Twenty-seven things Kaslovians mostly agree on when it comes to public art

As we explained in a previous post, in the spring and summer of 2014, two of us interviewed 55 citizens of this area about public art in Kaslo and North Kootenay Lake. Our intention at the get-go was to get feedback on the nitty-gritty of the draft public art policy, but we quickly realized that what people really wanted to talk about was public art itself, not just policy, and we revised our questions accordingly. Considering that public art can sometimes be a contentious, hot-button topic, and given that many of us around here make it a point of honour not to agree on anything, we were pleasantly surprised—actually we were shocked—to discover how much agreement there was.

What follows, then, is the points on which most of the people we talked with agreed.

The context of public art in Kaslo is very important to nearly everyone.  Much of what follows is outside the bailiwick of KPASAC Kaslo Public Art Select Advisory Committee), but nevertheless provides this context. A number of people hoped that KPASAC will coordinate with those responsible for these other aspects of Kaslo’s overall visual landscape: other Village committees, non-profits, business owners, individuals.  In any case, nearly all agreed that whatever Kaslo does with public art should complement and enhance this overall visual environment, and be enhanced by it. This includes the following:

> Kaslo’s natural setting (mountains, forest, lake, rivers, streams, clouds, wildlife);

The village’s historic / iconic buildings (e.g. Old Village Hall, St. Andrew’s United Church and St. Mark’s Anglican Church, the Langham Cultural Centre, and many others);

seniorshall
Seniors Hall, Kaslo. ©DBorsosphoto

> The Moyie, our lovingly-restored sternwheeler;

> The village’s trees. Those we interviewed felt that too many trees are being cut down.  Everyone we interviewed expects that, if cutting is necessary, maximum transparency and accountability, and overwhelmingly people like and want trees in the village, and consider them a vital part of the village’s visual landscape;

>  Municipal  gardens, verges, parks, and the foreshore. (There has been some disagreement over the degree to which the foreshore has been groomed, but that’s another story. The point here is that the foreshore matters to people.)

The Kaslo River Trail, including its information signage, walking tour, benches, and of course its two pedestrian bridges;

kaslo_trailblazers_bridge
The first of two of Kaslo Trailblazer’s beautiful foot bridges

> The historic look of Front St, as maintained according to Village guidelines. (Everyone likes the guidelines, but also believes that in the interest of fairness, all businesses must follow them. What people resent is lax or inconsistent enforcement, not the guidelines themselves.);

> The village’s signage.  Our interviews did not focus on municipal signage nor does the Public Art Policy cover it, but a number of interviewees stressed the role that municipal signage plays in visually defining a small community, and in directing visitors toward key spots (e.g. the historic downtown).  One informant praised Silverton’s as well as Crawford Bay’s distinctive and pleasing signs, which are based on a consistent template throughout that village.  This may be something the Village wishes to explore in future.

> Yard Art.  A number of interviewees talked about the delights of Kaslo’s yard art, which is to say, art on private residential property.  Dragons atop roofs; rows of flagpoles flying flags from around the world; fences using cross-country skis as pickets, outdoor paintings, folk poetry offering words of advice to passersby, fibreglass wildlife, and of course, everywhere, constructions of driftwood and riverrock: this list barely scratches the surface. While in no way under the jurisdiction of the Public Art Policy, these exhuberant and highly imaginative displays enhance Kaslo for locals and tourists alike, and to some extent help define a distinctly funky and playful West Kootenay culture.

What our interviewees want to see in Kaslo, in terms of public art itself, they agreed that all pieces should be:

> of high artistic quality and craftsmanship, whatever genre they may be,

> original, dynamic, interesting, i.e. not “the same old thing,” derivative or cliched,

> from the artist’s heart and unique vision, i.e. artistically authentic, challenging in some cases, but intended neither to pander nor to gratuitously shock (e.g. “meat art”), nor to intimidate those who don’t “get it”,

imbued with a sense of place (i.e. this place!)

 

 

loggerschopprayerwheelsmall
©DBorsos photo.    This lovely piece of public art ” Loggers Prayer Wheel” by Kate Tupper, offers a crossover between the arts and forestry sectors; both important parts of our community.

 

 

> thoughtfully placed in appropriate locations,

> properly maintained at all times, and

> appropriately and respectfully deaccessioned when need be.

> Kaslo should not become a theme park filled with a single genre of work, but rather, should feature a variety of genres and subject matter, reflecting Kaslo’s diversity and different people’s tastes. That said, “mini-themes” can provide a sense of coherence without taking over the village. Suggestions included environment, history, wildlife, music—anything reflecting a sense of place.

Nor did anyone want Kaslo to have a giant novelty mascot like those one sees in so many small towns (e.g. Mr. PeeGee in Prince George). All but one interviewee said they did not want a giant inflatable pot-smoking, chainsaw-wielding unicorn with a tie-dyed hard hat greeting visitors at the bridge (though most agreed that something in that spot would be good). In six words: no kitsch, nothing garish, nothing gigantic.

No one said they wanted overtly devotional religious imagery, and several said they didn’t.

Nothing that anyone might consider obscene (“unless it’s by someone too famous for us to afford anyway”)  or racist.

Placement is very important. And if something turns out to not “work” in a particular location, it’s okay to move it after a period of time.

General rule of thumb: make potentially controversial or “challenging” pieces temporary rather than permanent, especially at the beginning. And in general, rotation should be the norm rather than the exception.

Many appreciate the spontaneity (and sometimes topicality) of rogue art, and believes this contributes significantly to our local culture and identity.

Likewise re. roadside shrines and other memorials.

Art by small children, while charming,  should be placed judiciously.

Re. the May Days mural on the wall of Kaslo Community Pharmacy:  except for one person, everyone agreed it has been delightful but is reaching the end of its lifespan.

We found a great deal of enthusiasm for performance in public places (by this we mean village-owned spaces where no entrance fee is charged). While performance per se (e.g. music, theatre) is outside the scope of KPASAC, and the village’s policies and procedures re. performance are already in place, Kaslovians would likely respond well to visual art / performance crossovers. Ryan Cook’s public performance as he chainsaw-carved Kaslo’s Protectors (Osprey and Tree Spirit) at Loggersports in May 2014 was very popular.  In other cases, where no permanent installation results, such performances can be a way of trying edgier / riskier projects.

ryancookandbird
Ryan Cook working on his chainsaw project at Loggers Sports, 2015.  ©DHunterphoto

People expressed a strong preference for local artists rather than imports, unless there is no one local able to meet the needs of a particular project.

Everyone agreed that everyone would never agree on anything to do with public art. And yet when we asked people about the pieces already in place, nearly everyone agreed that they were all suitable. Everyone we pointed this out to agreed it was a curious paradox.