Big Projects

Michael Rosenthal

Publisher

   Last weekend I had the good fortune to be able to spend time in Portland Oregon. From most vista points the view of Mt. Hood is quite extraordinary. What is even more amazing is the waterfront park that was developed on the west side of the Willamette river. It was once a major freeway artery. The politicians there chose to pull up the freeway and replace it with a green way just yards away from the river. One that enhances their beautiful skyline.
   Complete with Skate Parks (yep mostly teenagers), public art, numerous water fountains and lots of pedestrian walkways this major undertaking completely transformed downtown.
   Now there is talk of another big project. One that will unite neighborhoods around a new greenway park, only this one is even more unusual. It requires covering a mile of existing freeway and turning it in to a green belt in the heart of the city. The usual naysayers abound, oh no, too much money, too difficult technically, too tough politically, Yadda yadda yadda. If they thought about the projects they have undertaken before and the great public benefit that ensued they might think differently. Also if they considered future generations. 50 years from now people will say, "gee I remember when they built that park" Now my children and grandchildren get to picnic there.
   There was some talk not long ago about doing something similar here in Santa Monica. The short stretch of freeway near the McClure tunnel can have a lengthened tunnel and add sorely needed open space near the civic center. Perhaps to be used as a community green? We will all need to see the details, provide public input, go through endless meetings and debate the merits in great length. Good, that is what public input is all about. But in the end, as they say in Portland, home of Nike. Just do it.

Unspinning the Web

   Once again, “Solar Web,” the sculpture that the Santa Monica Arts Commission wants to place on the beach near Sea Colony, is in the news.
   At a Rec and Parks Commission meeting last week, seven speakers asked the Commission to forbid placement of the sculpture on the beach on a variety of grounds, ranging from safety to cost. Two people, a former Arts Commissioner and a current Commissioner, spoke in favor of it.
   After listening to the speakers, The Commission decided to hold a public hearing (date, time and place to be announced) on the issue before it makes its final recommendation to the City Council.
   On its face, it seems to be a complex question, touching on everything from aesthetic standards to the well-being of children. Perhaps that’s why the debate over it has gone on so long, why it remains on the City’s agenda of things to do.
   Is the “Solar Web” unsafe? The City says no; critics say yes. The City’s defense is far less compelling that the critics’ offense.
   Will it become a makeshift shelter for homeless people? Perhaps, but if people are setting up housekeeping in sculptures, do we not have far more substantive problems to deal with than the fate of “Solar Web?”
   Is it a work of art? The Arts Commission says yes and cites the artist’s “international reputation.” Its critics say no, and cite the piece itself, as shown in renderings and a model. Since it’s an entirely subjective question, it’s ultimately unanswerable, but the Commission’s previous installations do not inspire much confidence
in its judgment.
   Is it too expensive? Well, it’s $270,000, several times more than its original cost, probably not too much if you like the work, but about $270,000 too much, if you don’t.
   Can we afford to spend $270,000 on one sculpture? That’s a question of quite another stripe. Not unless all the other arts needs in Santa Monica have sufficient funding. And they don’t. The recent recession and the state’s slashing of school budgets has left arts instruction and arts programs for children in tatters. Everyone—including the children themselves—knows the value, the necessity of the arts in their education and their lives.
   Clearly, if we have $270,000 to invest in the arts, we must invest it in programs for our kids, not an inanimate installation in the beach.
Which, of course, brings us to the final question, do we need or want art on our beach? No.
   When this debate began, years ago, when the Arts Commission first proposed the Natural Elements Sculpture Park (NES Park) on the beach, Harry Shearer put it succinctly, saying it amounted to “public vandalism.”
   The beach is sufficient—as it is. It needs no “improvements” or “enhancements” (to use two of the City’s favorite euphemisms).
   The beach does not need to be embellished or decorated, much less cluttered up. It needs to be swept clean. That is not only all the City should be permitted to do; it is the only thing it should be permitted to do.
   The beach is perfect. It cannot be improved upon. Not by Michelangelo or Cezanne or Henry Moore or Picasso, and certainly not by the Santa Monica Arts Commission.
   Clearly, it is time for the Arts Commission to pack up its designs on the beach and put its money and its good intentions to work where they are sorely needed—in arts programs for our children.