I sometimes feel as though I missed out on an important period in Oxford’s celebration of culture. Returning to town in 2018 after more than three decades away, I had only passing awareness of the people and activities in theatre, art, poetry, that were evident in the Riverside Art Gallery, poetry festivals, performing arts, etc. I was just becoming re-settled when the pandemic arrived and shut down so much of that public activity. Those initiatives can be very difficult to launch, to fund, and to implement at the best of times.
Taking a longer view, there does seem to also be a distinct lack of attention or interest in the area of public art, and artistic expression in public infrastructure. Why can’t we have nice things?
Canada’s youth as a nation explains in part why our public and private infrastructure — the buildings, bridges, gathering places, parks, are less grandiose than, say, the countries of Europe from which the majority of our settler population originated. There are thousands of years of urban development behind the great architecture of Paris, London, Bonn, Moscow, Amsterdam, Edinburgh, Prague, Budapest, Bratislava, Athens and so many other visually splendid cities.
Notable examples include Valencia’s City of Arts and Science in Spain; Copenhagen’s The Black Diamond in Denmark; The Kunsthaus Graz in Austria; the Metropol Parasol in Seville, Spain; and the concert hall Elbphilharmonie Hamburg in Germany (KNYCX Journeying).
Even in rural communities, the styles of building and cultural expression seem to be effortlessly created and re-created.
When we think of putting style and innovative / artistic design into public buildings and spaces, the stumbling blocks are many, from a lack of interest among planners to perhaps the overriding reason: justifying the expense. A square office building is straightforward and easy to build. Art can seem frivolous; expensive; something that it would be nice to do, if only we had the money. It could be argued that a lack of cultural and artistic education in our society has left us with a population unaccustomed to appreciate the value of art.
It’s not like nobody is talking about this stuff. There is the interesting work of the Creative City Network of Canada, which connects cultural planners among municipalities across the country for peer education / sharing / planning. But these are larger urban centres which have far more financial flexibility in their budgets and more community cultural organizations interested in pushing public art.
Would you rather look at a five-story brick-shaped concrete building? Or a work of art that greets you on the walk to work in the morning, or a relaxing shaded park with sculptures and colour and music at the end of a long day, helping to salve the drudgery of daily life?
Here’s a well-known secret that somehow continues to elude public discourse: Art has value. I’m not talking about having a Van Gogh hanging in your living room. It can be a driver of economic activity, particularly tourism. It makes our public space welcoming, encouraging people to spend time in its presence, which can help to alleviate “dead zones” particularly in downtown cores. The Centre for Policy Alternatives has put some thought into what public art means and how it can contribute to vibrant societies:
A bonus of public art is the nature of free access, opening the opportunity to communities’ cultural values and a sense of identity without the price tag of a ticket. Public art offers artists the possibility to bring different ideas and disciplines together, advancing artistic practice, capturing the spirit of local histories and energies in a common ground. Public art is a magnet inviting locals and tourists to reinvent urban life, making generic urbanscapes unique, increasing a sense of place with a distinctive character. The opposite is also true: lack of public art makes cities and urban spaces generic and lacking in spirit. (PDF)
Oxford has its own public art, of course! That would be Oxley, the large concrete blueberry located at the Irving gas station at the entrance to town. Relocated from Peticodiak, NB, in 1999, Oxley is a favourite of visitors and locals alike, appearing in vacation photos of folks from all over. It was also a focus of Canada Post’s 2011 Roadside Attractions stamp issue.
Oxford is a small town. On a good day, we have perhaps 1300 residents (and a significant working population that comes from the surrounding area). Our municipal budget topped $3-million this year for the first time, but much of that is spoken for in the terms of existing debt that must be serviced, day-to-day operations, and is being tucked away for future infrastructure work.
But we can still be pretty.
Much of the effort to improve our community’s look comes in the form of citizen volunteers. Local couple Allie Clarke and Maxine Dobson-Clarke, stalwart stewards of Oxford’s Bunny Trail, somehow also find time to tend to the flower garden in front of Town Hall. The Communities in Bloom initiative, which receives municipal funding, has been hit-or-miss depending on whether there is an active group of local volunteers willing to administer the project. The town (under a provincial government programme) has also in the past offered a beautification grant to local businesses, covering a portion of the expense when improving the façade of their buildings in the downtown core.
Ultimately, making our community a nicer-looking place to live may seem as though it should take second place to addressing matters of potholes, vandalism, local drug use, and crime. The counter to that view is that art and design provides a psychological and emotional benefit to the community that contributes to the reduction in those negative aspect of community life.
We can be pretty, and good, and enjoy our surroundings.
In 2022, as we emerged from the pandemic restrictions, Oxford hosted the CBC television series Still Standing (Season 7, Episode 8). Host/Comedian Johnny Harris put the spotlight on Oxford’s recent adversity and its community spirit. I’ll admit not never having heard of the programme before they came to town, but my interest was piqued, leading me to check out the other episodes focusing on small towns across Canada. One in particular I found to be an inspiration: Chemainus, British Columbia (Season 7, Episode 4). This former logging town, facing the collapse of local industry, embraced public art as a vehicle for revitalizing the community through… murals!
I am also a sighted person. And as I come to the conclusion of this article, I realize that all that I have posted above is meaningless to those who cannot enjoy it. Visual art does not directly benefit the visually impaired. What about sound? Greenspace creation that attracts songbirds is limited in the appreciation that those who have auditory impairments might have. We are fortunately, seemingly, in a new era where accessibility and barrier-free design / retrofitting is gaining political and broader social importance (and funding). What does public art mean to those who cannot appreciate it equally with their neighbours?
What kind of public art / building design / municipal expenditure would you like to see?
I couldn’t agree with you more on this topic. I dream of the day when everything is beautiful and accessible.
Comments are closed.