I Love Public Art But Not When It's At Public Expense
I have to say that it has been quite the week. Last Tuesday I published my analysis of calls to the Calgary Police Service for the years 2012-17 in my blog MyWestCalgaryNeighbourhood. I went over my findings with Danielle Smith on her show on QR77, and since then have started to settle into a routine with this blogging thing.
There certainly hasn't been a lack of things to write about this week as hot-button issues like the 2026 Olympic bid and public art make the headlines. This gives me plenty to write about because they are also hot-button issues for me. I've already made my position on the Olympics very clear in an earlier post (No to a bid!) so I'll move on to the matter of public art. This won't be the only thing I have to say on the issue. Rather, this is the opening salvo in a barrage I plan on firing at city hall. I will only cease firing when the tax-payers of Calgary have claimed victory in the battle (I really don't know where the navy metaphor is coming from but I'll go with it.)
First off I'm not opposed to public art. It is something that exists in many of the finest cities around the world (okay maybe in a few dumps too) and generally adds to the experience of living in and visiting a community. Some cities are even renowned for their public works of art and are vacation destinations for art lovers.
I can't think of a single person that would book a trip to Calgary to see the Big Blue Ring. Overseas travel agents aren't booking tours to see our Poop Palace. An increase in tourism is not something that can be counted as a plus for having public art, at least not our public art. It might help if some of it was actually visible to the public for them to enjoy, but then given what I've seen so far, maybe it's best kept hidden from view.
Ludicrous artwork aside, my bone of contention here is that money that could have been spent more effectively, going towards critical infrastructure or emergency services or, maybe, towards not hiking the fees you charge us on the array of bins I have sitting in my alley.
The City has a page on the calgary.ca website dedicated to the Public Art Process Review. I'll post a link at the bottom of this post. Although the site has a lot of different pages and contains a lot of information, it is in some instances sorely lacking. This is the case for this particular page. It contains a lot of nice words and pictures and tells of an ipsos poll that says:
In 2014 an independent citizen survey conducted for The City by Ipsos Reid found that 87% of Calgarians believe that it’s important to have public art in Calgary and 81% agree that Calgary’s public art contributes to making our city a great place to live and visit. Furthermore, 83% of those surveyed supported a public art program that is inclusive when considering citizen input.
I don't think they were asking the right questions, like the ones that mentioned tax money funding public art. Also missing entirely from the short survey on the Public Art page is an option to say that you do not want public money paying for artwork. There's a lot of talk about being engaged but those who want a say in whether or not their tax dollars are used are not included in the engagement.
You don't hear the term "City Father's" used much any more as another moniker for city council's. I suspect it's because it isn't correct and would have to be changed to be more inclusive so. City Mother's just doesn't have that ring to it so I suppose it would be City Parents. I think the term is appropriate for many on this council because they treat the people that voted them in like children. This is yet another example of Calgarians being told what and how to think and feel by a city council that doesn't seem to understand that they are there to SERVE US. They are not there to impose their ideals on the people that voted them in.
I have a lot more to say on this, but I'll continue this in another post. I have a lot of things to say about a lot of things, and you'll hear about it soon.
https://engage.calgary.ca/public-art-NOM
ps. Here's a link to a great article in the Herald by Colin Craig of the Canadian Taxpayers Foundation. It's a great idea that appeases both the art lover and the tax payer. Why wouldn't it work here?
http://calgaryherald.com/
D.B.C.
There certainly hasn't been a lack of things to write about this week as hot-button issues like the 2026 Olympic bid and public art make the headlines. This gives me plenty to write about because they are also hot-button issues for me. I've already made my position on the Olympics very clear in an earlier post (No to a bid!) so I'll move on to the matter of public art. This won't be the only thing I have to say on the issue. Rather, this is the opening salvo in a barrage I plan on firing at city hall. I will only cease firing when the tax-payers of Calgary have claimed victory in the battle (I really don't know where the navy metaphor is coming from but I'll go with it.)
First off I'm not opposed to public art. It is something that exists in many of the finest cities around the world (okay maybe in a few dumps too) and generally adds to the experience of living in and visiting a community. Some cities are even renowned for their public works of art and are vacation destinations for art lovers.
I can't think of a single person that would book a trip to Calgary to see the Big Blue Ring. Overseas travel agents aren't booking tours to see our Poop Palace. An increase in tourism is not something that can be counted as a plus for having public art, at least not our public art. It might help if some of it was actually visible to the public for them to enjoy, but then given what I've seen so far, maybe it's best kept hidden from view.
Ludicrous artwork aside, my bone of contention here is that money that could have been spent more effectively, going towards critical infrastructure or emergency services or, maybe, towards not hiking the fees you charge us on the array of bins I have sitting in my alley.
The City has a page on the calgary.ca website dedicated to the Public Art Process Review. I'll post a link at the bottom of this post. Although the site has a lot of different pages and contains a lot of information, it is in some instances sorely lacking. This is the case for this particular page. It contains a lot of nice words and pictures and tells of an ipsos poll that says:
In 2014 an independent citizen survey conducted for The City by Ipsos Reid found that 87% of Calgarians believe that it’s important to have public art in Calgary and 81% agree that Calgary’s public art contributes to making our city a great place to live and visit. Furthermore, 83% of those surveyed supported a public art program that is inclusive when considering citizen input.
I don't think they were asking the right questions, like the ones that mentioned tax money funding public art. Also missing entirely from the short survey on the Public Art page is an option to say that you do not want public money paying for artwork. There's a lot of talk about being engaged but those who want a say in whether or not their tax dollars are used are not included in the engagement.
You don't hear the term "City Father's" used much any more as another moniker for city council's. I suspect it's because it isn't correct and would have to be changed to be more inclusive so. City Mother's just doesn't have that ring to it so I suppose it would be City Parents. I think the term is appropriate for many on this council because they treat the people that voted them in like children. This is yet another example of Calgarians being told what and how to think and feel by a city council that doesn't seem to understand that they are there to SERVE US. They are not there to impose their ideals on the people that voted them in.
I have a lot more to say on this, but I'll continue this in another post. I have a lot of things to say about a lot of things, and you'll hear about it soon.
https://engage.calgary.ca/public-art-NOM
ps. Here's a link to a great article in the Herald by Colin Craig of the Canadian Taxpayers Foundation. It's a great idea that appeases both the art lover and the tax payer. Why wouldn't it work here?
http://calgaryherald.com/
D.B.C.
Comments
Post a Comment