Literature Review - School of Architecture and Allied Arts Blog

Literature Review
Danielle Walter
March 14, 2012
AAD 630: Research Methods
Literature Review
How can artist-led initiatives benefit urban development projects through creative place-
making and public art practice?
To better inform and articulate my research question I identified one to two pieces of
literature to address the four emerging themes within my topic of interest: 1) the role of artists in
society; 2) social practice are in the public sphere; 3) artistic intervention in urban space; and 4)
methods and theory of place-making. The intention was to explore the major concepts imbedded
in the development of artist-led initiatives for creative place-making and urban revitalization.
This investigation allowed me to analyze my topic from a variety of perspectives – educator,
artist, geographer, designer, and architect – while simultaneously revealing the deep
interconnectivity between these themes and perspectives.
In “The Artist in Society”, Rubén A. Gaztambide-Fernández (2008), professor at
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, focuses on the discourse between three distinct
definitions of artist figure: a) cultural civilizer; b) border crosser; and c) representator. He
admits that these are not the only possible definitions, but chooses to focus on these specifically
because they are rooted in historical and theoretical context, and provide a useful contrast to one
another. Discussing each view of the artist “across three analytical dimensions” – cultural
discourse, consideration of multiple understandings, and society’s expectations” (p. 236),
Gaztambide-Fernández situates each view with a social, historical, philosophical, and pragmatic
context. He explains that idea of artist as cultural civilizer evolved during the Age of
Danielle Walter 1

Enlightenment and was a product of liberal humanist theory. In the role of cultural civilizer, the
artist’s talent, personality, and contribution to the world is considered far superior to that of
others, and society equates artist with genius.
The concept of artist as border crosser, in contrast, draws on postmodern, feminist, and
postcolonial cultural philosophy, and is rooted in critical theory. As border crosser, the artist is
“not understood as a subject with special abilities for creating works of art that are valuable for
their own sake, but is imagined as someone who has a critical view of social structures and can
discern how to mobilize symbols to challenge boundaries” (p. 245). In this way, artists are
expected to transcend cultural conventions, incite innovative thought and contribute an
ethnographic perspective to the course of society.
Gaztambide-Fernández grounds the third notion of the artist, as representator, in the
cultural populism theory of Rhys H. Williams. Cultural populism is a democratic approach to
cultural issues of representation, meaning-making and public life, in which the artist plays a
crucial role by reflecting and representing the concerns and mind-set of his or her society and is
not considered a higher source of intelligence located outside the public sphere. Artists, as
representators, “are part of a large web of meaning in which they are just the most obvious but
least important actors” (p. 249). Rather claiming the validity of one definition over the other,
Gaztambide-Fernández urges academic and cultural institutions to examine the “various
overlaps between the three different view of the artist and her/his role in society” (p. 257).
Artists of the 21 st century are “at a crossroads of discursive and disciplinary implosion” (p. 258).
In order to play an active and relevant role in cultural identity construction, artist must be
allowed “a public space where they can engage with the audience in a collective process of re-
presentation outside the purview of the culture industry” (p. 257). Cultural practitioners should
Danielle Walter 2

not rely on one narrow definition of artist, but rather encourage and foster open and ongoing
dialogue between all three roles.
Social practice art is becoming an increasingly recognized field within the academic,
professional, and public sectors. Suzanne Lacy – artist, activist, and writer – is a widely
recognized scholar of evolving public art practice. She is well known for her book, “Mapping
the Terrain: New Genre Public Art” (1995), that illustrates the emerging trend of politically and
civically activated art projects, which she calls new genre public art, through a variety of case
studies. In 2008, Lacy reflected back on the field’s progression in “Time in Place: New Genre
Public Art a Decade Later”. She explains that toward the end of the 20 th century federal funding
for modernist art projects and programming significantly decreased due to a series of public art
controversies. Any artist that did appear as, what Gaztambide-Fernández would refer to as, a
cultural civilizer struggled to find funding. Lacy cites the Ford Foundation’s investment in civic
arts, including the Animating Democracy Initiative, the Institute on the Art and Civic Dialogue,
and the American Festival Project, as evidence of a major shift in national attention towards
new genre public art a decade later.
Lacy addresses the challenge of developing critical methods of evaluation for new genre
art projects, including process and outcome based objectives. “It is important to locate these art
practices within the trajectories of art history and cultural theory to give real texture and
meaning to the notion of artist citizenship, and in so doing reconstruct the civic relevance of art”
(p. 31). She recommends three strategies: “the ‘close reading’ of specific projects embedded in
their locality; ‘mulitvocal’ criticism that compiles diverse viewpoints; and alignment with
economic, aesthetic, and cultural theories that draw on the ‘continental theory canon’, but do not
necessarily give it priority over other histories or theories” (pp. 21-22). In other words, it is
Danielle Walter 3

