Civic engagement project to community - ezmeralda Castaneda
Civic engagement project to the community
The reasons for a lack of public artworks on campus are varied and include the reasons you mentioned. In my sole, unresearched opinion, the reasons have to do with historic economic conditions and the resulting policies, as well as current funding sources and preferences by the College Administration and Staff.
Southwestern College Chula Vista campus does have 6 historical Public sculptures from the 1960s-early 1970s, which were originally spread throughout the smaller grounds of that era. These sculptures came from a time when there was an abundance of post-War funds funneling into education to support the soldiers enrolling with the G.I. bill. Colleges had enough money for every area, so the Art Department was able to access funds to purchase artworks for the campus, albeit with less funds than other departments at the time, but still proportionally greater than in present times.
The difficult economic situation of Stagflation in the mid to late 1970s resulted in deep budget cuts to education and a policy known as "deferred maintenance" to be implemented. This meant that, in addition to cuts to funding for any new artwork acquisitions, the upkeep and maintenance of our existing public sculptures was also suspended, leaving the historic public artworks uncared for.
The 1980s brought a new economic resurgence mainly through a policy known as deficit spending, which jump-started the economy in the short term but resulted in enormous debts in the long term. While spending in some areas increased (such as the military and defense contracts), the spending on Education also increased, but did not return to its earlier proportional levels. After the previous years of constraints, the decisions on most College campuses were to spend money on new projects, new classes, and staff, and so the policy of deferred maintenance continued, resulting in the expansion of classes and part-time Faculty but no new public art purchases and the continued neglect of the existing sculptures and buildings.
The economic bust and boom cycle continued in the late 1980s, crashing into the tech boom of the 90s, reducing classes and staff in lean times and increasing them again when funds were available. Continuing to prioritize resetting to the previous status quo rather than increasing spending on new artworks.
The 2000s began with a new education policy, President George W. Bush's "No Child Left Behind," which cemented the trend of funding with measurable data metrics. This meant that Federal funds to Colleges now were tied to enrollment, class completions, graduation, and transfer rates, etc. So all campus projects and activities are now viewed through that lens. Any funds for projects (such as the Art Department wishing to purchase public artworks) needed to be justified and prioritized in relation to benefiting enrollment or class completion, or graduation. Since no one is directly responsible for Public Art on campus, and nearly all other projects could more easily be justified by the data metrics for more funds than Public Art, no one has been willing to sacrifice their slice of the budget to propose new Public Art. Why would a Photography professor propose a public art project when it would directly compete with a proposal for new computers or equipment for their classes, etc., especially when they know their computer proposal has a high chance of succeeding and the public art project does not?
New Public Art on campus does exist; however, it reflects the new funding sources of this era. Building and Upgrades are funded through Bonds voted by the public. These Bonds fund all the new building projects on campus and are highly regulated and budgeted. The end choices of architectural styles and any new artworks for the new buildings (inside and out) are now proposed by the specific outside Architects and designers for those projects and ultimately selected by the College Administration, with no input from the Art Department or the Gallery. If the project Architectural firm does not propose new artworks, or if the College Administration does not request it, the new building will be created without any artworks. Or if the choice is to be made between funding new artworks or expanding room size, or technology for new classrooms, public art falls by the wayside.
Ultimately, there is no policy dictating the preservation and expansion of new Public Artworks, there is no person directly responsible for advocating new works, and any new artwork proposals would be pitted against the budget of other upgrades and maintenance of existing art resources. Combine those with limited budgets and the expansion of student services on campus, and there's less money for the Arts in general, and the Visual Arts often are not a consumable or marketable good.
The Performing Arts Center is able to rent out the space for events to offset the cost. The music recitals and theatrical productions charge for entry. Those funds justify the departments' existence. A sculpture on campus by a prominent San Diego artist that is free to view and doesn't draw any additional renown, media attention, or funds makes for a difficult proposal to those handling the funds. Not a high "return on investment" in most people's eyes.
Many Universities have large outside donors to the Arts, which completely fund their Public Art projects on campus (see UCSD, USD). Other Colleges have held their artwork maintenance budget over the years and sustained their works acquired in the 60s & 70s (see Palomar College), and some have more robust student participation in the creation of murals and sculptures.
Grants are available to generate funds for public art purchases; however, there is currently no budget for cleaning or maintenance for artworks on campus, and most Faculty would prefer to write grants that benefit their specific areas rather than the campus in general.
The community is being represented in the public realm
The public realm is being represented by the community and there is not a lot of people releasing the arts to the public areas because there are huge regulations and insurance and on top of the fact that public art releases are expensive and have some requirements. There is a section in the Bonita museum link and they have histories of people who want to release there art to the community. https://bonitahistoricalsociety.org/collections/ There are some exhibitions in San Diego in the Bonita museum and my friend is showing his arts in the museum in Bonita. The Bonita Museum have been trying to raise money for the past 4 years and to help with the community.
I’ve seen the community that I like is the art that they own to the public and nothing is really sitting but it’s super expensive that there’s not a lot of art to show to the actual outside the world public area. My dislike is that the arts that I want to show to the public are expensive and it’s not fair that there’s a lot of restrictions and knowing that you have a pay insurances for it And the way that people who show their art in Private areas where they don’t have to worry about the damage. Some placement I recommend would be the prettier of the museum in southwestern College gallery they are connected, and they are shown of the arts in the great community and it helps and the way that they save up money and use it for the artist to show the art in the gallery can help. Everything’s open nothing is restricted nothing’s closed off, they have different artists and themes and art selections that can surprise you even though there’s not a lot of artist shown in the public.
Comments
Post a Comment