Art and Public Space

Art and Public Space Who 'owns' public space? Public space is never neutral, even though it is theoretically owned 'in common,' but rather reflects the particular ideology of those who construct it. Thus, in a sense we all own public because we have a hand in how it is used and we are all owned by public space in the sense that the locations in which we dwell limit and define our social interactions.

"One of the main trends in philosophy is to see the public sphere as a form of social reality, and less as an act of creation whose results would be negotiated intersubjectively" (Gheorghe 317). Marxists see the demarcation of spaces into public and private arenas as a way to negotiate power relationships.

Anyone who doubts this should consider the extent to which desirable real estate is determined by proximity to privileged social spaces: an apartment with a view of Central Park in New York City is an excellent example of this phenomenon: even though the park is public, to 'possess' a private view is a sign of social superiority. Having a certain kind of room in a hotel, flying first class, and the ability to occupy specific 'spaces' separate from the public confers a certain social prestige.

Even certain seemingly 'public' spaces are clearly policed by class dynamics. Although a store is technically a public space, the ability to buy the items within the store determines one's sense of belongingness.

Conversely, not possessing a certain status can get someone evicted even from an ostensibly public space that is open to the public, like a homeless person who is evicted from the sidewalk in front of a store or a group of minority teens 'shadowed' by a neighborhood watch are presumed to be suspicious because of their appearance (Dunn 79).

Public spaces are ideologically policed and the art located in public spaces is likewise policed so it can convey a particular ideology -- once this was the idea of a "hero on a horse" while today or displays of art are consciously chosen to convey a specific image about the residents of the community like a colorful mural paying homage to Chicano artists ("Chapter 3: A critical overview of public art" 53).

There has been much talk about the need to democratize art in recent decades, and one proposal for doing so is to include more art in public spaces, such as murals in public parks and works of art in buildings populated by the public. However, given the extent to which public spaces are not truly 'public' at all, this proposal is somewhat problematic.

What types of art will be displayed and where? Of course, museums are considered public spaces in that they are theoretically open to the public, often with only suggested donations for entrance, but perceived social barriers as well as admissions fees often keep many people away. There have been efforts to create more accessible places in commercial areas, including requiring developers to offer publically accessible parks when they create large 'private' residential or office structures in cities.

This attempts to challenge the perception that 'gated communities' are beginning to solidify class divides in the cities and suburbs and are creating chasm between 'haves' and 'have-nots' in terms of access (and often access to beauty). However, in actual practice, public spaces in cities can be dangerous places in many locations, at least in the locations where the people the public art movement is trying so hard to reach people (Orum 80).

If an area is not safe or pleasant or easily accessible, it is difficult to argue that the art exhibited there is truly 'public.' This is not to say that transgressions of social space are impossible on a grassroots level. The demographics of an area can change and the people who inhabit its public spheres: a good example of this is immigrant communities making incursions into areas formerly dominated by the hegemonic majority.

Orum cites the example of groups of Filipino women whose public socialization was noteworthy in a city dominated by Chinese; another example might be groups of marginalized ethnic minorities moving into formerly all-white suburbs to enjoy the prosperity and amenities offered in the district, including parts and public art (Orum 81).

Although not part of officially subsidized public art, it could be argued that visible restaurants, movie theater signs, and even street signs that reflect the ethnic identity of a district can be a way of announcing the power of a minority group through the colonization of a particular space in a manner that is visually arresting and artistic. The very definition of art itself has been broadened to comprise aspects of popular and traditional cultures.

Such art reflects the existence of "parallel discursive arenas where members of subordinated social groups invent and circulate counterdiscourses to formulate oppositional interpretations.