  a  lively  discussion    about  the  future  for  design  thinking  and  critical  and  creative  practice  in  the  public  realm,  in  the  academy  or  outside.  

 

Ruth  Fazakerley  &  Fiona  Hillary  Convenors  

3  

Page 8: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

4  

Page 9: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Snapshots                        

5  

Page 10: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

6  

Page 11: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Sasha  Grbich:  Adelaide  Central  School  of  Art                        

Ash  Tower,  Postcards  from    the  Bibliopolis,  2014  

7  

Page 12: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Examples  of  works  by  degree  and  honors  students  that  explore  public  spaces  and  invite  

par:cipa:on        

Sasha  Grbich  2015    

Page 13: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Ash  Tower,  Postcards  from  the  Bibliopolis,  2014,  found  paper,  resin.  Dimensions  variable.    Presenta:ons  of  the  work  at  Barr  Smith  Library  and  State  Library  of  Western  Australia  .  

Page 14: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Lilly  Ahlefeldt,  terrace,  2013,  Oregon,  terracoMa  roof  :les,  lichen,  moss,  mild  steel,  misc.  hardwood  &  fixings,  sculptural  installa:on,  dimensions  variable.  Image  Sasha  Grbich    

Page 15: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Luke  Wilcox,  Free  Individual  Produc9ve  Potency  1,  performance  in  front  of  the  Art  Gallery  of  South  Australia,  2015.  Image  Catherine  Leo.      

Page 16: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

12  

Page 17: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Fiona  Hillary:  RMIT  University  VE                        

Ainsley  McCauley,  Urban  Laboratory,  2013  

13  

Page 18: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Contributor: Fiona Hillary, Teacher Program/Course: Advanced Diploma of Visual Arts – Vocational Education, School of Art, RMIT University, 2013

The Urban Laboratory was a 12 month research project commissioned by the City of Melbourne and undertaken by RMIT University’s Centre for Art, Society and Transformations in Hosier & Rutledge lanes in the Melbourne CBD. The research was designed to explore perceptions of safety in the laneways through public art interventions.

Students completing the Advanced Diploma of Visual Art in the School of Art in 2013 engaged with the site to focus the development of their works for their final semester. They contributed their ideas via site analysis to the research team and then developed and installed works influenced by their experience of the site.

Engaging in a ‘live test site’ for practice is an invaluable experience for students – providing a working understanding of public spaces.

The current context of TAFE and VE staff engaging in research in Victoria means these opportunities are often dependent on the staff teaching in the program also being engaged in research activity outside their position. It is critical that a shift emerge to acknowledge the importance of research in the TAFE/VE sector and the benefits to staff, students and learning outcomes.

Page 19: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University©2011 The Urban Laboratory 2013

Elizabeth Brain Daisy Catterall

Daisy Mak Photographs: Fiona Hillary

Ainsley McCauley

Lauren Holmwood

Student works Ten vocational education students participated in the Urban Laboratory project across S2 2013. Their final installations occurred in Hosier and Rutledge lanes in November 2013 as a one night show case.

Page 20: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University©2011 The Urban Laboratory 2013

Additional project material: Urban Laboratory Research Tumblr: http://urbanlaboratory.tumblr.com/ Publications: Hillary, F. and Sumartojo, S. (2014). Empty-Nursery Blue: On Atmosphere, Meaning and Methodology in Melbourne Street Art. Public Art Dialogue, 4(2), pp.201-220.

Page 21: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Eileen  Legaspi-­‐Ramirez:  University  of  the  Philippines  Diliman                      

Off-­‐site/Out  of  Sight  17  

Page 22: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Off  Site/Out  of  Sight Eileen  Legaspi-­‐Ramirez,  Asst.  Professor/Co-­‐curator  

Off-­‐Site/Out  of  Sight  community  workshops  and  site-­‐specific  installaEons  

University  of  the  Philippines  Diliman,  Quezon  City,  Philippines,  February  2015    (transiEoning  to  phase  2  at  the  moment)  

Page 23: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Back  to  Square  1/Juan’s  Off  Site/Out  of  Sight  art  projects  deliberately  pose  a  contrast  to  those  found  in  spic  and  span  galleries  and  other  spaces  oDen  too  clinical  or  in9mida9ng  to  most.  Project  ar9sts  literally  and  figura9vely  peg  their  work  upon  a  backstory  about  how  UP  might  be  thought  of  as  an  ecosystem  that  needs  a  jumpstart  possibly  from  ar9sts  like  themselves.    In  works  that  don’t  pull  any  punches  nor  face9ously  conceal  their  seams  and  underside,  ar9sts  (like  Mars  Bugaoan,  Cagayan  de  Oro  Arts  Guild,  Cavity  Collec9ve,  Contemporists  Collabora9ve,  Ohm  David,  Arvi  Fetalvero,  Lyra  Garcellano,  Carlo  Gernale,  Carol  Peña-­‐Santos,  Merv  Pimentel,  Roselle  Pineda,  Alma  Quinto,  Claro  Ramirez,  Jose  John  Santos  III  and  Pam  Yan  Santos,  Ioannis  Sicuya,  KaX  Sta  Ana,  Manolo  Sicat,  Talaandig  Ar9sts,  Angel  Ulama,  Ferdz  Valencia,  Oca  Villamiel,  WALA,  Christopher  Zamora,  and  Eric  Zamuco,  among  others)  respond  both  to  the  spaces  of  the  former  University  of  Philippines  (UP)  stud  farm  and  the  stories  in  and  around  this  site  which  essen9ally  fell  into  disuse  when  the  Marcoses  fell  out  of  favour  in  EDSA1.      In  containing  work  within  the  old  stud  farm  turned  materials  recovery  facility  now  used  for  segrega9ng  solid  waste  generated  by  UP  campus  along  with  receiving  yard  waste  and  rubble  from  Quezon  City  hall,  Off  Site/  Out  of  Sight  imagines  how  art  might  play  into  preven9ng  one  of  the  formerly  greenest  spots  on  campus  from  turning  into  a  virtual  Smokey  Mountain/  Payatas  lookalike  and  live-­‐a-­‐like.  In  challenging  themselves  to  transform  this  back  into  a  green  hub  not  only  for  art  but  community  engagement,  the  project  partners  find  themselves  dealing  not  only  with  crea9ve  problems  but  complex  issues  of  territoriality  and  skewed  resources.  The  process  of  occupying  the  stud  farm’s  old  administra9on  building  and  stables  for  Off  Site/Out  of  Sight  also  consists  of  workshops  done  with  willing  partner  informal  sealer  communi9es  as  well  as  immersing  into  the  complicated  social  soup  of  rela9ons  between  these  communi9es,  the  UP  bureaucra9c  structure,  and  local  government.  Not  aaemp9ng  any  cookie  cuaer  solu9ons  nor  posing  panacea  pla9tudes,  Off  Site  hopefully  imprints  on  those  part  of  it  that  making  art  of  this  stream  requires  nego9a9ons  beyond  form  and  technical  dexterity,  and  necessarily  ques9ons  the  no9on  of  good  inten9ons.    Partly  in  response  to  this  laaer  concern  are  Off  Site/Out  of  Sight’s  collateral  workshops  that  count  on  community-­‐mapping,  collabora9ve  produc9on  of  installa9ve  elements  while  in  the  midst  of  possibly  tense  dialogues  between  contending  stakeholders,  exploring  how  situa9ons  infused  with  play-­‐learning  and  even  basic  design/craDing  might  open  up  individuals  to  otherwise  unimagined  possibili9es  that  suggest  more  humane  forms  of  rela9ng  and  living.  It  is  a  tac9cal  approach  to  effec9ng  intersec9ons  between  the  parallel  lives  of  university  faculty,  staff  and  students  alongside  those  of  daily  UP  transients/sealers  like  laundry  service  and  maintenance  personnel,  shopkeepers,  vendors,  barkers,  trike  drivers,  etc.  who  are  in  and  out  of  UP’s  493-­‐hectare  space  for  varying  lengths  of  9me  but  who  are  all  dependent  on  its  land  and  resources.    

