2011•Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University)Open access

Is it possible to teach public art? Setting the scene.

Susanne Bosch

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Art in the public sphere is probably one of the oldest art forms in its incarnation as commemorative culture or representation of power. In her essay “For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities”, art and architecture critic Miwon Kwon discusses the three phases of the paradigm shifts that have taken place over the course of the last decades in art in public spaces: from an art in public places, typically modernist abstract sculptures situated outdoors that are supposed to ‘decorate’ or ‘enrich’ urban spaces; via an art as public spaces that aims to promote the increased integration of art, architecture and environment, and for which artists work with those responsible for urban planning on continuous city-development projects; to an art in the public interest (or “new genre public art”), which deals more with social issues than with the architectonic environment, preferring to work with social groups to working engage with professionals, and which works towards the development of a political awareness in society. [1]Art in public spaces that involves people in the creative process through participatory methods is not actually a recent phenomenon. Art movements at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, for example, supported social reform. Stella Rollig describes the role of artists in the Russian revolution of 1917 as designers of a new society. To this end, life and art were merged in order to “break from the indifferent autonomy of the nineteenth century's bourgeois salon art”. [2]Participatory art explicitly situates itself where art leaves no doubt as to its sociality: whether with an object or without, it is always about an interaction between people via an artistic process or product.Participation as an art form is currently subsumed in the discourse of socially engaged art, activist or dialogical art, art in the public interest.Nowadays, many of these projects are situated where the meaning of a democratic public as a social and political form is in need to be formulated. The discussion about the teaching of this art form is more recent: how does one prepare artists for this type of work? This text will provide a critical contextualisation of this issue, with reference to two existing Master’s programmes (MFA Fine Arts, Public Art and New Artistic Strategies at the Bauhaus-University Weimar and MA Art in Public at the University of Ulster, Belfast).[3] [1]Miwon Kwon, For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities. 1997. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0102/kwon/en [20.1.2011][2]Stella Rollig, Between Agitation and Animation. Activism and Participation in Twentieth Century Art, 2000. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0601/rollig/en [30.11.2010] [3]The author worked on both programmes and is herself a practising artist in this field.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Art in the public sphere is probably one of the oldest art forms in its incarnation as commemorative culture or representation of power. In her essay “For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities”, art and architecture critic Miwon Kwon discusses the three phases of the paradigm shifts that have taken place over the course of the last decades in art in public spaces: from an art in public places, typically modernist abstract sculptures situated outdoors that are supposed to ‘decorate’ or ‘enrich’ urban spaces; via an art as public spaces that aims to promote the increased integration of art, architecture and environment, and for which artists work with those responsible for urban planning on continuous city-development projects; to an art in the public interest (or “new genre public art”), which deals more with social issues than with the architectonic environment, preferring to work with social groups to working engage with professionals, and which works towards the development of a political awareness in society. [1]Art in public spaces that involves people in the creative process through participatory methods is not actually a recent phenomenon. Art movements at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, for example, supported social reform. Stella Rollig describes the role of artists in the Russian revolution of 1917 as designers of a new society. To this end, life and art were merged in order to “break from the indifferent autonomy of the nineteenth century's bourgeois salon art”. [2]Participatory art explicitly situates itself where art leaves no doubt as to its sociality: whether with an object or without, it is always about an interaction between people via an artistic process or product.Participation as an art form is currently subsumed in the discourse of socially engaged art, activist or dialogical art, art in the public interest.Nowadays, many of these projects are situated where the meaning of a democratic public as a social and political form is in need to be formulated. The discussion about the teaching of this art form is more recent: how does one prepare artists for this type of work? This text will provide a critical contextualisation of this issue, with reference to two existing Master’s programmes (MFA Fine Arts, Public Art and New Artistic Strategies at the Bauhaus-University Weimar and MA Art in Public at the University of Ulster, Belfast).[3] [1]Miwon Kwon, For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities. 1997. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0102/kwon/en [20.1.2011][2]Stella Rollig, Between Agitation and Animation. Activism and Participation in Twentieth Century Art, 2000. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0601/rollig/en [30.11.2010] [3]The author worked on both programmes and is herself a practising artist in this field.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Art in the public sphere is probably one of the oldest art forms in its incarnation as commemorative culture or representation of power. In her essay “For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities”, art and architecture critic Miwon Kwon discusses the three phases of the paradigm shifts that have taken place over the course of the last decades in art in public spaces: from an art in public places, typically modernist abstract sculptures situated outdoors that are supposed to ‘decorate’ or ‘enrich’ urban spaces; via an art as public spaces that aims to promote the increased integration of art, architecture and environment, and for which artists work with those responsible for urban planning on continuous city-development projects; to an art in the public interest (or “new genre public art”), which deals more with social issues than with the architectonic environment, preferring to work with social groups to working engage with professionals, and which works towards the development of a political awareness in society. [1]Art in public spaces that involves people in the creative process through participatory methods is not actually a recent phenomenon. Art movements at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, for example, supported social reform. Stella Rollig describes the role of artists in the Russian revolution of 1917 as designers of a new society. To this end, life and art were merged in order to “break from the indifferent autonomy of the nineteenth century's bourgeois salon art”. [2]Participatory art explicitly situates itself where art leaves no doubt as to its sociality: whether with an object or without, it is always about an interaction between people via an artistic process or product.Participation as an art form is currently subsumed in the discourse of socially engaged art, activist or dialogical art, art in the public interest.Nowadays, many of these projects are situated where the meaning of a democratic public as a social and political form is in need to be formulated. The discussion about the teaching of this art form is more recent: how does one prepare artists for this type of work? This text will provide a critical contextualisation of this issue, with reference to two existing Master’s programmes (MFA Fine Arts, Public Art and New Artistic Strategies at the Bauhaus-University Weimar and MA Art in Public at the University of Ulster, Belfast).[3] [1]Miwon Kwon, For Hamburg: Public Art and Urban Identities. 1997. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0102/kwon/en [20.1.2011][2]Stella Rollig, Between Agitation and Animation. Activism and Participation in Twentieth Century Art, 2000. See online http://eipcp.net/transversal/0601/rollig/en [30.11.2010] [3]The author worked on both programmes and is herself a practising artist in this field.

Key concepts: Contemporary art, Sculpture, Art methodology, Public space, Visual arts, Public sphere, Citizen journalism, Autonomy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Is it possible to teach public art? Setting the scene. — Research Paper | ScholarLens