I adore festivals. I've been fortunate enough to attend many small-scale festivals, and I particularly enjoy ones that feature music, dance, and other culturally expressive elements. I study how festivals and similar arts/cultural "happenings" are useful for gathering people and adding to a framework of sustainable economic activity in an area. I'm lucky to be here with the time to write about these topics and I invite you to use yours to entertain healthy appreciation for and skepticism about the arts/cultural happenings you observe in your community. What is perceived as "public art" may not be for everyone.
Festivals are a tool in the tool bag of Creative Placemaking. Creative Placemaking is both an urban development theory and practical strategy to elevate a physical space through tools such as public art installations, street festivals, and development of arts businesses. The term was first coined in a 2010 whitepaper by Anne Markusen and Anne Gadwa who defined it as:
Creative Placemaking itself is a tool in the tool bag of something else--the interplay of arts happenings, local government, and urban development stakeholders that make up "Public Art." These entities' aims are increased and sustained economic activity, as well as the ultimate of existential goals: higher quality of life.
This increased and sustained economic activity requires more citizens and tourists to spend locally and/or more citizens to live in an area. One function of Creative Placemaking is to attract these new citizens and make them want to stay. The aforementioned strategic collaboration between arts happenings, local government, and urban development stakeholders seeks to curate a unique experience for prospective spenders; this experience should leave them light of heart and wallet.
Tools like festivals, public murals, sculptures, interactive water features, and the like set the conditions for optimum discovery and delight. Unwitting subjects don't realize that their organic experience was harvested from a petri dish. This is not to suggest that these intentional spaces of enjoyment are cold and clinical; indeed, a participant may enjoy remarkable pleasure from these tools.
Although I am fascinated by the Creative Placemaking tool bag and how powerful it can be, I am critical of its uses. The claim that art for public consumption seeks to stimulate spending mostly indulges an alliance with government and other funding sources; that is, art is good for business. "Spend on us because art makes you money--we're an investment." But by that very token, if public art is funded with the intention of attracting people with spending money to the area, public art cannot be for everyone. Instead of addressing that paradoxical subtlety, many proponents of public art claim that it benefits all.
While Creative Placemaking is indeed a useful strategy for attracting investment, I wonder if emphasizing this power drains arts/cultural happenings of their life force; that which allows for the creation of spaces for people of diverse backgrounds to gather and challenge their preconceived notions. If we are creating works that seek to attract and serve people with copious money, we are not seeking to attract and serve all. A deeper dive into the intricacies of the relationship between arts happenings and socio-political impacts illuminates the need for reliable transportation, housing, and other resources. For example, perhaps the poor man can enjoy a public sculpture garden, but he must visit it by train because his apartment became too pricey to live in once the area inevitably succeeded in attracting its enlarged tax base. However, he will first have to wait 10-20 years before the city installs a more efficient transportation system. But more on that later.
The tools and activities of Creative Placemaking are in the name of progress but have the power to leave people behind.
Festivals are a tool in the tool bag of Creative Placemaking. Creative Placemaking is both an urban development theory and practical strategy to elevate a physical space through tools such as public art installations, street festivals, and development of arts businesses. The term was first coined in a 2010 whitepaper by Anne Markusen and Anne Gadwa who defined it as:
“Partners from public, private,
non-profit, and community sectors strategically shape the physical and social
character of a neighborhood, town, city, or region around arts and cultural
activities. Creative placemaking animates public and private spaces,
rejuvenates structures and streetscapes, improves local business viability and
public safety, and brings diverse people together to celebrate, inspire, and be
inspired” (p. 2).
This increased and sustained economic activity requires more citizens and tourists to spend locally and/or more citizens to live in an area. One function of Creative Placemaking is to attract these new citizens and make them want to stay. The aforementioned strategic collaboration between arts happenings, local government, and urban development stakeholders seeks to curate a unique experience for prospective spenders; this experience should leave them light of heart and wallet.
Tools like festivals, public murals, sculptures, interactive water features, and the like set the conditions for optimum discovery and delight. Unwitting subjects don't realize that their organic experience was harvested from a petri dish. This is not to suggest that these intentional spaces of enjoyment are cold and clinical; indeed, a participant may enjoy remarkable pleasure from these tools.
Although I am fascinated by the Creative Placemaking tool bag and how powerful it can be, I am critical of its uses. The claim that art for public consumption seeks to stimulate spending mostly indulges an alliance with government and other funding sources; that is, art is good for business. "Spend on us because art makes you money--we're an investment." But by that very token, if public art is funded with the intention of attracting people with spending money to the area, public art cannot be for everyone. Instead of addressing that paradoxical subtlety, many proponents of public art claim that it benefits all.
While Creative Placemaking is indeed a useful strategy for attracting investment, I wonder if emphasizing this power drains arts/cultural happenings of their life force; that which allows for the creation of spaces for people of diverse backgrounds to gather and challenge their preconceived notions. If we are creating works that seek to attract and serve people with copious money, we are not seeking to attract and serve all. A deeper dive into the intricacies of the relationship between arts happenings and socio-political impacts illuminates the need for reliable transportation, housing, and other resources. For example, perhaps the poor man can enjoy a public sculpture garden, but he must visit it by train because his apartment became too pricey to live in once the area inevitably succeeded in attracting its enlarged tax base. However, he will first have to wait 10-20 years before the city installs a more efficient transportation system. But more on that later.
The tools and activities of Creative Placemaking are in the name of progress but have the power to leave people behind.
Comments
Post a Comment