hMp://backtosquarejuan.org/off-­‐site.html  

Page 24: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Key  Strategies  •  Framing  project  within  the  domains  of  art  

educa:on,  environmental  work,  and  community  rela:ons  to  effect    transdisciplinarity  and  mi:gate  ins:tu:onal  hesita:on  

•  Working  with  on-­‐site  materials  and  responding  to  informal  seMler  community  nuances  

•  Media:on  and  engagement  through  art  educa:on  

•  Educa:ng  ar:sts  in  community  rela:onal  skills  to  broaden  their  prac:ce  

•  Phase  into  life-­‐skills  learning  for  older  children  and  adults  

Page 25: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Challenges,  constraints,  gaps  

•  Strained  rela:onship  between  the  landholder  university  and  con:nuing  threat  of  demoli:on  of  seMlers  has  created  an  environment  of  suspicion  around  any  efforts  to  work  with  these  communi:es  

•  University  Master  Development  Plan  presents  a  structural  obstacle  to  working  with  communi:es  on  site  for  the  long  term  

•  Meager  project  resources  prevents  us  from  hiring  full-­‐:me  community  organizer  who  can  oversee  daily  tasks  that  ar:st-­‐teacher-­‐organizers  are  unable  to  concentrate  on  fully    

•  Need  for  even  more  immersive  engagement  with  communi:es  given  complex  macro  development  factors  impinging  on  ability  to  emerge  from  marginal  status  

Page 26: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Implica:ons,  opportuni:es,  future  planning  

•  Climate  for  transdisciplinary  work  makes  ini:a:ves  like  this  palatable  even  to  the  most  business-­‐inclined  admin  officials    

•  By  framing  this  as  a  poten:al  niche  incubator-­‐laboratory  for  transdisciplinary  ini:a:ves,  may  possibly  aMract  the  energies  of  other  academic  units  and  strengthen  its  chances  of  gaining  more  ins:tu:onal  suport  past  the  local  academic  poli:cal  dynamic  

•  At  least  for  current  Diliman  administra:on,  highly  placed  allies  at  the  Chancellor  &  Vice-­‐Chancellor  levels  so  should  try  to  consolidate  gains  as  quickly  and  as  sustainably  as  possible  

•  Need  to  broaden  base  of  support  not  just  within  university  but  possibly  from  local  government,  alumni/private  sector  

Page 27: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Conclusions,  key  ques:ons,  discussion  points  

•  Art  educ  is  perceived  as  a  rela:vely  benign  but  produc:ve  entry  point  in  aMemp:ng  media:on  between  contested  par:es,  in  this  case  informal  seMlers  and  the  state  university  

•  How  can  we,  however,  move  on  to  just  doing  a  broad  range  of  informal  art  educ  work  to  reaching  out  to  other  members  of  the  community  (e.g.older  children,  adults)  s:ll  through  the  primary  channel  of  art?  

•  What  project-­‐specific  structural  aspects  must  urgently  be  put  in  place  so  that  the  goodwill  gained  in  phase  1  might  not  be  squandered  and  con:nuing  phases  might  be  realized  and  eventually  bear  longer  term  benefit  for  both  the  academic  and  non-­‐academic  communi:es  broached  in  Off  Site/Out  of  Sight?  

Page 28: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

 hMp://backtosquarejuan.org/off-­‐site.html    

or  hMps://www.facebook.com/backtosquarejuan  

 

Page 29: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Clare  McCracken:  RMIT  University                        

Brooke  Altmann  ,  Looking  Up    Photograph:  Andrew  Ferris  25  

Page 30: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Bachelor of Fine Arts elective Public Art Project.

Dendrochronology by Georgina Lamperd. Photograph: Andrew Ferris Illuminate by Cristal Johnson. Photograph: Andrew Ferris

Space Between Light: Richmond Housing Estate 2015

Page 31: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Bachelor of Fine Arts elective Public Art Project.

The Space Between Light Festival: At the Richmond Housing Estate, Melbourne

Studio Lecturer: Clare McCracken Industry Partners: The Department of Health and Human Services and the Neighbourhood Justice Centre Date: Semester One, 2015 Due to a combination of aging infrastructure, and antisocial behavior related to the presence of a needle exchange and methadone program on the estate, both the community surrounding the area, as well as the community living within, have the perception that significant parts of the estate’s public spaces are unsafe. The project consequently activated the area over two nights through the use of interactive, site-specific light and sound-based art installations, to research if this perception could be shifted. Playscape by Panayiota Petrakis. Photograph: Andrew Ferris

Page 32: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Bachelor of Fine Arts elective Public Art Project.

The Space Between Light Festival: At the Richmond Housing Estate, Melbourne

By fostering the production of works that were site-specific, interactive or involved the community in their production, the research also sought to explore the development of a more vibrant sense of community within the estate. The project offered real industry experience for the 50 emerging artists involved. In the semester leading up to the event they were mentored by established projection artist Yandell Walton and lighting designer Jo Norster to develop greater technical and aesthetic understanding of light-based work. By sharing their practice with the students involved, Walton and Norster also opened their eyes to the diversity of light-based works. Art in Public Space lecturer Clare McCracken worked closely with the emerging artists, helping them develop site-specific practices, which engaged with community.

Looking Up by Brooke Altmann Photograph: Andrew Ferris

Page 33: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Maggie  McCormick:    RMIT  University                        

Freya  Pitt,  White  Night,  Melbourne  29  

Page 34: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

   

           

 

MMC

art+space  What  new  rela:onships  are  developing  between  contemporary  art  prac:ce  and  the  public  realm?  

   Master  of  Arts  (Art  in  Public  Space)  

RMIT  University  Melbourne,  Australia  

   Contributor:  Dr  Maggie  McCormick,  Program  Manager  

Program:  Master  of  Arts  (Art  in  Public  Space)      

Art  in  Public  Space  takes  a  mul:disciplinary  approach  to  crea:ve  prac:ce  that  engages  cri:cally  with  contemporary  urban  culture.  The  program  addresses  the  interconnec:on  of  prac:ce  and  theory  

engaging  in  issues  central  to  interna:onal  cultural  and  social  debate  with  a  current  focus  on  connec:ons  with  Europe,  China  and  South  America.  With  an  emphasis  on  work-­‐integrated  learning  the  program  aims  to  develop  the  conceptual  and  prac:cal  skills  needed  to  undertake  collabora:ve  and  individual  projects  

within  professional  situa:ons.        

The  program  is  aimed  at  those  with  skills  in  visual,  video,  sound  and  performa:ve  arts  as  well  as  those  in  the  curatorial,  architectural,  design  and  cultural  management  fields,  with  ambi:ons  to  further  develop  those  skills  within  their  exis:ng  career  or  to  move  into  prac:ce  in  and  about  contemporary  public  space.  

   

Page 35: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

   

           

 

MMC

RMIT  University    Art  in  Public  Space  

student  work  

Riza  Manalo.  White  Night,  Melbourne  &  City  of  Greater  Dandenong  Nocturnal.  

PS50  public  art  space  

Riza  Manalo,  SkypeLab,  Shanghai  Freya  PiM,  White  Night,  Melbourne  

Page 36: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

   

           

 

MMC

RMIT  University  program  informa:on:  hMp://www.rmit.edu.au/study-­‐with-­‐us/levels-­‐of-­‐study/postgraduate-­‐study/masters-­‐by-­‐coursework/mc079/

#pageId=overview        

Art  in  Public  Space  Facebook  Group:  hMps://www.facebook.com/groups/365780873432971/        

RMIT  Centre  for  Art,  Society  and  Transforma:on  (CAST)  Skypetrait  project  and  publica:on:    

hMp://www.rmit.edu.au/research/research-­‐ins:tutes-­‐centres-­‐and-­‐groups/research-­‐centres/centre-­‐for-­‐art-­‐society-­‐and-­‐transforma:on/projects/skypetrait/  

Page 37: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Maggie  McCormick:    RMIT  University    &  Henning  Eichinger:  Reutlingen  University                        

33  

Page 38: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

SkypeLab:  TransconEnental  Faces  &  Spaces  Dr  Maggie  McCormick  RMIT  University,  Melbourne  Australia  

Prof  Henning  Eichinger,  Reutlingen  University,  StuMgart  Region,  Germany    

SkypeLab  is  a  prac:ce  led  research  laboratory  across  con:nents  that  inves:gates  the  impact  of  digital  tools  and  social  networks  on  art  and  design  with  a  focus  on  mapping  iden:ty  percep:on  mediated  

though  digital  screens  within  the  public  space  of  Skype.        

