Mark Wallinger is definitely not the first: Jaume Plensa installed a
huge two part video fountain "Crown Fountain" in Chicago in 2004.
This work is in the open, unsheltered, and permanent. So much for the
record, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Park
as for discourse: In Hamburg, Germany, there used to be an ambitious
'art in public spaces' programme (until it was ditched about 5 years
back by a new conservative government). This programme was financed
through a percentage in the city's budget, and included not just the
commissioning of permanent works but also of temporary projects, most
of which have been documented in books. One internet based project
"Hamburg Ersatz" by Delbrügge / DeMoll is still online; a public work
of art. English version button at the bottom of the text links to a
sister work, the "Copenhagen Substitute"
http://hamburg-ersatz.trmd.de/
One year, the commssioning of projects / works was suspended in
favour of a series of discoursive events that were investigating
notions of art and public. Exemplary here is Christian Philipp
Müller's project "Kunst auf Schritt und Tritt / Public Art Is
Everywhere" published in 1997 (german / english), an investigation
into the role of art in a particular part of Hamburg; the publication
includes essays by, eg., Miwon Kwon who put the specific context into
a broader international (American) perspective. Other works, though
not strictly "new media" included the "Open Public Library" by Clegg
& Guttman which consisted of the installation of three public
libraries in small electricity boxes, that worked on a 'bring one,
take one' scheme; the work also included a sociological study by
students at the University of Lueneburg (nearby Hamburg) which was
exhibited in the Kunstverein Hamburg during the artists'
interventions. Within this context I would put any works by Jochen
Gerz who has worked with ideas of permanence and memory in various
media, including the internet. Below link has links to a large number
of his works.
http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/berkeley-oracle/
from a UK perspective, I have a problem with the term of "public" in
relation to the financing of works. A lot of commissions seem to run
through organizations that specialize in "public art". They team up
with some developer who is required to put a work of art close to
their building; and then some abomination is put in place that is
made by some artist who specializes in "public art". I wonder where
role of 'public' is. My understanding of public in "art in public
places" is that it is financed by the public, ie. the councils, the
cities and villages, and reflects the role of the public and of
citizenship. The works of art are means of communicating that
relationship of individual / group and political framework. Yet the
financial framework of Private Public Partnerships (if this is what
these organisations are) obscures any relationship with the public
and becomes a purely financial funding set-up in a particular branch
of art business.
best
Jorn
|