Public Art
Public arts are seen in many areas, different countries. Their forms often become landscapes, but not always. It would be a common that most people gathered together and enjoy the interpretation of the works. By enjoying the works, most people get inspired and receive unknown power from it. In the reading “Public art controversy” by Doss, he states that “These early programs were guided by the idea that public art was a form of civic improvement and could help generate a shared sense of civic and national identity.” Obviously, no matters the format of public arts are, audiences create aesthetic reactions, interpret what messages artists try to convey and get impression on them.
Referring to a mural exhibited in Knight Library, I was curious whether it is included in public art or not. The mural looked like simple and abstract. I think the public art should have a common sense that everyone can share with. According to Doss, he states that “Being a public depends on the shared assumptions of its participants that they comprise America’s public sphere, and are hence entitled to its rights and privilege.” In terms of the definition, the mural in Knight Library seemed to be a normal and not special at all. I stopped by the mural and stared at the work for a time. I tried to interpret the meaning of the work that the artist implied on. At first glances, I could not figure out what the mural is telling about. Honestly, it seemed to be a kind of normal art because of the similar facial expression and monotonous style. I thought the art did not take a long time to be created. However, looking at the mural specifically and slowly enhanced me to respect the mural in some ways. The three layers based on structure of a tree definitely showed an evolution of arts in U.S. Obviously, the mural expressed the value of art in U.S and appreciation of art in evolution. Also, the artist focused on conveying the history of arts in US by making detailed clothes and backgrounds to show development. Although each layer included different depiction of art and era, the mural created harmony. The hierarchy structure also revealed that today’s art has been changing over years and the art absolutely unites all audiences to be proud of experience fantastic works. By fierce changes on arts, audience might share aesthetic senses, amazing depiction of art developments. It obviously informs a history of art and opens a room for audiences to feel their pride of being the US identity and privilege.
In my experience, I had a memory to get impressed on a public art which depicts an era when Japan suppressed Korea. When I was in elementary school, I went to excursion and saw the public art. It was a mural that most people gathered in front of the work. The mural depicted how tragic the ancestor overcomes. It did not deliver a cruel scene on the work but most of people imagined that. I was inspired by the works that could not leave the place. Many thoughts passed away on me and thanked to our ancestors who overcame the tragedy and built good infrastructures for our generation. The mural obviously gave huge impacts on children who were there and evoked them to have a patriotic spirit. In foreigner’s perspective, the mural definitely explained the history of Korea. However, in common, we all had the same notion that numerous people were sacrificed to get an independency.
Doss states in his essay that “That’s because whether permanent or temporary, figurative or abstract, man-made or mass produced, public art is as diverse as the people who view it.” Depending on countries or cultures, the public arts are diverse and also the method of delivering messages might be different. However, people who view the public arts have the similar sense they receive. In public places, or inside a building, public arts grab audiences’ attentions and people strongly have a pride to be involved in the region where the public arts are placed. The public arts definitely generate a shared sense of civic and national (regional) identity.