Bookmark and Share

PASW Regional Newsletter: Spring 2001

Report on the Regional Network Meeting

PASW Regional Network Meeting, Bude 16th November 2000

Maggie Bolt welcomed everyone to the meeting. She said that the Regional Network had held its first meeting in Gloucester and was delighted to now be in Cornwall at such a timely point with all the opportunities facing the County. She said that the meeting would hear about three very interesting regional projects and that there would be a lot of time for discussion. She finished by thanking the partners involved in the meeting; North Cornwall Arts and North Cornwall District Council who had also provided the delicious lunch.

The meeting's Chair, Lee Corner, then set the context for the afternoon. She said that it was important to see ourselves in a national context as well as regional and local. She said that we were entering a period of amazing times with many funding opportunities presenting themselves. The purpose of the day was, she said, to hear and learn from the experience of other managers and artists so that we could be well placed to maximise the affordability that funding such as Objective 1 offers.

Neil Tibbitts, Architect, Jonathan Ball Practice, started the presentation on the Bude Light project by giving us some background on the project; how it had first started in 1984 with the architects, Jonathan Ball Practice being selected to do a feasibility study for the whole Parkhouse area in February 1997. This study had identified the need for and value of establishing a significant element of public art. In February 1998 a maquette of the proposed Bude Light work was presented to the sub-committee and well received. The period that followed saw a major roller coaster journey of gaining public support. Funding was gained for the project from the Arts Lottery, ERDF, Town Council, North Cornwall District Council and the County Environment Trust. Following the AGM held in April 1999 a vociferous group of people called for a referendum on the project to re visit the site. This was held and 60% of those who voted were in favour of the project. June 2000 saw the successful opening ceremony of the Bude Light. Neil finished by saying that funds had been ring fenced to start the development of Phase II of the project and that he felt that they, because of the experience of working on Phase I, had benchmarks to work against.

Sue Richardson, Director, North Cornwall Arts started by saying that this project had represented totally uncharted territory for North Cornwall Arts. She explained how when they began their involvement in the project the feasibility study had been completed and that no artist had been appointed. This, she said, was the area she was keen to redress. Sue talked about the role of the commissioner when they have little previous experience of the commissioning process and the importance of being brought into partnerships with government agencies at all levels so that their professional skills can be utilised. Artists can bring a great deal of insight into the process this type of project demands. In view of all the regeneration projects emerging, especially in Cornwall and the opportunities presented through Objective 1 funding, she said that she hoped that we could address all these issues and get a commissioning strategy in place.

Bude Light, Artists : Carole Vincent / Anthony Fanshawe. Photo: Robin Mudge

Bude Light, Artists: Carole Vincent / Anthony Fanshawe.

Photo: Robin Mudge

Sue then went onto talk about the Bude Light project in more depth; how the artists Carole Vincent and originally Peter Freeman, and subsequently Anthony Fanshawe, were appointed. She discussed the project's difficult path from original support, to the public poll and its ultimate realisation. She talked about the outreach work that went on and the role of the local community in the opening ceremony which attracted over one thousand people.

Sue said that their vision for integrating the scheme into the heart of the local community was already taking shape with the site being used for many community events. She finished by saying that the project had broken new boundaries for them all and in the process put Bude and North Cornwall firmly on the national arts map.

Lee thanked both Sue and Neil for their presentation and then asked the meeting for any questions. A series of questions were asked about :

  • local opposition and how it could have been different.
  • how they had got the Council to take on board the vision for the project.
  • what Bude Town Council had learnt from the process and whether it would respond differently to further projects.
  • the evaluation of the project and its importance.
  • the opposition to the project being fuelled by false information.

Lee said that the point we needed to come back to was recognition of the need for a development phase and the point at which we then see public art coming on board. Central to this was the advocacy function that we can be involved in. She said that the evaluation of a project was essential not only for external bodies but also for personal reasons; if we were to take on an advocacy role then we needed to come from an informed stance.

The next presentation was from Polly Mason, Arts Consultant who started by saying that they were very much at the early stages of development on the Falmouth Moor project. This period was concerned with the process of public consultation and the gaining of funding. She showed slides of the area in question and explained how the town was very traditional and the area in question was predominately a conservation area. The intention of the project was to incorporate public art into the street furniture, creating something that was specific to Falmouth.

David Buurma, Landscape Architect started by showing slides of examples of artists working in public spaces in cities like Barcelona and Rotterdam. He talked about how a multi disciplinary approach created situations where objects cross boundaries.

Polly mentioned the importance of public participation; how one should not impose things on people but that they should not make the work, that, she said, was the role of the artist.

David talked about the two areas they were working on; one for cars and one for pedestrians. He said that they had been collaborating with Falmouth College of Art and showed computer generated work that the students had produced on the project. He finished by saying that they were currently involved in a period of public consultation and were in the process of getting local public artists involved in the project.

Lee thanked Polly and David for their presentation and then invited questions.