Page 39: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

 Aims  Undertake  prac:ce  led  research  Re-­‐evaluate  the  role  of  drawing  and  the  senses  as  research  and  mapping    tools    within  digital  media  Increase  awareness  of  the  impact  of  digital  tools  and  social  networks  Set  up  a  sustainable  transcon:nental  network  through  the  Labs      Methodology  SkypeLab  explores  the  nature  of  contemporary  portraiture  in  a  digitalized    and  urbanized  world  through  reinterpreta:on  of  Blind  Contour  Drawing    prac:ce  within  the    everyday  public  space  of  Skype.    Central  to  the  concept  is  pairing  across  difference  within  con:guous  and  ephemeral  transcon:nental  space.  

Outcomes  of  the  experience  of  drawing  via  Skype  are  reflected  on  and  interpreted  through  Labs:  performa:ve  ac:ons,  visual    dialogues,  screen  works  &  publica:ons.            

 

   

Image  Freya  PiM  

Page 40: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

           

 

Image  Georgina  Humphries  

Labs  &  Outcomes  Reflec:on  and  analysis  to  date  includes  considera:on  of  the  impact  of  paradox,  contour,  layering  and  fragmenta:on  on  percep:on  mediated  by  digital  screens,  and  on  the  mapping  of  this  through  art  and  design.    

Melbourne,  Australia/Reutlingen,  Germany  2012/2013  Gertrude  Street  Projec:on  Fes:val,  Melbourne  City  Library,  Reutlingen  City  Hall,  RMIT  Project  Space  and  Spare  Room,  

Federa:on  Square    

Shanghai,  China  April  2015  Visuelle  Bibliothek,  Department  for  Culture,  German  

Consulate  &  Goethe  Ins:tut  China    

Rio  de  Janiero,  Brazil  August  2015  Mapping  Emphemerali:es,  ICA  conference  

 Reutlingen,  Germany  February  2016  

Staed:sche  Galerie,  Reutlingen  with  a  second  publica:on  2016    

www.skypelab.org  Including  2013  publica:on  pdf  

     

Page 41: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Anthony  McInneny:  RMIT  University                        

Lauren  Black,  Candy  Stripes,  Little  Queen  St,  Melbourne  (proposed)  37  

Page 42: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT  University.  Master  of  Arts,  Art  in  Public  Space.  

Only  post  graduate  studies  in  Australia  solely  focussed  on  Art  In  Public  Space.  2002  -­‐  2015  

Higher  degree  by  coursework  began  as  a  post  graduate  cer:ficate  with  a  focus  on  competencies,  praxis  and  industry  engagement.  This  con:nues.  

3  semester  full  :me  program.    1st    Studio  Teaching  &  Theory  2nd  Crea:ve  Ac:on  &  advanced  seminar  3rd  Major  Project  MP  &  MP  Presenta:on  

Square  Water.  Melbourne  Environment  Commissions  2003.  Awarded  to  then  student  now  Lecturer,  Anthony  McInneny  and  forms  the  basis  of  Studio  Teaching.  2004  –  2015  

Page 43: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT  University.  Master  of  Arts,  Art  in  Public  Space.  

Melbourne  Laneway  Commission.    Studio  Lecturer:  Anthony  McInneny    Industry  Partner:  City  of  Melbourne    Date:  2005-­‐2009  -­‐  50  submiMed  proposal  –  concept,  logis:cs,  budget  -­‐  10  shortlisted  proposal  funded  to  feasibility  stage  -­‐  3  works  realised  with  funding  of  $30,000  AUD  Peer  review  of  concepts  Expert  &  technical  feedback  for  all  concepts  Mentorship  and  logis:cal  support  from  RMIT    

City  Dreaming,  QingLan  Huang.  Lingham  Lane  Melbourne  CBD  2009  

Candy  Stripes.  Lauren  Black.  LiMle  Queen  Street  Melbourne.  2008  Shortlisted  proposal    

Page 44: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT  University.  Master  of  Arts,  Art  in  Public  Space.  

Agony/Ecstasy  by  Eddy  Carroll,  Phebe  Parisia,  John  Howland.    Manton  Lane.  Melbourne  2008    

Page 45: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Anthony  McInneny  &  Clare  McCracken:    RMIT  University                        

Ainslie  Macauley,  Jump  Rope    41  

Page 46: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Master of Fine Arts (Art in Public Space)

Nocturnal: Light in Winter Festival, City of Greater Dandenong

Nocturnal Blooms by Rachel Prince

Page 47: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Master of Fine Arts (Art in Public Space)

The Space Between Light Festival: At the Richmond Housing Estate, Melbourne

Studio Lecturer: Dr Anthony McInneny and Clare McCracken Industry Partners: City of Greater Dandenong Date: 2009 – 2015 Students explored themes of diverse communities, the Australian suburbs & urban growth and renewal. Written proposal submitted followed by industry assessment, construction and installation. Project supported through material funding inkind support and professional documentation. Due to the City of Greater Dandenong’s relationship with Federation Square many works went on to be recommissioned for Federations Squares Light in Winter Festival.

Locals created the content for light paintings by Rebecca Claire Edwards

Page 48: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

RMIT University. Master of Fine Arts (Art in Public Space)

The Space Between Light estival: At the Richmond Housing Estate, Melbourne

Jump Rope by Ainslie Macauley

Page 49: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Jasmeen  Patheja:  Blank  Noise                        

Action  Heroes  -­‐  Talk  To  Me  (2012-­‐  ongoing)  45  

Page 50: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Blank Noise is a community of Action Heroes united to eradicate sexual and gender based violence. ���

Page 51: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Action Heroes are from across cities, towns and places in India and globally. Action Heroes build Blank Noise through its participatory projects. Blank Noise builds participatory projects to deal with fear, build trust and empathy. A core part of Blank Noise . ‘Action Heroes’ are also built in classroom spaces, through formal educational institutions. ������

Page 52: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

#SafeCityPledge – 2012 end onwards

Page 53: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Being Idle : Invites individuals to be ‘Action Heroes’ by being idle across multiple city streets (2007)

Page 54: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Action Heroes Meet To Sleep (2015) in open public parks.

Page 55: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Action Heroes - Talk To Me (2012- ongoing) The first Talk To Me was built with students of Srishti Institute of Art Design and Technology , Bangalore, as part of a month long semester with Blank Noise.

