Runquist Reflection
As the quarter comes to a close, I was grateful to take a break from studying for my more traditional finals and to tackle this assignment. Like the Google Remix project or the hour of people watching earlier in the quarter, it’s fun to explore this unit’s subject, Public Art, by experiencing it in addition to reading others’ points of view. As I walked over to the Knight Library I thought about the Runquist Murals and how my purpose was specifically to view them rather than use the library as I had so many times before. It felt like I was heading to a museum exhibit.
I spent a good amount of time looking at each of the murals and in truth, really saw them for the first time. Many, many times I passed them on my way to one study session or another but I never took the time to truly see them. This moment reminded me of Alex Grey’s chapter, “Deeply Seeing “ that we read for the unit on Creative Spirituality. I had found the reading difficult and Grey’s self importance annoying, but in seeing rather than just looking at the murals, I can agree with him when he says, “Seeing occurs when our attention is arrested by a person, object, or scene. Our mind stops chattering and pays attention. We see both the shape of the thing and it’s meaning to us.” (Grey, p. 72) In taking time to really “see” the Runquist Murals, two areas of interest emerged for me – capturing history and ethnic and gender diversity. In my mind they are interwoven and I will strive to make that clear in my response.
The Runquist Murals tell a historic story of the evolution of science and the arts. In addition, the lens through which the artists and brothers Albert and Arthur created the murals reflects the times and environment in which they lived and worked. World War II, the depression, and the natural beauty of the Pacific Northwest all contributed to the outcome. In other words, they capture notable people and moments in history but the very nature of the work is informed by their own lives. In Erika Doss’ article Public Art Controversy: Cultural Expression and Civic Debate, she discusses the idea that public works of art are hard to pin down and define because the very concept of “public” art is, “a multifaceted arena.” (Doss, 2) She further says, “Public art’s multifaceted dimensions segue with the multifaceted forms and multiple publics of America itself.” (Doss, p. 2) What I believe Doss is saying is that we, the “public” all have differing views of what we know to be valuable and true and therefore should be reflected in our art. By displaying the murals, the University of Oregon is capturing a moment in time from a particular pair of artists who are alumni of the university as well as being native sons.
I can understand that some aspects of the murals might be troubling when looking at them through a modern lens. The obvious omission of people of color and women, in a piece that is about the history of the world, is notable. However, this lack of gender and ethnic diversity gave rise to the University’s creation of the Runquist Project which, “ … looks to create a dialogue centered …” (A Response To Runquist’s Murals) around the murals. Rather than removing the murals because they don’t represent the public’s prevailing points of view, the University has created a place to surface and discuss difficult topics. Doss discusses this phenomenon when she describes the controversy over several works of public art and the fact that they sometimes don’t survive when there is pressure to remove them or destroy them. In summary she says, “ … the shifting circumstances of American public culture and … original intentions … are often subject to change and reconsideration.” (Doss p. 4)
This is where I believe the idea capturing history is interwoven with that of cultural diversity. The public art history of our country is riddled with examples that ignore the true diversity of the American people and yet altering or removing these works rather than use them as a place to engender dialogue seems to me to be a mistake. As a nation, how else do we learn not to repeat the past or to look at society through different eyes? Doss captures this sentiment when she says, “Grounded in conversation, dialogue, and often debate, public art can serve as a symbol of civic examination, prompting further debates about community needs, hopes and histories. As an instrument of public conversation, public art can become a catalyst for civic and national revitalization. Often because it is controversial.” (Doss, p. 10) I imagine this is exactly the point of keeping the Runquist Murals in the Knight Library and the creation of the The Runquist Project.
Grey, A. (2001). Art as Spiritual Practice. The Mission of Art (1st ed., pp. 205-233). Boston & London: Shambhala.