Bismarck Tribune - Bismarck News - Bismarck public art policy discussed

Bismarck public art policy discussed

Jan 25, 2008 - 04:05:31 CST

By GORDON WEIXEL
Bismarck Tribune

Questions from the community were as wide-ranging and diverse as the subject matter itself during the course of Thursday evening's Public Arts Forum sponsored by the Bismarck Parks and Recreation District.

Originally intended as a four-person panel with a moderator, an unexpected fifth panelist appeared in the form of park district director Steve Neu, who found many of the questions directed his way. Other panelists included Bismarck State College instructor and artist Michelle Lindblom; local art dealer Ondine Baird; public art consultant Jack Becker; and Doug Kane, who started the process by questioning the park district's policy on public art display.

Neu said the park district has a long history of involvement in public art. He pointed out the dedication of Sleepy Hollow to the performance arts; the various programs of dance, theater and science offered at the High Prairie Arts & Science Complex; and development of the Lewis and Clark Legacy Center and its involvement in the Lewis and Clark bicentennial project, which led to United Tribes Technical College's annual education and art project of displaying eagle-related sculptures along the Missouri River on park district property.

The park district should establish policy and a review committee for public arts projects, Kane said.

"The park board has devoted $114,000 to public art over the past four years, and $37,000 of that was local tax money," Kane said. "It's time to establish effective public policy. Public art can often be controversial."

Becker applauded the community for making this effort regarding public art. He said public art takes many forms, from permanent sculptures to performance art.

"What's exciting is that you're working in a field you can take in whatever direction you want to take," Becker said. "Any good public art plan reflects the mission of the agency or community. What's the mission's purpose? It can serve the people, enhance public spaces, improve the quality of life. These are all things art programs can be developed around."

Public art will continue to be controversial, said Lindblom, but she added that it breeds frank and open discussion, and if these are handled well, will lead to a meeting of minds. She said she hopes the forum will lead to some sort of advisory committee made up of a diverse cross-section of the community. Lindblom also said she wants to see the city get involved.

Because of Bismarck's growth, public art is becoming important to the community. Baird said she doesn't want people to get caught up in their opinions of specific art pieces, but rather have a general appreciation for the arts, whatever form it takes.

Becker said that Bismarck didn't need to reinvent the wheel, that communities throughout the nation have policies in place, and this community can learn from their mistakes and use the best of what works.

In reply to a question on how to fund public art, Becker said there are many ways. Some communities devote a percentage of their capital improvement budgets. Others are privately funded by foundations and corporations. St. Paul, Minn., where Becker works, provided one-tenth of 1 percent of the sales tax for cultural programs.

Becker did recommend that when an artist is hired, an agreement be in place determining things such as materials, type of construction and maintenance.

"It will save tons of headaches, time and money if you make sure sculptures are low maintenance, durable and resistant to graffiti and vandalism," Becker said.

Neu said there will be further discussion with the community and that the information will be brought to the park board for their consideration. The forum was broadcast live on Community Access Television and will be repeated several times. The public can offer its comments to the park district by letter or e-mail up until Feb. 1.

(Reach reporter Gordon Weixel at 250-8255 or gordon.weixel@bismarcktribune.com.)

News > Topnews

Printer friendly version Bismarck public art policy discussed

Comments

Ideas wrote on Jan 26, 2008 1:07 AM:

" One idea is to have different local artists develop art concepts, and then once or twice a year these concepts are published in the Trib and voted on by the citizens of Bismarck. The art that is wins by majority vote is developed by the artist, and goes up. This is a much more democratic, socially-rooted means for deciding what goes up, then to have a bunch of self-appointed "experts" tell us what we like, and what we should look at for the next several years. Another idea is to have a community fund that pays rewards for tips leading to the identification and conviction of people who deface community art. I would gladly donate to the fund. "

Donald wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:50 PM:

" It sounds like the panelists brought forward some good ideas and suggestions. I'm glad the panel didn't turn out to be a bunch of racist "let's shut those Injuns up and put them in their place" naysayers. "

Dakotah wrote on Jan 25, 2008 5:16 PM:

" There is nothing wrong with art that some find controversial. At least it gets more publicity and more people go to see what all the hollaring and censorship whining is about. Put up more of it.
Encourage the local youth to work on artistic pursuits and educate them as to what quality really is so the work will be worth displaying. "

BILL G-A-R-R wrote on Jan 25, 2008 2:46 PM:

" Lets start by removing some ''ART?". That carnival midway "ART?" that sits below the Grant Marsh bridge. I'ts horriffic. Replace it with natural art such as native plants and landscaping. "

Grumpy Old Republican wrote on Jan 25, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Touchy subject here. Everyone will gripe about something, whether it's an athiest getting cranky about something that might be religious, or a religious zealot griping about something that they deem immoral. Any time public funds are used for art, someone is going to whine and complain like their toes are getting stepped on. My bet is that the only thing that would work is to limit public funding of art to yellow smiley faces... "

All for "art" wrote on Jan 25, 2008 10:27 AM:

" and the perfoming arts. However it seem the park district is partial to the native Americans and their so called art project placed along the river . . . let's talk to the motorcylce groups and build "Harley-Art", let the Churches place statues though out the parks, don't forget the wildlife hunters-some Elk, Beer, and Deer statues would look nice-huh? maybe the park district could invite all the special interest groups to cluter our parks with these eye-sores? Guidlines, Policy, and maybe public approval would be good. What about "temporary" art, the "Painted Pony" project was great. As are the events at sleepy Hollow. "

MamaMia wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:20 AM:

" I watched the whole thing and agree with what Ondine Baird said -- that the point is not whether you like a particular piece of art, or I don't like a particular piece of art, but whether you and I and the community as a whole have an appreciation for the ideas, effort and talent that went into the creation of the art. If we start picking the individual art pieces apart, public art will never work. You'll have people saying, "I don't like modern art, so none of that please." Or someone else saying, "Can't we just have a nice statue of Mayor Warford?" :) "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.