Page 56: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Action Heroes - Talk To Me (2012- ongoing) The first Talk To Me was built with students of Srishti Institute of Art Design and Technology , Bangalore, as part of a month long semester with Blank Noise.���

Page 57: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Talk To Me ( 2012)���Location: Safest Lane, Yelahanka, Bangalore Duration: One hour Event: Tea, samosas Action: Invite a stranger to a conversation about anything except sexual violence. Time: 3- 7 pm

Page 58: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Strangers were invited to a conversation with an Action Hero via a letter reading : Dear Stranger, Talk To Me. We haven't had a chance to talk to each other before. Let's talk over a cup of tea and samosas. We can talk about anything; our dreams, hope, fears. Our conversation will not be recorded but a photograph will be taken. You don't have to share your details and name, but of course we would encourage you to do so. We are Action Heroes from Blank Noise; a collective committed to building safe spaces. Come be an Action Hero too. Thank you, Your friend and Action Hero "

Page 59: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper
Page 60: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper
Page 61: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Blank  Noise  is  a  community  of  'Ac9on  Heroes',  individuals  and  ci9zens  united  to  eradicate  gender  based  violence.  Ac9on  Heroes  are  stepping  up  against  vic9m  blame.  They  resonate  "I  Never  Ask  For  It”.  Ini9ated  in  2003,  as  a  response  to  street  harassment.  Built  en9rely  on  the  capacity  of  volunteers  as  'Ac9on  Heroes',  from  across  age  groups,  gender  and  sexuality,  Blank  Noise  ignites  the  idea  that  every  individual  has  the  capacity  to  take  a  small  step  to  make  a  big  change.  Blank  Noise  has  been  building  public  discourse  on  sexual  violence,  through  a  range  of  campaigns  and  projects  designed  across  forms  of  media  (video,  audio,  live  ac9on,  performance,  posters).  Selected  projects  include:  •  "Talk  to  Me"  :  (2012  onwards)  brings  two  strangers  to  an  hour  long  conversa9on  to  talk  about  

anything  except  sexual  violence.  The  interven9on  is  rooted  in  building  empathy  instead  of  defense.    •  Meet  to  Sleep:  (2014  onwards)  invites  women  to  be  'Ac9on  Heroes'  by  taking  a  nap  in  their  city  

parks.  The  ac9on  calls  to  fight  fear,  build  trust,  take  risk  and  ask  that  spaces  be  made  safe  for  all.  •  Safe  City  Pledge:  (2012  end  -­‐  2013  end),  ini9ated  as  a  response  to  the  rape  of  Jyo9  Singh,  

#SafeCityPledge  calls  for  building  collec9ve  ownership  of  sexual  violence.  'Every  individual  has  the  power  and  ability  to  influence  a  safe  space.'  

•  I  Never  Ask  For  It:  Call  to  arrest  vic9m  blame.  Building  tes9monies  of  clothing.    Blank  Noise  has  been  part  of  numerous  publica9ons  and  media  including:  The  Huffington  Post,  Guardian,  The  Atlan9c,  Chris9an  Science  Monitor,  Salon,  BoingBoing,  New  York  Times,  Buzzfeed,  NDTV.  The  Collec9ve  work  has  been  shared  at  the  Goethe  Ins9tute  (Bangalore),  Bronx  Museum  of  Art  (New  York),  Cornerhouse  (Manchester),  Arts  3331  (Japan)  Talks  and  workshops  include  Guggenheim  Lab  Mumbai,  Tibetan  Women's  Associa9on.  "Talk  to  Me"  received  the  Interna9onal  Award  for  Public  Art  2015.    In  2012,  Blank  Noise  was  awarded  the  CNN  IBN  award  for  ci9zen  journalism.    

hMp://blog.blanknoise.org            @blank_noise        www.facebook.com/groups/blanknoise/    

Page 62: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Blank Noise is currently incubated at the Srishti Institute of Art Design and Technology, Bangalore, where Jasmeen Patheja is artist in residence. Blank Noise Action Heroes have been built in classrooms through students at Srishti. Srishti is located in Yelahanka. Students on campus have created the identity of the ‘Yelahanka Action Hero’.

Page 63: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Nien  Schwarz:    Edith  Cowan  University                        

59  

Page 64: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Gomboc  Sculpture  Survey  2001  -­‐  2015  Contributor:  Dr  Nien  Schwarz,  Snr.  Lecturer,  School  of  Communica:ons  and  Arts,  ECU.  Context:  Project  worth  50%  of  VIS3531  Sculpture:  Art  and  Environment,  1/16  units  in  the  Visual  Arts  major,  part  of  24-­‐unit  BA.  The  unit  is  a  popular  elec:ve  (no  pre-­‐req.)  •  An  annual  semester-­‐long  partnership  with  Gomboc  Gallery  Sculpture  Park,  a  2-­‐hectare  rural  

commercial  property,  located  in  Middle  Swan,  W.A.  (30-­‐min  drive  from  ECU).  The  Survey  just  concluded  it’s  32nd  year  and  since  1995  has  included  par:cipa:on  of  local  students  enrolled  in  sculpture  at  the  ter:ary  level  (ECU,  TAFE,  Cur:n  Uni,  UWA).  The    3-­‐4  week  Survey  features  interna:onal  ar:sts  (in  the  gallery)  and  student  projects  (in  sculpture  park  and  gallery).  

•  Annually,  18–38    ECU  1st  -­‐  3rd  year  students  select  a  site  (paddock,  creek,  groves  of  trees,  hill)  and  in  response  to  site  characteris:cs  design,  develop,  and  install  a  work  for  exhibi:on.  Technical  skills  development  supported  by  technical  staff.  I  mentor  each  project  individually.  Since  2000,  approximately  270  ECU  students  have  par:cipated.    

 

Jasmine  Teakel,  2010   Joni  Sercombe,  2011  All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  

Page 65: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Gomboc  Sculpture  Survey  2001  -­‐  2015  •  The  project  is  intended  to  prepare  our  students  to  par:cipate  in  Sculpture  by  the  Sea,  other  

compe::ve  outdoor  exhibi:ons,  and  public  art  opportuni:es  for  emerging  ar:sts.  •  Each  project  requires  a  wriMen  subjec:ve  and  objec:ve  site  analysis,  a  project  proposal  (including  

material  tes:ng,  sketches,  budget,  risk  assessment),  a  Powerpoint  presenta:on  for  peer  review  and  culminates  with  an  illustrated  report/acquiMal.  

•  2015  was  the  final  year  of  the  Survey  as  the  other  ter:ary  ins:tu:ons  have  closed  or  withdrawn  from  the  event.  At  ECU  Sculpture:  Art  and  Environment  will  no  longer  be  offered.      

•  What  next?.....................................................................  A  new  ECU  unit  :tled  Spa9al  Studio.  

Aliesha  Mafrici,  2015  Jason  Skele,  2005  All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  Claire  Canham,  2003  

Page 66: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Exhibi:on  catalogues/NLA  periodical  (1990-­‐2013).  Gomboc  Gallery  Sculpture  Park,  1990.  Sculpture  survey.  Gomboc  Gallery  Sculpture  Park,  Middle  Swan,  W.A.      Schwarz,  N  2011,  ‘Foreword’,  28th  Annual  Exhibi9on  Sculpture  Survey.  Available  from:  hMp://www.gomboc-­‐gallery.com.au/sculpture_park/sculpture_survey_2011.pdf.  [1  August  2015].    Schwarz,  N  2008,  ‘Silver  lined  survey’,  Art  Monthly.  Available  from:hMp://www.artmonthly.org.au/artnotes.asp?aID=10&issueNumber=210  [10  August  2015].    Schwarz,  N  2015,  32nd  Annual  exhibi9on,  Sculpture  Survey  2015.  Available    from:  hMp://www.gomboc-­‐gallery.com.au/sculpture_park/gomboc_sculpture_survey_2015c.pdf  [[10  August  2015].          

Gomboc  Sculpture  Survey  2001  –  2015  AddiEonal  informaEon  

Page 67: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Chloe  Deeks,  2015  

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Nien  Schwarz:    Edith  Cowan  University                        

63  

Page 68: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

The  Materials  Murmur  exhibiEon  projects  2010-­‐2015  Contributor:  Dr  Nien  Schwarz,  Snr.  Lecturer,  School  of  Communica:ons  and  Arts,  ECU.  Context:  Project  worth  38%  of  VIS3531  Sculpture:  Art  and  Environment,  1/16  units  in  the  Visual  Arts  major,  part  of  24-­‐unit  BA.  The  unit  is  a  popular  elec:ve  (no  pre-­‐req.)    

Adele  Price  Coat  of  Paint,  2015  Media:  recycled  house  paint  Photographer:  Nien  Schwarz  

•  A  12-­‐week  studio-­‐based  materials  research  project.  Students  create  new  work  while  simultaneously  reducing  their  ecological  footprint.      

