In her Feb. 2 Around Davidson column, DavidsonNews.net‘s Brenda Barger offered her thoughts on “Bouquet for Davidson” by Andy Dunnill, our town’s first public art sculpture, calling it “an assemblage of poorly weathering scrap metal.” The writer below, a longtime resident, Davidson College professor and sculptor, offers a reply on behalf of the Davidson Public Art Commission:
"Bouquet for Davidson" by Andy Dunnill (David Boraks/DavidsonNews.net photo
By CORT SAVAGE
I completely understand a viewer’s dismay that our “Bouquet,” only a few months old, is already rusting. If I bought a car and it was rusting in a few months, I would be furious! But a sculpture and a car are two different things with different intentions and purposes.
Art should generate conversation, even if it means people disagree, but it is helpful if the conversation is informed, so here’s some information.
Davidson’s sculpture, like many outdoor sculptures, was intended to naturally rust, and this was taken into consideration when it was made to make sure the rust would not compromise the physical integrity of the artwork. The rust ultimately makes a more uniform surface that requires a minimum of maintenance. This tradition goes back to the very beginnings of welded steel sculpture and the work of the artist considered the world’s most famous steel sculptor, David Smith.
Antony Gormley's "You" at Davidson College (David Boraks/DavidsonNews.net photo)
Beginning in the 1950s Smith made many pieces intended to be left outside to rust, seeing the rust as simply a color and surface that is what the material does naturally and that real beauty resides in permitting steel to do what it naturally does. David Smith links back further to another artist who changed history: Constantine Brancusi.
Brancusi’s stone, bronze and wood sculptures made at beginning of the 20th century recognized the material as important as the object sculptured and that a thing is most true and honest when the integrity of the material is permitted to follow its natural course. Why? Because when a material is permitted to follow its natural course, it is closer to nature and nature is the true source of inspiration for most art. But Brancusi would likely not have realized this without the teachings of Leonardo da Vinci, one of the great geniuses of the Italian Renaissance. He advised his students to study the patterns cracks in walls and puddles of rain because he maintained that art must be connected to nature. Rust is nature.
August Rodin, one of the world’s most famous sculptors of the human form wrote, “The vulgar believe that what they consider ugly in existence is not a fit subject for the artist, it is a great error on their part. What is commonly called ugliness can in art become full of great beauty.”
My education and 30 years as a sculptor have led me to agree. I can look at the rust on my truck and see it as ugly, but I look at the rust on a Richard Serra sculpture in New York, or the cast iron Antony Gormley sculpture on the campus of Davidson College, or the Andy Dunhill sculpture on Main Street and see the rust as gorgeous.
Cort Savage is a sculptor, professor, and chair of the art department at Davidson College. He is also a town resident of 18 years who loves sculpture – even rusty ones.
RELATED LINKS
See a video “A Bouquet for Davidson” produced by DavidsonNews.net for the Public Art Commission a year ago that includes an interview with artist Andy Dunnill.
See all of DavidsonNews.net’s coverage of Andy Dunnill’s sculpture and the Davidson Public Art Commission.
I can appreciate intellectually the explanation that rust is a natural process for the sculpture’s material and therefore part of the art experience over time. Still, aesthetically the rusting metal creates a visual nuisance. There is a similarity with graffiti, which also can be art but which we also wouldn’t welcome on the wall of the Toast Cafe. A counter-example to letting a metal sculpture rust is set by Alexander Calder, who painted his stabiles black or bright red.
How much did this cost the town/residents? I cannot seem to find any public record on this commission.
I’ve covered the Public Art Commission as a reporter since it was conceived. Let me see if I can help. (All of this below is pulled from articles that were published on DavidsonNews.net over the past couple of years):
Our town’s Public Art program was the brainchild of Kate McIntyre, the former Davidson downtown director, who passed away in 2007. She saw it as a way for the town to set itself apart, to build community and to build excitement about the community, to borrow words from her husband, Peter Macon. As someone whose job involved helping to promote Davidson, she saw an opportunity. She also wanted to build on the existence of other public art in town, particularly on the Davidson College campus. (I’ve written elsewhere about the installation of Davidson’s sculpture garden outside the college library, and of the sculpture at South Main Square.)
The town went through a 2-year process leading up to the commissioning and installation of “A Bouquet for Davidson,” including public meetings, an exhibition of public art proposals by citizen committees, discussions at the town board, a visit and lecture in Davidson by Mr. Dunnill, and a lengthy series of public discussions about public art. All of the people involved in the process were our neighbors, either elected to town office or people who responded to the town’s call for volunteers.
Mr. Dunnill’s “Bouquet for Davidson” project cost a little over $36,000, according to town officials. Of that, $15,000 came from a North Carolina Arts Council grant, $5,500 from a Arts & Science Council grant, and $15,600 came from the Town of Davidson. The town’s contribution to this project, and future public art projects contemplated, comes from a portion (15 percent) of the revenues generated by the town’s hotel occupancy and prepared food tax.
You can read more of the background in my report on the sculpture’s dedication, http://davidsonnews.net/2009/04/26/new-sculpture-prompts-admiration-and-questions/
Additional background on the foundation of the public art program beginning in 2008 can be found under the “Public Art” category, http://davidsonnews.net/category/public-art/
The town Public Art Commission has a web page on the town website. http://www.ci.davidson.nc.us/index.aspx?NID=229
The comment suggests there is a lack of a public record on the Public Art Commission and this project.
As a reporter, it’s not my role to defend (or condemn) the process. My role is to present the information I gather. But I am not sure it’s fair to suggest any lack of transparency. The town did issue public notices about meetings, and the Town Board – our elected representatives – asked questions and discussed the proposal at several of its Town Board meetings, which are open to the public. And the town posted a web page about the commission and the process (see above).
Meanwhile, the news media, including DavidsonNews.net covered the process. We followed formation of the Public Art Commission and Mr. Dunnill’s project about as closely as one might want. Various aspects of the process have been covered or mentioned in about two dozen stories since May 2008, when the first public art study committee was formed.
Does that mean people have to like what the Public Art Commission bought? Of course not. That brings us back to Mr. Savage’s point: “Art should generate conversation.”
So who’s up next? We welcome your thoughts.
Regarding “liking (or not) what the Public Art Commission bought”: I am in favor of public art and I do like Andy Dunnill’s sculpture – I think it’s whimsical and uplifting, and an enrichment for downtown. It’s just the issue of letting it rust, which I think sends a decaying message about Main Street, that I object to.
Personally I dislike the “statue” in front of the Post Office. However, one of my closest friends now visiting in St. Louis, thinks it’s just great! She knows art. I don’t. So much for my taste! Certainly the process was very open and anyone who volunteered to serve on the committee was put on it. As I recall, there was a problem getting enough volunteers. The people who ended up volunteering were folks who know a lot more about art than I. I was also told early on that it would rust and that rust would make it maintenance free and more “interesting to look at.” I guess it’s all in the eyes of the beholder. Gumby anyone?
Town Board member Margo Williams adds one more detail on the funding for public art in Davidson: “All of both taxes (hotel occupancy and prepared food) must be spent on travel and tourism. And public art is considered to be in the travel and tourism category throughout North Carolina because it draws visitors.
25% of the prepared food and beverage tax must go to Visit Lake Norman [the regional tourism promotion body]. Public art is just a small percentage of both taxes – 15 percent is what we had scheduled for it. The other distributions of the taxes are clearly delineated in our budget.”
Great art is always controversial. The French Impressionists were ridiculed in their day. And since Bouquet is considered a tourist attraction, someone should make postcards of it. I’d buy a dozen.