Art is intertwined with every aspect of our modern societies worldwide. It is a universal condition of being human, with a focus on approaching life. Architecture is a profession that guides and shapes the experience of daily life. In these times of multiple crises, can the integration of art offer a new perspective in the search for resilient design, encompassing ecological, economic, and social dimensions?
Since the earliest cave paintings, art has been revolutionary. According to the architect Adolf Loos (1870-1933), art opens up new paths for humanity. He notes that, unlike architecture, art is a private matter and doesn't require justification. Is this why art is often superficially employed in our public spaces?
It is easy and politically safe to objectively place a sculpture on every roundabout to meet a cultural agenda. For Belgium, I am referring to directive MOW/AWV/2013/8 by the Roads and Traffic Agency on May 8, 2013, which serves as a model for a concession agreement for the installation of artwork on a roundabout, the introduction is promising: "Flanders has a strong tradition in the field of art in public space. Our cities are visited, among other things, because of the public immovable art heritage located on streets and squares of large and small cities." This is true and why? The art heritage is the result of a long and sometimes tumultuous history. Art tells stories, symbolizes local heroes, and creates connections. That is what art does: based on spectator participation, it makes one reflect on an inherent message linked to the local context. It is meaningful because it evokes emotions. It is inherently reflective and transformative. Paradoxically, art, with its intimacy and private nature, assumes a public role when qualitatively framed within public space. The boundary between art and architecture as such is thus not as straightforward as conservative views suggest. Key elements in this perspective are spectator participation, the situational, and the activation of emotions and stories with aesthetics.
If we continue reading the introduction of the directive, it states: "Also in shaping the public space of the 21st century, a conscious reflection on the artistic potential of new urban planning data such as the roundabout is necessary." Indeed, shaping the public space of the 21st century requires a conscious reflection on the artistic potential. But to claim that this pertains to new urban planning data and specifically roundabouts is challenging. Public space is, by my definition, space that can be used by everyone: streets, squares, gardens, public buildings such as town halls, cultural centers,... These are the places where you can encounter everyone at any given moment. These are the places where, from a sociological point of view, you can go, possibly sit down, and watch all passers-by and their activities. It is entertainment and related to everyone's intimate story and actions. A roundabout is infrastructure for cars and cyclists. It is an island physically separated from public space: a no man's land. To make this a focal point of artistic reflection on public space in the 21st century is particularly sad. Furthermore, because the text mainly focuses on the functional aspect "the artwork is listed as a possibility to make the roundabout 'less dangerous'." The text corrects itself with "But a functional starting point cannot be the only criterion when starting an artistic process. After all, the realization of a work of art should initially convey a cultural ambition. Therefore, from the perspective of local government, it is important to seek the necessity of furnishing the roundabout with artwork." In reality, this misses the mark. Art is context-specific, site-specific: artificially forcing art onto no man's land begs for meaningless objects that contribute nothing to the representation of public spaces in the 21st century or to current culture or contemporary trends that will be passed on to future generations. It demonstrates a lack of perspective and long-term vision. I certainly do not want to condemn every artwork on every roundabout as meaningless and empty, but merely question the mindset. Is the establishment of roundabout art truly representative of art in public space? Has there been consideration of the situational? Does the art create connections? Can the art ever become part of our valued heritage to connect future generations with stories about our lives now? To what extent is there spectator participation that goes beyond marking specific reference points on a road like name signs? This implementation of politically culture-washed art integration on roundabouts will certainly not offer us broader perspectives on the filling of public space and, by extension, sustainable architecture in general.
Yet, art integration is not completely written off. Art is an oscillation, intimate, based on subjectivity, and dependent on the observer. Art viewed from user participation can facilitate integration with architecture to create hybrid situations suitable for our 21st-century society. Architecture, seen from Loos's perspective, can use artintegration as a critique of itself and create meaning in reflecting on the relationships that have emerged and our societal entity as a whole. It is a mirror that connects us with another side of our daily lives and opens us up to new opportunities. Art can detach us from the obsessive focus on limits, especially within the ecological debate, where what we are no longer allowed to do is a childish impediment to innovation. The key lies in integration: where user participation in art is mainly important for meaning-making after the work is formed, for architecture, it lies precisely in the design process before the final conception of the work. To create quality architecture from a sustainable long-term perspective and with a certain continuity, art must be integrated into the design process. Only then can the needs of users, residents, informal co-designers, be considered. Architecture must start from the people for whom it designs.
A second condition and consequence when art integration is done right is the situational. By adjusting art to its environment and using aesthetics to increase perception, people become more aware of their surroundings. Increased awareness leads to adjusted behavior: living in accordance with the environment rather than imposing our own needs, resulting in an artificial and harmful context. Especially from an ecological perspective, this is important. Back to the roots of the treehouse.
One of the lighthouse projects of the New European Bauhaus initiative for irresistible circularity in Herlev, Copenhagen focuses on the development of public spaces with an identity through art integration and storytelling. Madeleine Kate McGowan is the artistic leader of 'A Place of Being' at NXT and discusses this project in the Desire Academy podcast. A shelter in the form of a glass droplet is where the local gardener/concierge can be found. With this, they want to explore what we know: the old caretaker who takes care of the functionality of a building, now often disappeared due to the anonymous corporation/security company. This character is modernized and is responsible for taking care of and facilitating our relationship with public space and everything that entails. On the one hand, this is about establishing a relationship with the space itself, its materiality, textures, the genius loci itself, but also with all other life: the biotope. Various artists take on the role of caretaker and try to engage people with their works, performances, and processes through various workshops. Not only the end result counts, but also the process. Thanks to the architecture of the glass droplet as a studio, you can follow the artist's process at all times, including all failed attempts. A being of place where art integration and architecture strive for a sustainable future and an open attitude.
Conclusion: In these times of multiple crises, can art integration offer a new perspective on the search for resilient design , encompassing ecological, economic, and social dimensions? Yes, provided there is critical local design starting from informality. As Jane Jacobs described it: Bottom-up design instead of top-down. We know it, we just need to put it into practice more, like the lighthouse project in Copenhagen. Quality projects often start with visionary designers, but to make this generally applicable, a restructuring of political vision is needed. Stop ticking paper boxes, look to the new reality. As for designers: open up new perspectives and take matters into your own hands.
~ Kimberly Wouters, Architect.
In written sequence
Service order for the roundabout art: https://wegenenverkeer.be/sites/default/files/uploads/documenten/MOW-AWV-2013-8.pdf
More information on "The Desire Academy- Towards an irresistable circular society" Desire (irresistiblecircularsociety.eu)
The Desire Podcast and the adressed episode: PODCAST The Desire Academy - Desire (irresistiblecircularsociety.eu)
References/ projects in the collage:
Chapel of the Clarenhof in Hasselt by A2O architecten
The droplet of the lighthouse project in Copenhagen (Desire Academy/ New European Bauhaus)
Roundabout art in Maasmechelen
Lapis Lazuli brick of Hans van Houwelingen in the troubleyn in reference to the Flemish Primitives
Quote of the artwork by Alberto Garutti in the foyer of het Troubleyn (amor fati).
Reference to the context of the site in Limburg (Maasmechelen), specifically the past of coalmines (R- Resilient design)
Comments