•  Enrolments  vary,  18-­‐38  students  (1st  -­‐  3rd  year)  select  a  primary  waste  material  of  their  choice  (natural  or  manufactured).  Poli:cal  theorist  Jane  BenneM’s  term  “vital  materialism”  is  their  star:ng  point  with  which  to  consider  that  consumers,  including  ar:sts,  need  to  be  more  mindful  of  their  rela:onships  with  the  material  environment  that  sustains  them.  Students  respond  to  BenneM’s,  ‘thing-­‐power’,  the  acknowledgement  that  everyday  objects  and  materials  (things)  have  significance  in  that  everything,  living  and  non-­‐living,  is  part  of  the  web  that  connects  us  all.    

•  I  mentor  each  student.  Class  outcomes  are  collated  by  cura:ng  an  exhibi:on  of  selected  works  in  ECU’s  Spectrum  Project  Space,  a  space  for  crea:ve  research  by  students,  staff  and  the  community.    

Page 69: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

•  Students  have  a  day  to  explore  installing  their  work  in  various  ways.  Assistance  in  hanging  works  provided  by  technical  staff.    

•  Selected  drawings  and  research  journals  are  included.    •  Students  sit  the  exhibi:on  and  engage  in  dialogue  with  viewers.  Contextual  floor  sheet  

provided.    •  Excellent  professional  development.    

All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  

The  Materials  Murmur  exhibiEon  projects  2010-­‐2015  

Giselle  Grant  Hazardous  hangings,  2015  Materials:  hazard  fencing  

The  Materials  Murmur  2-­‐5  June  2015  Spectrum  Project  Space  Edith  Cowan  University  

Page 70: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

The  Materials  Murmur  exhibiEon  projects  2010-­‐2015  AddiEonal  informaEon  

Ryan  Savage  (top  right)  Bird  House,  2015  Materials:  leaf  liMer,  recycled  chicken  wire  and  spray  paint.    

BenneM,  J.,  Ar9st  and  Agency  in  a  World  of  Vibrant  Maaer/  The  New  School.  Available  from:  hMps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q607Ni23QjA.  [8  August  2015]  Schwarz,  N  n.d.,  Nien  Schwarz  (about).  Available  from:  hMp://nienschwarz.org/about.  [5  August  2015]  

Spectrum  Project  Space,  2015,  The  Materials  Murmur5  June  2015.  Available  from:  hMps://www.facebook.com/spectrum.ecu.  [8  August  2015]  Weintraub  L  n.d.,  To  Life:  Eco  Art  in  Pursuit  of  a  Sustainable  Planet.  Available  from:  hMp://lindaweintraub.com/tolife.  [  10  August  2015].  

Chloe  Deeks  (2015)  Materials:  recycled  shopping  bags,  paint.    

Lisa  Reilly  (right)  Materials:  recycled  barbed  wire,  found  balloon.    

All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  

Page 71: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Nien  Schwarz:    Edith  Cowan  University                        

Nien  Schwarz,  Transpose,  Transpose  ,  Cottesloe,  2005  

67  

Page 72: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Socially  engaged  projects  involving  students  Contributor:  Dr  Nien  Schwarz,  Snr.  Lecturer,  School  of  Communica:ons  and  Arts,  ECU.  Context:  Engaging  individual  students  as  volunteer  assistants  for  my  public  art  projects  

Case  Study  1    City  of  Perth,  3  x  3  commission  2003  .    Contracts  awarded  to  3  ar:sts  for  3  days  each  to  create  a  work  for  Perth  City  centre.    With  the  assistance  of  3  students  my  work  con:nuously  evolved  over  3  days.  Working  outside  within  the  public  sphere  and  the  gallery  structure  was  wonderful!    Schwarz,  N  2003,  Transpose  –  Urban  Art  Project  Commissioned  by  City  of  Perth.  Available  from:  hMp://ro.ecu.edu.au/hca_papers/345/  .  [August  10  2015]  

Student  response  solicited  for  a  talk  I  gave  at  Hatched  2003  at  PICA,  Ar9st  &  Educator  –  maintaining  an  arts  prac9ce  while  teaching  art  within  the  university  environment.  •  “The  educator’s  inten:ons  in  pushing  young  ar:sts  towards  an  extended  immersion  into  the  arts  

community  needs  to  reflect  their  own  commitment  to  this  prac:ce…”      All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  

Page 73: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Nien  Schwarz  Transpose  Transpose,  2005  Photograph  by  Michael  Wingate  

Socially  engaged  projects  involving  students  

•  “I  had  the  opportunity  to  draw  upon  and  learn  from  the  more  experienced  prac::oner,  gaining  an  insight  into  the  working  process  and  how  to  deal  with  the  strong  emo:ve  and  mental  strain  by  channelling  it  into  a  produc:ve  and  enriching  ar:s:c  life.”  

•  “Prospec:ve  students  certainly  consider  the  work  of  those  they  would  be  learning  under  as  a  reflec:on  of  the  School’s  principles,  flexibility,  ethos  and  vision.”

Installa:on  of  Transpose  Transpose,  a  site-­‐specific  work  for  Sculpture  by  the  Sea,  CoMesloe.    A  student  volunteered  to  assist  me.  She  had  worked  with  me  on  the  3  x  3  City  of  Perth  commission.  She  fielded  a  lot  of  ques:ons  posed  by  the  public.  Her  feedback  about  her  experiences  on  site:    

Case  Study  2    Sculpture  by  the  Sea,  CoMesloe  

Page 74: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

All  photographs  by  Nien  Schwarz  

Socially  engaged  public  projects  involving  students  “It  is  important  to  the  student  to  see  and  interact  with  their  educators  outside  of  the  university  context,  informally  at  openings,  and  conferences,  …  as  well  as  pre-­‐arranged  mee:ngs.”  “It  is  vital  for  the  ongoing  presence  of  the  School  to  be  felt  outside  of  the  architectural  buildings  on  campus.”                          Student  feedback  2005  

Staff  concerns:  1.  Risk  assessments  and  liability  concerning  duty  of  care  for  students  working  in  public  spaces;  2.  how  much  structure  to  provide  for  students’  self-­‐directed  public  projects;  3.  When  a  student  project  goes  wrong  and  your  reputa:on  and  competence  as  ar:st  and  lecturer  is  compromised.    Case  study  3  Ar:st’s  Founda:on  of  WA  Artopia  Project  funded  opportuni:es  for  socially  engaged  temporary  art  projects  for  5  days  in  Perth’s  city  centre.  Do  anything  you  like,  just  engage  the  public.  Chairs  and  paper  supplied.    A  few  students  refused  to  go  or  to  engage.  Many  dressed  up  as  angels.  A  few  mature-­‐age  students  taught  younger  students  and  members  of  the  public  (including  youth  high  on  drugs  and  men  fresh  out  of  prison)  how  to  create  origami  cranes.  The  student-­‐ini:ated  ac:vi:es  were  cri:cised  by  the  City  of  Perth,  for  lack  of  structure  and  for  not  being  visually  appealing.  Artopia  disagreed.    

