Plop art versus monumental sculpture
Monumental sculpture doesn’t always have to be big, but it ought to be memorable if it’s to live up to its name.
For a sculptor like Australia’s Todd Stuart, ‘plop or plonk art’—sculpture positioned without meaning or context—does the art, its location, and its viewers a triple disservice. Based in Melbourne, Todd is well aware of the city’s record for monumental—and controversial—sculpture. He’s not alone.
Writing in the Sydney Morning Herald in December 2014, Fairfax media journalist Gina McColl took a focused look at public art. In particular, she examined work commissioned and curated by the cities of Melbourne and Sydney. She made the point that major metropolises have substantial public art collections, and budgets to sustain or expand them.
She also said that ‘ephemeral, pop-up and short-term works make up a large and growing part of art generally and particularly that commissioned by councils. Impermanence — along with “immersiveness” — are to noughties art what “interactivity” was to the nineties.’1
Are historical sculptures still relevant?
The article raises the question: do the monumental sculptures that dot our cities, especially those commemorating historical figures and events, remain relevant to later generations?
A case in point is Melbourne’s historic Burke and Wills monument. Erected by public subscription after the two explorers perished on their return from the continent’s first documented south to north traversal, the sculpture itself has had a nomadic history. Currently in storage while work takes place on the Metro Tunnel underground rail project, its last resting place was on the prominent corner of Collins and Swanston Streets. Before that, it had moved four times, three to notable sites within the CBD, and for a time to the Carlton Gardens on the northern edge of the city.
In May 2018, I published a blog about my impressions of my family visit to the Museum of Old and New Art (MONA) in Tasmania. I referred to the controversial removal of statues, monuments, and memorials from cities and sites in the southern states of America. The art referenced figures and events connected to the Confederate side of the American Civil War.
Social warriors strike at freedom
I made the point that so-called social warriors had struck a hammer blow at freedom of thought and speech by conducting what was effectively an ethnic cleansing of history. In its place I offered the view that they had victimised not only the art, but also those who viewed it, regardless of their politics or beliefs.
The return of Melbourne’s Burke and Wills monument to its current location on completion of the rail works has sparked debate. In April 2017, ABC News reported the Burke and Wills Historical Society had called for the statue’s relocation to a site to the north of the CBD. The society claimed the City Square position meant the sculpture was ‘lost in a jumble of poles, tram wires and buildings’.1
The City of Melbourne has rejected the suggestion, calling the City Square setting ‘an amazing corner — absolute centre of the city, 75,000 people pass it daily.’
A victory for history and common sense?
Is the decision a victory for history and common sense? When cities, municipal councils, and even private developers bow to political correctness, returning the 155-year-old monument to its place in the heart of the city looks like more than a gesture of recognition to Victoria’s past.
Veteran art critic for The Guardian, Jonathan Jones, also takes up the point. Referring to comments by British sculptor, Dame Rachel Whiteread, he wrote in September 2017: ‘Britain is full of bad public art that seems to have no particular reason to be where it is and can give little to its surroundings, let alone inspire or move anyone.
‘A debate no one can win’
‘Yet she has entered a debate that no one can win: a blasted wasteland of critical dispute littered with burnt-out shards of rhetoric. The real problem with putting permanent works of art in public spaces in modern Britain is that we have no consensus about what art should look like or even what it is. One person’s poetic vision is another’s plop art.’3
No one will ever satisfactorily define or gain complete consensus on what makes art, let alone good art. But as long as we have the courage to allow the public debate, and permit people to vote with their opinions, public sculpture will remain the most accessible of the arts.
Sculpture and the flow of discussion around it—like freedom itself—is no less than a critical thermometer for the temperature of a healthy culture.
For a sculptor’s view on art’s influence on your public and private consciousness, call Todd Stuart on 0451 518 865, visit www.toddstuart.com, or download our blog MONA, sculpture, and the curse of knowledge.
(1) https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/public-art-and-social-history-is-the-monument-dead-20141211-122bzf.html
(2) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-10/burke-and-wills-statue-in-melbourne-relocated-for-metro-tunnel/8428766
(3) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/12/plop-art-rachel-whiteread-bad-public-art
