Patricia Casey_Thinking About the Public In Public Art

Thinking About the Public In Public Art by Tom Eccles and Tom Finkelpearl with Ann Pasternak 

Introduction:

·      The talk between artists and curators Tom Eccles and Tom Finkelpearl is a conversation between two reputable men within their field, both are responsible for providing new york city with some of its greatest public art.

·      Tom Eccles Was the executive director of Pulbic Art Fund from 1997-2005.

·      Tom Finkelpearl is currently the executive director of Queens Museum of Art. He founded the Art on the Beach Program in 1985 and also served as director of New York City’s Percent for Art Program- a program in which one percent for the budget for city construction projects is spent on artwork.

From first Eccles comment though third Finkelpearl comment on page 83

Initially they speak about how the intention of public art is to-as Pasternak says “Inspire, baffle or provoke the public.”  She also asks-“Is art in the public art made for the public, with the public or is the public intended as a spectator? What is artists responsibility to the public?”

Finkelpearl talks about how art usually has class overtones although  “Consumers of public art are the larger public” and in this way public art varies from many other realms of the artistic world and its elitism.

Eccles talks about how the common perception of the percent for art program and its agenda in the 80s and 90s. He goes on to say didn’t have a class driven agenda or political agenda however the artists chosen for specific projects were chosen because the program felt that the race of an artist and best represented the community.

Finkelpearl directly disputes that claim by stating that an emphasis on diversity is important and appropriate for an urban environment like New York. He pulls out a statistic that 70 percent of the artists they worked with were woman and artists of color.

Eccles goes on to say that he felt that program’s mission was to pick the best artist that coincided with the environment and reflect the demographics of the area.

Finkelpearl states that the artists intent directly coincided with the environment in that they were “Created work as a response to a architectural, historical or social setting” and that it was imperative for the artist and the community would reach a collaborative understanding of what would the best way to utilize the space would be.