Page 75: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Andrew  Stock:  Adelaide  College  of  the  Arts                        

71  

Page 76: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  :  elecEve,  CerEficate  IV,  B  CreaEve  Arts  (Visual  Art)  Adelaide  College  of  the  Arts,  TAFE  SA    

hMp://www.tafesa.edu.au/adelaide-­‐college-­‐of-­‐the-­‐arts    

Contributor:  Andrew  Stock,  Lecturer  in  Sculpture  Course  Statement:    IntroducEon  Public  art  is  art  in  any  media  that  has  been  planned  and  executed  with  the  specific  inten:on  of  being  sited  or  staged  in  the  public  domain.  ‘Public  art’  o~en  has  implica:ons  of  site  specificity,  community  involvement  and  collabora:on.  The  role  of  public  art  is  to  engage  and  inform  (not  alienate)  the  public  and  to  facilitate  the  development  of  community  culture.  This  can  be  achieved  by  integra:ng  art  and  design  components  into  architectural  projects  at  their  incep:on,  encouraging  considera:on  of  ecological;  cultural;  landscape;  biological  and  heritage  components  with  daily  life,  by  enriching  the  aesthe:c  environment.  Alterna:vely  Public  Art  can  play  a  significant  role  in  invigora:ng  an  exis:ng  public  space  and  in  promo:ng  a  new  perspec:ve  in  a  locality.  In  order  to  create  a  Public  Art  work,  the  ar:st  must  have  developed  their  own  visual  language  and  interpre:ve  ability  to  a  level  of  sophis:ca:on  which  enables  the  ar:cula:on  of  a  design  solu:on  to  the  Public  Art  brief  which  is  both  intelligible  and  expansive  in  the  response  it  elicits  from  the  viewer.  Public  Art  work  can  be  both  independent  or  collabora:ve,  with  the  ar:st/s  engaged  in  any  or  all  aspects  of  the  process  from:  

•  research,    •  community  consulta:on,    •  concept  development,    •  responding  to  a  design  brief,    •  concept  ar:cula:on  and  budget  proposals,    •  through  to  fabrica:on,    •  installa:on  and    •  project  co-­‐ordina:on.  

       

Page 77: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Aims/learning  objecEves  The  study  unit  explores  art  in  the  public  realm,  both  commissioned  and  self-­‐ini:ated.  Students  will  inves:gate  the  skills  and  knowledge  required  to  respond  to  a  Public  Art  brief:  

•  incorpora:ng  site  or  brief  specific  research  methods;  •  concept  development  within  the  parameters  described  by  the  brief,  including  budgetary  constraints  and  legisla:ve  requirements,  and    

•  All  other  aspects  of  the  process  through  to  installa:on.        

Study  program  Students  will  be  engaged  in  philosophical  and  cri:cal  discussions.  The  subject  will  provide  historical,  theore:cal,  prac:cal  and  administra:ve  learning.    

Students  will  aMain  the  skills  to  act  effec:vely  in  the  field  as  ar:sts,  client  representa:ves  and  Public  Art  project,  business  and  site  managers.  Integral  to  the  process  of  crea:ng  a  public  art  work  is  engagement  with  the  community,  facilita:ng  the  development  and  consolida:on  of  ideas,  themes  and  images  generated  during  this  process.  

Students  are  encouraged  to  research  and  experiment  with  various  techniques  and  media  for  the  realisa:on  of  public  art  work.    

Projects  can  be  carried  out  collabora:vely  with  architects,  landscape  architects,  urban  planners,  designers  and  other  related  professionals  undertaking  real  life  projects  which  can  engage  a  broad  network  of  industry  partners  and  associated  ins:tu:ons.    

Prac:ce  may  include  street  sculpture  and  street  art,  Performance,  Happenings,  Graffi:  and  Stencil  Art,  Video  Sculpture  and  Projec:ons,  Kine:c,  Ephemeral  Art,  Murals,  constructed  landscapes  and  public  installa:on,  projects  in  virtual  space,  and  trans-­‐disciplinary  work  engaging  new  and  emerging  technologies.  

Page 78: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Units  of  study  The  units  of  study,  for  both  cer:ficate  and  degree  studies  are  from  (training.gov.au)    

   CUSRAD02A    Conduct  research      BSBCRT403A    Explore  the  history  and  social  impact  of  crea:vity      CUVCRS02B    Select  sites  and  plan  work      CUVPUA501A  Create  works  of  art  for  public  spaces      CUVPUA601A  Realise  a  public  art  project      CUVVSP48B    Research  and  experiment  with  techniques  to  produce  public  art  

         

On  a  personal  note:  In  my  professional  career  I  have  been  involved  with  a  number  of  both  independent  and  collabora9ve  Public  Art  projects.  In  

my  experience  the  single  most  important  factor  in  bringing  to  frui9on  a  successful  Public  Art  work  is  the  ability  to  maintain  an  ongoing  dialogue  with  the  relevant  interest  groups.    

 Art  in  the  public  domain  is  imbued  with  a  responsibility  beyond  the  parameters  of  its  ‘design  brief’,  and  that  is  as  an  

ambassador,  an  invita9on  to  explore  another  cultural  domain.  This  demands  that  the  ar9st  be  conscious  of  that  role,  and  of  community  sensi9vi9es,  in  that  this  Public  Art  is  differen9ated  from  the  art  which  is  on  display  in  a  gallery  because  of  its  

intrusion  into  the  public  sphere.  If  executed  well  and  responsive  to  site  it  can  be  a  welcome  intrusion.  

   

 

Page 79: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Peter  Walker,  Ron  Nicholls,  Tangi  Steen:  University  of  South  Australia      

Learning  on  Country,  bush  tucker  walk,  Coorong,  2015  

75  

Page 80: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Yuntuwarrin  -­‐  Learning  Together  on  Country  Contributors:  Peter  Walker  (School  of  Art,  Architecture  &  Design  -­‐  AAD),  Ron  Nicholls  &  Tangi  Steen  (David  Unaipon  College  of  Indigenous  Education  and  Research  –  DUCIER  ),  University  of  South  Australia  Program:  Master  of  Sustainable  Design      

In  2013/2014  DUCIER  and  AAD  at  the  University  of  South  Australia  developed  a  collaborative  learning  project  with  members  of  the  Ngarrindjeri  Community  at  Raukkan  (ancient  meeting  place),  The  Ngarrindjeri  Land  and  Progress  Association  (Camp  Coorong),  and  Masters  of  Sustainable  Design  students.  In  collaboration  with  Ngarrindjeri  elders  the  project  explores  different  aspects  of  experiential  and  intercultural  learning  on  country  with  the  aim  of  developing  creative  design  solutions.            The  Raukkan  Community  is  situated  on  the  shores  of  Lake  Alexandrina  in  the  south-­‐east  of  South  Australia  and  has  a  population  of  about  200  people.  Founded  in  1859  by  the  Aborigines  Friends  Association  as  the  Point  McLeay  Mission,  the  governance  of  the  community  has  been  administered  by  the  Raukkan  Community  Council  since  1985.  Since  that  time  the  community  has  developed  a  range  of  cultural  and  commercial  activities  including  cropping,  natural  resource  management  and  landcare  programs  and  housing  and  infrastructure  projects.  The  purchase  of  an  old  primary  school  in  Narrung  (about  3  Kilometres  for  Raukkan)  in  2011  has  facilitated  the  establishment  of  a  community  learning  centre  (Yuntuwarrun  Learning  Centre)  in  order  to  create  and  build  sustainable  and  beneficial  learning  opportunities  for  the  community.          

Page 81: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Students  participate  in  two  3  day  trips  to  Camp  Coorong  and  Raukkan  and  this  includes  a  range  of  shared  dialogue  and  organic  learning  processes  as  part  of  an  introduction  to  Ngarrindjeri  culture  and  place.    Students  explore  design  ideas  with  community  members  from  within  a  context  of  the  knowledges,  structures,  values  and  features  of  Ngarrindjeri  worldviews  and  an  appreciation  of  the  significance  of  the  community’s  relationship  to  land  and  waters  (Ruwe).  The  program  adopts  a  participatory  approach  from  within  a  holistic  and  interconnected  worldview  which  locates  subjects  as  co-­‐learners  within  the  natural  world.  The  processes  of  design  are  not  prescriptive  in  the  sense  that  students  are  designing  for  the  community,  but  generate  collaborative  designs  that  are  available  to  the  community  for  development  as  they  see  fit.    The  resulting  design  concepts  are  exhibited  at  UniSA  at  the  end  of  the  course  and  more  recently  an  exhibition  has  been  mounted  at  the  Raukkan  community  in  NAIDOC  week.      The  sustainable  design  course  features  an  open  brief  pedagogy  which  offers  opportunities  for  experiencing  relationships  to  land  and  waters  and  ways  of  knowing  associated  with  Ngarrindjeri  worldviews  […]    an  approach  that  offers  spaces  for  Indigenous  and  ecological  worldviews,  and  challenges  modernist  and  postmodern  positions  which  largely  privilege  rationalism  as  the  only  verifiable  source  of  knowledges  available  to  human  societies.    

