Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning The University of Melbourne Public Art in the City of Melbourne Its Typology and Planning November 1999 Dongsuk Shin Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning The University of Melbourne Public Art in the City of Melbourne Its Typology and Planning November 1999 Subject: Masters Research Project Coordinator: Dr. Ray Green Supervisor: Andrew Saniga Written by Dongsuk Shin Contents Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgments iii List of Tables iv List of Figures v 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Research Questions and Objectives 1 1.2. Approaches 2 1.3. Significance 4 2. Background 5 2.1. Definitions of Public Art 5 2.2. Kinds of Public Art and Settings 8 2.3. Roles of Public Art 11 2.4. Public Art Policies and Planning 15 3. Methodology 23 3.1. Chronological Analysis 25 3.2. Geographical and Locational Analysis 33 3.3. Content Analysis 41 3.4. Changes of Public Artworks before and after 1973 55 3.5. Artworks in Urban Context 60 4. Conclusion 65 Appendix A. Public Artworks, Part of the City of Melbourne Collection 68 B. Public Artworks Complimented by a Survey 100 Glossary 109 Bibliography 112 Public Art in the City of Melbourne: Its Typology and Planning i Abstract Abstract Public art began with outdoor sculpture as symbolism or embellishment, and public artworks were increased dramatically over the world in the 1960s. However, debate on the definition of public art is still going on: ‘Artworks in Public Places’ and ‘Artworks by/with the public’. Roles and content of public art in Melbourne have been altered and they have affected the typology chronologically and geographically. Awareness of significance of site-specific artworks leads artists to design artworks in the urban context. As another catalyst for public art, community art projects may not be inseparable from neighbourhood character. Site-specificity and execution of community art projects may always need collaboration. Public Art in the City of Melbourne: Its Typology and Planning ii Acknowledgments Acknowledgments I have to thank many people for their time and help. First of all, I would like to thank Andrew Saniga, my supervisor, for helpful comments and generous advice. I would like to thank those people in Cultural Development of Melbourne City Council, who have provided information about outdoor artworks, and urban and public art policy: Dave Hamra, Alison Fraser and Dodd Haunt. Also, I would like to thank Ray Green, subject coordinator, for his special consideration. When I lost my final works at the end of semester because of my personal computer problem, he extended my due date. I am seriously grateful for professional life in Object Plan, Seoul where I became interested in public art for the first time. Most of all, I would like to thank my wife and professional colleague, Youngju Choi, for her support and discussion. Without her help, this thesis would not have been possible. Lastly, all photographs and maps are prepared based on a survey except the following which I would like to acknowledge: Figures 2-4 (source: Robinette, 1976), Figures 5-8 (source: Wagenknecht-Harte, 1989), Figures 11-12 (source: Fleming and Tscharner, 1987), and Photos 10, 38 and 69 in sculpture category in Appendix A (source: City of Melbourne, 1995). I dedicate the thesis to my lovely baby who will start her life next April. Public Art in the City of Melbourne: Its Typology and Planning iii List of Tables List of Tables Table 1. Factors for analysing ..................................................................................................... 24 Table 2. Number of artworks by categories................................................................................. 29 Table 3. Distribution of MCC public artworks by suburbs ......................................................... 36 Table 4. Locational distribution of MCC artworks by types of locations ...................................40 Table 5. Classification of forms of sculpture............................................................................... 42 Table 6. Relationship between forms and memorials..................................................................44 Table 7. Classification of memorials by themes..........................................................................44 Table 8. Materials for sculpture................................................................................................... 46 Table 9. Classification of painting............................................................................................... 48 Table 10. Classification of water features ................................................................................... 49 Table 11. Classification of pavement art..................................................................................... 51 Table 12. Classification of drinking fountains ............................................................................ 52 Table 13. Classification of others category ................................................................................. 53 Table 14. Summary of changes of public artworks before and after 1973..................................59 Public Art in the City of Melbourne: Its Typology and Planning iv List of Figures List of Figures Figure 1. Research flowchart......................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Clement Meadmore, Lippincott, Inc., North Haven, Connecticut. ................................8 Figure 3. Eero Saarinen, Gateway Arch, St. Louis, Missouri........................................................ 8 Figure 4. Willi Gutmann, The Big One, Peachtree Centre, Atlanta............................................... 8 Figure 5. Henry Moore, in front of Dallas City Hall, Texas.......................................................... 9 Figure 6. George Segal, 3 People on 4 Benches, Grove Isle. ........................................................ 9 Figure 7. Richard Serra, Tilted Arc, Manhattan, New York.......................................................... 9 Figure 8. Irwin and the SWA Group, Dallas, Texas.................................................................... 10 Figure 9. Petrus Spronk, Architectural Fragment, 1992 ............................................................. 13 Figure 10. Ron Robertson-Swann, Vault, 1980........................................................................... 14 Figure 11. Drawing of Bethesda's Art Plan. ................................................................................ 17 Figure 12. The Townscape Institute devised this art plan for Richmond's proposed arts district.19 Figure 13. Surveyed area............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 14. Apollo of Belvedere, c.1780, Queen Victoria Gardens............................................... 25 Figure 15. Boy on a Turtle, c.1850, Fitzroy Gardens .................................................................. 25 Figure 16. Charles Summers, River God Fountain, 1862, Fitzroy Gardens................................ 25 Figure 17. Charles Summers, Burke and Wills Monument, 1865, Swanston Street Walk .......... 26 Figure 18. Change of the number of artworks over time.............................................................26 Figure 19. Clement Meadmore, Awakening, 1968, AMP Square................................................ 26 Figure 20. Proportion of artworks over time ............................................................................... 27 Figure 21. Change of categories of artworks over time...............................................................28 Figure 22. Change and proportion of artworks over time ........................................................... 30 Figure 23. Peter Corlett, Sir Edward "Weary" Dunlop Memorial, 1995, Kings Domain ........... 31 Figure 24. Change by character of artworks................................................................................ 31 Figure 25. Ray Thomas, Another View Walking Trail Site 10, 1995, Alexandra Gardens.......... 32 Figure 26. Ian Sprague and participants, People's Path, 1979, Fitzroy Gardens ........................ 32 Figure 27. Classification of suburbs............................................................................................ 34 Figure 28. Change of artworks by suburb ................................................................................... 35 Figure 29. Distribution of artworks by suburbs........................................................................... 37 Figure 30. Distribution of artwork in the CAD ........................................................................... 38 Figure 31. Change of types of locations ...................................................................................... 39 Figure 32. Change of forms of sculpture..................................................................................... 41 Figure 33. G. A. Lawson, Roberts Burns Memorial, 1904, Treasury Gardens. .......................... 41 Public Art in the City of Melbourne: Its Typology and Planning v List of Figures Figure 34. Sir Bertman Mackennal, King Edward VII Memorial, 1920, Queen Victoria Gardens.42 Figure 35. John E. Robinson, Water Children, 1975, Queen Victoria Gardens.......................... 42 Figure 36. Tom Bass, Genii, 1973, Queen Victoria Gardens...................................................... 43 Figure 37. Bernice McPherson, Di Christenson,