Public "Art"

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by SebC

While Charging Bull was not a commission, I still think it serves as an example as bang-for-the-buck public art. Del Geist has said that over 90% of the cost of Bowfort Towers went to production+installation, leaving at most 10% as his profit. Why do you think there would be a major cost difference if it were commissioned?

The draw back of commissions generally is they have an upper cost limit, therefore its like calling up builders and asking them if they can do you a bathroom for 50,000, all of them will quote you 49,999 for your new bathroom.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by SebC

While Charging Bull was not a commission, I still think it serves as an example as bang-for-the-buck public art. Del Geist has said that over 90% of the cost of Bowfort Towers went to production+installation, leaving at most 10% as his profit. Why do you think there would be a major cost difference if it were commissioned?

I meant if the Charging Bull was commissioned first instead of built with sculptor's own money and gifted to the City. Going from $500,000 for our blue ring, this was a fair assumption to make!

[chemgear]

#### me $20,000.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...izes-1.4425418

The Calgary artist behind the public art that used photos of British comedians without permission and prompted an international incident this week has apologized and offered an explanation.

Derek Besant's $20,000 piece, installed along the Fourth Street underpass in downtown Calgary two years ago, involves a series of images of people's faces, blurred out with words overtop of them.

This explanation differs from a 2015 article in Avenue Magazine in which Besant was interviewed about the underpass project.

That article states: "Besant chose the 20 people at random from the pedestrians he met at the underpass."

[CaptainCrunch]

So the artist was lazy and did it in the quickest way to get his 20k.

Hopefully he's offering a refund and payment to take his slackta-art down.

[Fuzz]

"In no way did I ever mean to hurt anyone involved, and I am extremely sorry that this is the result of my misunderstanding,"

hahaha, no. That's not an apology. Misunderstanding? What you have done is fraud. You fraudulently misrepresented what it was you were providing, and got busted. Pay back the money.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by chemgear

#### me $20,000.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...izes-1.4425418

The Calgary artist behind the public art that used photos of British comedians without permission and prompted an international incident this week has apologized and offered an explanation.

Derek Besant's $20,000 piece, installed along the Fourth Street underpass in downtown Calgary two years ago, involves a series of images of people's faces, blurred out with words overtop of them.

This explanation differs from a 2015 article in Avenue Magazine in which Besant was interviewed about the underpass project.

That article states: "Besant chose the 20 people at random from the pedestrians he met at the underpass."

I wonder how the enlightened progressives on this board are going to defend the city on this one.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

I wonder how the enlightened progressives on this board are going to defend the city on this one.

I have to admire how you're obviously drunk and angry but have managed to spell correctly.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

I wonder how the enlightened progressives on this board are going to defend the city on this one.

What exactly did the city do wrong here? Do you expect public administration officials to be able to identify obscure British comedians from fuzzy, out-of-focus photos? The artist is clearly in the wrong and should reimburse the city for the cost of the piece (and if not, the city should sue to have the money refunded), but I don't see how any reasonable person could fault the city for this.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

I wonder how the enlightened progressives on this board are going to defend the city on this one.

The Art was pretty cool. I think it would have been a good permenant installation.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by chemgear

#### me $20,000.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...izes-1.4425418

The Calgary artist behind the public art that used photos of British comedians without permission and prompted an international incident this week has apologized and offered an explanation.

Derek Besant's $20,000 piece, installed along the Fourth Street underpass in downtown Calgary two years ago, involves a series of images of people's faces, blurred out with words overtop of them.

This explanation differs from a 2015 article in Avenue Magazine in which Besant was interviewed about the underpass project.

That article states: "Besant chose the 20 people at random from the pedestrians he met at the underpass."

reading the article, it seems clear that the artist is a big fat liar and did a pathetic job of explaining why he used the pictures.
especially that he already lied once about the pictures he used.

artist is a dirty cheat and in no way can the city be blamed in any way.
and no excuses about not meaning to hurting anyone. I don't think anyone was hurt, but ticked off he stole their imaged for his artwork. he should have said he's sorry for stealing their images.

why didn't he use 20 random pictures of pedestrians? for $20,000 he could have easily taken a few pictures instead of just taking photos from a program he had.

[Nufy]

I don’t fault the city for the project.
But I won’t be surprised to see them spend 50k in legal fees to go after 20.

Then probably settle for 10.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Nufy

I don’t fault the city for the project.
But I won’t be surprised to see them spend 50k in legal fees to go after 20.

Then probably settle for 10.

What do they sue him for?

Unless his contract stated it would be 20 Calgarians at random or if there is some clawback if the project is removed before X dates, i don't see an avenue here.

[Locke]

Look, I dont fault the City, but between this the Blue ring and 'rocks on sticks' I think we have to consider adopting a more effective process of vetting the artists we engage.

I know that artists by and large are a troublesome lot, but seriously, we need to do something.

[CaptainCrunch]

There have basically in the last two pieces of controversial art been two artists that have been caught in lies about them.

The Rocks on Sticks and the artist claiming to have based it on local Native Lore only to have the local bands state that he was full of poop.

And then this latest one.

so yeah, I think your right Locke, I think that there has to be serious vetting which means that its likely that public art will have to come from Artists with a history so to speak.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

There have basically in the last two pieces of controversial art been two artists that have been caught in lies about them.

The Rocks on Sticks and the artist claiming to have based it on local Native Lore only to have the local bands state that he was full of poop.

And then this latest one.

so yeah, I think your right Locke, I think that there has to be serious vetting which means that its likely that public art will have to come from Artists with a history so to speak.

I'm not eminently knowledgeable about Native Affairs but when the Native Bands basically backed away and held up their hands and said 'dont drag us into this' I think a lot was said.

We need more of a process for picking artists. Hell, if it were me I'd probably engage a local artist as a consultant to maybe veto or vet potential candidates.

[Nufy]

Originally Posted by Cappy

What do they sue him for?

Unless his contract stated it would be 20 Calgarians at random or if there is some clawback if the project is removed before X dates, i don't see an avenue here.

On Global last night, one councilor noted they may ask for some of the funds back.

I don't know the terms of the contract but I can see someone making this a personal mission to save Calgarians tax dollars.

you know...for the good of the people...

[gottabekd]

Did y'all see this article about Douglas Coupland creating an LED light show embedded into the windows of the Telus Sky building?



There is a video at the bottom of the article: http://calgaryherald.com/entertainme...t-installation

I guess "public" in the sense that it is visible to everyone.

[Red Slinger]

Good writer. I had no idea he was also a visual artist.

[CliffFletcher]

Are incompetence and fraud by artists participating in this project any more common than incompetence and fraud by contractors in other public projects (or private ones for that matter)? Or just more visible?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

Good writer. I had no idea he was also a visual artist.

He's Vancouver's go to artist, the golden tree down on marine and cambie, the replacement Terry fox plaza statue (hard to make something as ugly as the one it replaces but he gave it a good college try!!), if you need a large piece of fibreglass irony Doug's your man