TOP:  Students  learning  tradi:onal  rush  weaving  techniques  specific  to  the  Ngarrindjeri    people.  BELOW:  Janna  Moore,  Pelican  Puzzle,  student  

project,  interac:ve  learning  for  children.  

Page 82: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Amanda  King  and  Janyce  Allan,  Yuntuwarrin  Summer  Workshops  Program,  student  project.    Development  

of    summer  workshops  for  Learning  Centre  at  Raukkan  Community.  

 

Exposing  AAD  design  students  to  a  much  deeper  understanding  of  indigenous  traditional  knowledge’s  and  current  day  concerns  will  continue  to  have  a  marked  impact  on  the  graduates  ideas  and  understanding  of  the  broader  societal  role  they  can  play  as  professional  designers.    

Working  with  Aboriginal  elders  I  discovered  that  design  to  them  is  a  different  definition  to  what  the  traditional  education  system  teaches.    I  now  think  of  my  design  within  the  context  of  impacting  seven  generations  into  the  future  and  how  best  I  can  design  for  that  based  on  understanding  of  key  traditions  and  values  held  by  a  collective.    (Student  feedback  2013)  

 The  interaction  between  the  university  and  the  community  contributes  not  only  to  the  students  education  but  also  has  an  impact  on  the  notion  of  a  “shared  future”,  an  explicit  desire  voiced  by  Raukkan  community  leaders.    

The  Community  Council  really  liked  the  innovation  and  thought  put  into  the  community  landscape  from  different  sets  of  eyes.  Others  (some  practical  men)  liked  the  ideas  but  talked  about  the  reality  of  moving  from  paper  to  implementation  and  our  lack  of  resource  at  this  time,  which  was  a  fair  comment.    Others  captured  the  importance  of  dreaming  the  design  into  being  as  being  equally  important.    So  the  project  pieces  certainly  caused  good  discussion  and  will  continue  to  shape  our  thoughts  as  we  go  forward.  (Raukkan  Community  leader,  Clyde  Rigney,  2013)    

Page 83: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Aaron  Davis  and  Brec  Abroe,  Straw  bale  construc:ons,  student  project.  Development  of  designs  u:lizing  local  resource  of  straw  bales  for  temporary  structures.    

Page 84: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

80  

Page 85: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Prompts    

       

       

81  

Page 86: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

82  

Models  of  art  and  design  practice  Diverse  approaches  to  art,  design,  publics  and  sites  

Diverse  models  of  art,  artist;  relations  between  teachers,  students,  viewers,  participants,  social  (geographical,  cultural,  political)  contexts,  discipline  and  institutional  boundaries

Locations  –  regional,  urban,  international,  virtual  

Online  space  as  public  space    

Materials,  media  and  forms  –  ephemeral,  performative,  participatory,  social  practice,  object-­‐based  sculpture,  digital  mediation,  workshop,  festival,  exhibition  

Processes    –    interdiscipinary/trans-­‐disciplinary,  partnerships,  collaborations,  collusions,  co-­‐creation

Purposes  and  products    –    commissioned  projects,  open  brief,  experimentation,  intervention,  critique,  dialogue,  encounter,  contestation,  intercultural  communication,  citizenship,  problem  solving

       

Page 87: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

83  

Pedagogical  approaches  Experiential,  project-­‐based  learning  

Live  ‘test  sites’  for  practice  and  experimentation  

Foreground  relations  between  teachers,  students,  viewers,  participants,  social  (geographical,  cultural,  political)  contexts,  discipline  and  institutional  boundaries  

Dedicated  programs  and/or  courses  at  undergraduate  and  postgraduate  level  

Assessed,  credit  bearing  opportunities  for  students  enrolled  in  courses  or  programs  

Informal  learning  opportunities  

Community  based  public  pedagogy  

Mentoring    

Professional  based  training  

 

Page 88: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

84  

Student  learning  Knowledge  Skills  Attitudes  and  values    

Page 89: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

85  

Creative   and   Performing  Arts   Learning  Outcomes   Statements   (2011,   Creative   and  performing   arts   learning   and   teaching   academic  standards   statement   ,   December   2010,   Learning  &  Teaching  Academic   Standards   Project,  ALTC,  Sydney)  

Page 90: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

86  

Challenges,  opportunities  Sustainability    

Resources  

Reliance  on  individual  educators,  partnerships,  relationships  

Maintaining  goodwill,  following  through  on  promises  

Structural  obstacles  (curriculum  processes,  course,  program,  institutional,  discipline  borders)  

Making  space  in  the  curriculum  

Expediency  (short  term  goals  make  it  difficult  to  plan  and  realise  long  term  social  engagements,  large  scale  projects,  beyond  the  life  of  a  course)  

       

Page 91: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

87  

 

Contested  practices  –  colliding  factors,  goals  

Risk  management  and  risk  aversion  

Ownership,  professional  boundaries  and  territories  

Permeating  institutional  silos    

Rhetoric  vs  reality  

Evaluation,  critique  

Demonstrating  value,  relevance  

Ethics  

Quality  

(Silences)  

 

     

Page 92: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

88  

Futures?  Is  there  a  future  for  longitudinal  practice?  

Dynamic,  permeable,  trans-­‐disciplinary,  socially  engaged  incubators  and  laboratories  that  foster  culturally  aware  and  critical  pedagogies?  

What’s  the  next  turn?  

 

 

     

Page 93: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    Contributors                  

89  

Page 94: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

     Convenors:    

•  Ruth  Fazakerley  Lecturer:  Academic  Development,  University  of  South  Australia  people.unisa.edu.au/Ruth.Fazakerley  publicartresearch.wordpress.com  

•  Fiona  Hillary  Teacher/Lecturer,  School  of  Art,  RMIT  University  urbanlaboratory.tumblr.com  

   

90  

Page 95: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

     Roundtable  speakers/discussants:    

•  Professor  David  Cross  Professor  of  Visual  Art    School  of  Communication  &  Creative  Arts,  Deakin  University  www.deakin.edu.au/profiles/david-­‐cross        

•  Dr  Maggie  McCormick  Program  Manager,  Master  of  Arts  (Art  in  Public  Space)  School  of  Art,  RMIT  University  www.rmit.edu.au/contact/staff-­‐contacts/academic-­‐staff/m/mccormick-­‐dr-­‐maggie    

•  Dr  Nien  Schwarz  Senior  Lecturer  School  of  Communication  and  Arts,  Edith  Cowan  University  www.ecu.edu.au/schools/communications-­‐and-­‐arts/staff/profiles/senior-­‐lecturers/dr-­‐janien-­‐schwarz    

•  Professor  Marie  Sierra  Deputy  Dean  &  Head  of  School  Art  and  Design,  UNSW  www.artdesign.unsw.edu.au/about-­‐us/our-­‐staff/professor-­‐marie-­‐sierra    

91  

Page 96: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

     Snapshot  contributors:    

•  Sasha  Grbich  Examples  of  works  by  degree  and  honours  students  that  explore  public  spaces  and  invite  participation  Adelaide  Central  School  of  Art,  Adelaide  

•  Fiona  Hillary  The  Urban  Laboratory  RMIT  University,  Melbourne  

•  Eileen  Legaspi-­‐Ramirez  Off  Site/Out  of  Sight  University  of  the  Philippines  Diliman,  Quezon  City  

•  Clare  McCracken  Space  Between  Light:  Richmond  Housing  Estate  2015    RMIT  University,  Melbourne  

•  Maggie  McCormick  Master  of  Arts  (Art  in  Public  Space)    RMIT  University,  Melbourne  