necessary to conduct comprehensive case documentation and analysis, solicit critical discourse
equally, and examine issues through the lens of multiple philosophical, political, and academic
perspectives. I foresee this set of guidelines informing my own understanding and analysis of
the case studies in my research.
After an investigation of the philosophical role of the artist and a present-day look at the
public policy of new genre art, I turned my attention to methods of creative civic engagement in
an urban setting. I explored the observations and findings of David Pinder, Professor of
Geography at the University of London, in his article “Arts of urban exploration” (2005). Pinder
bases his discussion on the art interventions of Brooklyn-based artist groups that seek to
instigate playful and provocative art interventions on the streets of New York. Pinder wants to
uncover how artists can enact civic change and defend public space. He cites his first-hand
observations; he draws on the theories of established philosophers and scholars; and includes
anecdotal feedback from artists and media sources. Situationist theory and psychogeography are
the foundation of his critical study of the perceived notions of urban spaces and their implied
values.
Pinder challenges the common assumption that artists serve merely to beautify and
inspire urban renewal projects. “It is not simply an issue of asking what artists can do in a
narrow instrumental sense to bring about progressive urban change, but rather of opening up
through such practices the potential for collaboration, interventions, re-imaginings that disrupt
and expand senses of both the city and self" (p. 404). Pinder draws connections between
psychogeography and urban exploration techniques. Walking, for example, is powerful mode of
access, discovery, and action. Intentional, accidental, and subversive pedestrian path-making
contributes to the identity and vitality urban communities. Mapping exercises and storytelling
Danielle Walter 4

are creative approaches to uncovering the hidden values and assumption of a city. “To
intervene through creative practice in public space today in New York and other cities is to enter
into a crucial struggle over the meaning, values and potentialities of that space at a time when
democracy is highly contested ” (p. 398). The complexity of perspectives within the urban
environment makes it impossible for one’s knowledge of a city to ever be complete, but
experimentation and exploration will always be vital to revitalization and enrichment.
Pinder is primarily concerned with uplifting and preserving the ‘rights to the city’ and
methods of ‘writing the city’ as a means of strengthening each citizen’s connection to and
respect for place (p. 387). In their book, “Place-making: The Art and Practice of Building
Communities”, Lynda H. Schneekloth and Robert G. Shibley argue that the professional
appropriation of place-making – embodied in the fields of architecture, urban planning, civic
engineering, and landscape design - has traditionally denied the rest of the community
participation in a fundamental mode of human expression. If, however, professional place-
makers can recognize the scope and implications of their actions, they have great potential to
affect positive change. The term “intervention”, though varying slightly in definition, can be
found throughout each piece of literature I reviewed and is emerging as a valuable concept in
my research. Schneekloth and Shibley claim, “All professional place-making activities are
interventions” (p. 13). It is vital to approach interventions in both physical and imagined space,
with intention and caution.
Schneekloth and Shibley attempt to outline a best practice approach to place-making for
artists, design professional, and community leaders, alike. Place-makers must undertake the
following tasks: a) make ‘dialogic space’ by facilitating respectful and open discussion; b)
conduct exercises of ‘confirmation’ (affirming aspects that are working) and ‘interrogation’
Danielle Walter 5