A number of questions and comments were raised, about :

  • the differences between working in Cornwall and in Holland.
  • how the space will be used and how it was important to encourage functions for the space.
  • traffic and car parking issues and the compromises that arise from these issues.
  • the tension between David's role and the role of the artist.
  • notions of open public space.

Sue Hill, Arts Director, Eden Project began by saying that she would not being showing us any images because she was aware that there had been a media overload on the project. She said that she felt it was worth revisiting where the idea for the Eden Project had come from. She talked about how they were working with 50 artists and were keen to explore the ways in which artists can be integrated into all forms of human activity. The Eden project, she said, had come from the Lost Gardens of Heligan. The project had taken the extraordinary decision to work with artists rather than an in house design team to create the interpretation / models etc. She referred to the good value for money you got from working with artists. Originally the aim was to interpret 85 exhibitions, they were now in the first phase and have 20 fully interpreted exhibits across various medium. She talked about how they were keen that the work had a human and social content and that they were keen to 'cast' locally whilst recognising that Eden was a global garden. She said that one of the major challenges was the fact that there were alot of different disciplines involved in Eden from landscape designers to builders. She referred to the current interest in the link between art and science and the need to approach projects with care, the need to nurture relationships.

Sunflower work, Eden Project Artist: Michael Chaikin Photo: Peter Blackburn

Sunflower work, Eden Project Artist: Michael Chaikin

Photo: Peter Blackburn

Artist, Michael Chaikin, described the work he was doing for Eden in the sunflower section. He showed a macquette of his design and talked about the challenges posed by working for Eden - the need for robust work that could withstand touching and vandalism.

Sue went onto talk about how important it was that the work produced was integrated into the landscape. She said that not all the work was accessible, some was 'difficult' but that she thought that it was important that art was not always safe. Art, she said, must provoke responses, question and excite.

Lee thanked Sue and Michael for their presentation and asked for people's questions. There followed a number of questions and comments that focused on how the artists were chosen. This, Sue said, was by invitation and involved a period of r & d which didn't always result in a final product or commission. She explained how the period of r & d gave them the tools to gain further funding.

Lee then introduced David Brown, Chief Executive of North Cornwall District Council, saying that he would be setting the financial context for what we had been talking about. She said that David was unusual as a Chief Executive in that he had recognised the value of working with artists.

David started by saying that traditionally public art had flowed from the Church and the State because of their power. He said that 1% for Art is a consultation not a fiscal policy and that artists should not being running public art projects. The two lessons he felt should be learnt from today were that people should stick to what they are good at and that quality counts. Art, he said, should be about people.

David went onto state that you have to have a strategy, you have to consult, and you have to have a detailed framework if you want other peoples' money. Everything, he said, is moving towards the common agenda i.e.

  1. Sustainable economic development
  2. Protection of the environment
  3. Promotion of health / welfare
  4. Social justice / inclusion

There is lots of money out there including Objective 1 funding. There are no specific headings for art or heritage but the themes of sustainability and regional distinctiveness give one areas where art can be explored. Objective 1 has a specific agenda, it is about regeneration and all the projects must come back to the common agenda.

Lee thanked David for his presentation and requested questions from the meeting. There followed a period of questions which focused on:

  • the importance of learning government language but also the importance of people like David speaking artists' language to local government.
  • the need to understand the agenda and what you are required to do for any money raised.

Lee then talked about what she saw as being the key issues that had come from the day, the importance of :

  • getting art in early, using cultural practice early.
  • evaluation for us all, not just funders, so we understand what we do and why.
  • getting the public on our side. How genuine are our consultation processes?
  • more adventurous commissioning.
  • questioning whose public space it is ? What do we mean by public space?
  • questioning whether you are willing for art to be a tool to the furtherance of the common agenda.

She then opened up the debate to the floor. Much discussion followed, which focused on some of the following issues:

  • the need to generate a real sense of ownership of projects.
  • the role of Town Forums in setting up art projects.
  • the need for artists to remain separate from the consultation process.
  • that sometimes it is the role of the artist to take you somewhere you did not want to go.
  • process and product.
  • the need for commissioners to consider what they are requesting artists to do when they are writing briefs.
  • the importance of involving local artists on projects and involving communities.
  • the role of the artist in taking strands of the recognisable, reinterpreting them and then giving the people back something that they did not necessarily expect but something that they recognised.
  • the need for more enlightened landscape architects especially in relation to new housing schemes.
  • the need for the artist to take on other peoples requirements.
  • the importance of getting artists involved in decision making at council level.
  • a plea for temporary / ephemeral work.
  • the difference between public art and private art done for the public.

Maggie then closed the meeting. She mentioned that the next Network meeting would be in Exeter in Spring 2001 and that it would explore issues of social space and temporary work. She said that one of the purposes of today had been to network and she urged people to tap into what was going on in the region. Lee thanked all the speakers for their contributions, North Cornwall Arts, and North Cornwall District Council.