92  

Page 97: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

     

•  Maggie  McCormick  &  Henning  Eichinger  SkypeLab:  Transcontinental  Faces  &  Spaces    RMIT  University,  Melbourne  &  Reutlingen  University,  Stuttgart  region,  Germany  

•  Anthony  McInneny  Square  Water  &  Laneway  Commissions,  Melbourne  RMIT  University,  Melbourne  

•  Anthony  McInneny  &  Clare  McCracken  Nocturnal:  Light  in  Winter  Festival,  City  of  Greater  Dandenong  RMIT  University,  Melbourne  

•  Jasmeen  Patheja  Action  Heroes  -­‐  Talk  to  Me,  Meet  to  Sleep,  Safe  City  Pledge,  I  Never  Ask  for  It  Blank  Noise,  Bangalore  

•  Nien  Schwarz  Gomboc  Sculpture  Survey  2001  –  2015  Edith  Cowan  University,  Perth  

93  

Page 98: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

           

•  Nien  Schwarz    The  Materials  Murmur  exhibition  projects  2010-­‐2015  Edith  Cowan  University,  Perth  

•  Nien  Schwarz  Socially  engaged  projects  involving  students  Edith  Cowan  University,  Perth  

•  Andrew  Stock  Public  Art  Adelaide  College  of  the  Arts,  TAFE  SA,  Adelaide  

•  Peter  Walker,  Ron  Nichols  &  Tangi  Steen  Yuntuwarrin  -­‐  Learning  Together  on  Country  University  of  South  Australia,  Adelaide  

94  

Page 99: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)    A  Public  Art  School  (Now)  Reader    

Ash  Tower,  Postcards  from    the  Bibliopolis,  2014  95  

Page 100: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

2011,  Creative  and  performing  arts  learning  and  teaching  academic  standards  statement  ,  December  2010,  Learning  &  Teaching  Academic  Standards  Project,  ALTC,  Sydney    www.olt.gov.au/system/files/resources/altc_standards_CREATIVE%20ARTS_080211_v2.pdf  .  

Biesta,  G  2012,  ‘Becoming  public:  public  pedagogy,  citizenship  and  the  public  sphere’  Social  and  Cultural  Geography  13(7):  683-­‐697.  

Bishop,  C  2012,  Artificial  hells:  Participatory  art  and  the  politics  of  spectatorship,  Verso,  London.  

Buckley,  B,  &  Conomos,  J  (eds)  2009,  Rethinking  the  contemporary  art  school:  the  artist,  the  PhD,  and  the  academy,  Press  of  the  Nova  Scotia  College  of  Art  and  Design,  Halifax.  

Burdick,  J,  Sandlin,  JA,  &  O'Malley,  MP  (eds)  2014,  Problematizing  public  pedagogy,  Routledge.    

Carey,  F  2008,  ‘A  Fine  Public  Art  &  Design  Education:  Teaching  Public  Art’,  in  C  Cartiere  &  S  Willis,  The  practice  of  public  art,  Routledge,  London,  pp.  103-­‐119.    

Cartiere,  C,  &  Willis,  S  (eds)  2008,  The  practice  of  public  art,  Routledge,  London.    

Cross,  D  (ed.)  2013,  Iteration:  Again.  13  public  art  projects  across  Tasmania,  Punctum  Books,  New  York.  

Doherty,  C  (ed.)  2015,  Out  of  time,  out  of  place:  Public  art  (now),  Art/Books.  

Duxbury,  L,  Grierson,  EM,  &  Waite,  D  (eds)  2007,  Thinking  through  practice:  Art  as  research  in  the  academy”,  RMIT  Publishing,  Melbourne.    

Elkins,  J  (ed.)  2012,  What  do  artists  know?,  Pennsylvania  State  University.    

Forrest,  D  (ed.)  2010,  The  curator  in  the  academy,  Australian  Scholarly  Publishing,  North  Melbourne.    

Garoian,  CR  1999,  Performing  Pedagogy:  Toward  an  Art  of  Politics,  SUNY  Press.  

96  

Page 101: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Giroux,  HA  2003,  ‘Public  pedagogy  and  the  politics  of  resistance:  Notes  on  a  critical  theory  of  educational  struggle,  Educational  Philosophy  and  Theory:  Incorporating  ACCESS,  35(1):5-­‐16.  

Grierson,  E,  &  Sharp,  K  (ed.)  2013,  Re-­‐imagining  the  city:  Art,  globalization  and  urban  spaces,  Intellect  Books,  Bristol.  

Hillary,  F  2015,  Public  art:  access  all  areas,  2013  Higher  Education  and  Skills  Group  Overseas  Fellowship  Report,  International  Specialised  Skills  Institute,  Melbourne,  www.issinstitute.org.au/wp-­‐content/media/2015/08/Report-­‐Hillary-­‐Final-­‐LowRes.pdf  .  

Hinkel,  R  (ed.)  2011,  Urban  Interior  -­‐  informal  explorations,  interventions  and  occupations,  Spurbuchverlag,  Germany.  

Jackson,  S  2011,  Social  works:  Performing  arts,  supporting  publics,  Routledge,  New  York  &  London.  

Johnson,  SA,  2008  ,‘Towards  a  celebratory  and  liberating  system  of  teaching  public  art’,  in    C  Cartiere  &  S  Willis,  The  practice  of  public  art,  Routledge,  London,  pp.    91-­‐102.    

McCormick,  M  2012,  ‘Urban  practice  and  the  public  turn’,  Asia  Pacific  Journal  of  Arts  and  Cultural  Management,  9,  3-­‐13.  

McLuhan,  M  1960,  ‘Classroom  without  walls’,  in  E  Carpenter  &  M  McLuhan  (eds),  Explorations  in  Communication,  Beacon,  Boston,  pp.  1-­‐4.  

McLuhan,  M  1966,  ‘The  relation  of  environment  to  anti-­‐environment’,  University  of  Windsor  Review  11(1):1-­‐10.  

Madoff,  SH  (ed.)  2009,  Art  school  (Propositions  for  the  21st  century),  MIT  Press,  Cambridge  MA.    

Miles,  M  1989,  Art  for  public  places.  Critical  essays,  Winchester  School  of  Art  Press,  Winchester.    

Miles,  M  (ed.)  2005,  New  practices  -­‐  new  pedagogies:  A  Reader,  Routledge,  London.    

O’Neill,  P,  &  Wilson,  M  (eds)  2010,  Curating  and  the  educational  turn,  De  Appel/Open  Editions,  Amsterdam.    

 

97  

Page 102: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Sandlin,  JA,  Schultz,  BD,  &  Burdick,  J  2010,  Handbook  of  public  pedagogy  education  and  learning  beyond  schooling,  Routledge,  New  York.    

Schuermans,  N,  Loopmans,  MPJ,  &  Vandenabeele,  J  2012,  ‘Public  space,  public  art  and  public  pedagogy’,  Social  and  Cultural  Geography  13(7):  675-­‐682.    

Sierra,  MA,  2013,  'Raquel  Ormella,  I  live  with  birds:  Critical  response',  in  D  Cross  (ed.),  Iteration:Again.  13  public  art  projects  across  Tasmania,  Punctum  Books,  Brooklyn,  New  York,  pp.  76-­‐81.  

Singerman,  H  1999,  Art  subjects:  making  artists  in  the  American  university,  University  of  California  Press,  Berkeley  CA.    

Spivak,  GC  2011,  An  aesthetic  education  in  the  era  of  globalization,  Harvard  University  Press,  Cambridge  MA.    

Willis,  S  2008,  ‘Teaching  public  art  in  the  twentieth  century:  An  interview  with  Harrell  Fletcher’,  in  C  Cartiere  &  S  Willis,  The  practice  of  public  art,  Routledge,  London,  pp.  120-­‐130.  

 

98  

Page 103: Public Art School (Now) Roundtable: Discussion Paper

Public  Art  School  (Now)