(critically analyzing conventions and challenges); and c) employ ‘framing action’ by allowing
these insights to guide and inform subsequent actions. This recommendation is “based on a
worldview that assigns legitimacy to every person’s experience of living, to the potential
competence and compassion of human action, and to the fundamental importance of place as an
actor in living well” (p. 8) The social activism tactic and educational theory of Paulo Friere is at
the core of Schneekloth and Shibley’s approach to place-making, drawing on non-elitist forms
of leadership and encouraging critical questioning of one’s surroundings in order to deconstruct
the forces at work. They assert that the production of knowledge is rooted in practice.
“To rehabilitate only the physical structure does not does not create the conditions for
change” (p. 16). Despite societal pressures to adhere to institutional boundaries and minimal
expectations, place-makers should encourage a free flowing exchange of responsibility and
vision. Artists, with the ability to reflect and engage their community, have great potential to
take on this task and expand the social implications of urban design. Schneekloth and Shibley,
however, warn of certain risks involved when bringing issues of place in to public discourse.
The act of communal place-making requires a high level of trust, open collaboration, and
accountability. Grounded in community cultural development theory, it is suggested that
without true caring and respect, exercises in collaboration will be an artificial and meaningless.
Lastly, I examined “Identity by Design”, a guide to urban design practice focused on the
mediation between physical and imagined community identity written by two professors at
Oxford Brookes University, Georgia Butina Watson and Ian Bentley. Between the two of them,
they are well versed in architecture, city planning, urban regeneration, urban morphology,
cultural studies, and public art. Published over ten years after “Placemaking”, “Identity by
Design” makes the assertion that professional urban designers are agents of civic and cultural
Danielle Walter 6

transformation. The methodological approach and case studies outlined by Watson and Bentley
illustrate a progression in the professional and academic understanding of and appreciation for
cultural place-making in the last decade. The designer possesses a thorough knowledge of the
morphological elements, including topography, hydrology, linkage networks, block, land plots
and building structures, and therefore it is their duty to “organize these elements and the
relationships and interfaces between them, so as to foster positive support for our place-identity
agenda: maximizing choice, constructing rootedness of imagined community, overcoming
nostalgia, supporting a sense of transcultural inclusiveness and co-dwelling with the wider
ecosphere, for as many users as possible” (p. 262).
Watson and Bentley advocate for a new definition of Modernism as it pertains to the
design sector. “Modern design” has become too preoccupied with aesthetic and the latest
technological advancements. To be truly modern, designers must “use the best knowledge we
have to face up to current design challenges – today certainly including problems of place-
identity – and have the courage to move in whichever direction that may lead” (p. 270).
Culturally and socially relevant urban design focuses on the link between place and identity.
Watson and Bentley define place-identify as “the set of meanings associated with any particular
cultural landscape which any particular person or group of people draws on in the constructions
of their own personal or social identities” (p. 6). Individualistic approach to urban design and art
making, motivated by superficial or detached factors, prevents constructive collaboration
between artists/designers and their community. “If issues of place-identity are indeed central to
our time, then it is crucial for art to reconnect with them” (p.271). By confronting and
challenging society’s perception of artists, conducting ‘close readings’ of progressive art
interventions in civic spaces, and reexamining the relationship between professional urban
Danielle Walter 7

designers and their communities, cultural workers can continue to expand the place-based
possibilities of art-based civic engagement.
Danielle Walter 8

Reference List
Gaztambide-Fernández, R.A. (2008). The artist in society: understandings, expectations, and
curriculum implications. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(3), 233-265. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
873X.2008.00408.x
Lacy, S. (1995). Mapping the terrain: new genre public art. Seattle, WA: Bay Press.
Lacy, S. (2008). Time in place: new genre public art a decade later. In Cartiere, C. & Willis, S.
(Eds.), The practice of public art (pp. 18-32). New York, NY: Routledge.
Pinder, D. (2005). Arts of urban exploration. Cultural Geographies, 12, 383-411.
Schneekloth, L.H. & Shibley, R.G. (1995). Placemaking: the art and practice of building
communities. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Watson, G.B. & Bentley, I. (2007). Identity by design. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Danielle Walter 9