 I
am struggling again, trying to like the plethora of bits of sculpture
that increasingly litters the canal system. In principle I am all for
the idea – public works of art that enhance the landscape and expand the
viewer’s cultural experience – great! It’s just the end results that are
often so disappointing. Why?
Let’s start with the second bit first, the actual
impact that the artwork has on the viewer, the visual shock or pleasure,
the unexpected statement or question, the challenge or enlightenment.
That is what the progressive artist sets out to do, to make something
that has never been made before, and because it is new there will only
be a limited number of souls that will immediately embrace that sort of
artistic statement in public. But just as we trust our lawmakers to
interpret the law so we increasingly trust respected artists to
introduce us to some new art. Some turns out to be wonderful, refreshing
all our spirits whilst other bits still seem like rubbish, even years
later. That’s OK surely? We’ve all got to learn, and sometimes fail,
whether as artist or viewer. That’s progress rather than ossification,
two steps forward, one step back.
But every artist knows that the position of the
artwork is also critical, the situation in which it is exhibited, the
environment it becomes part of, whether art gallery, sculpture park or
canal towpath. That situation affects the artwork and the way it is
appreciated, but much more important to my argument here is that the
artwork also critically affects the environment it is inserted into.
Here I return to my starting point again – public works of art that
enhance the landscape. If the landscape doesn’t need enhancing, then
please leave it alone. The addition of a bit of art does not per se
improve things although it will undoubtedly alter them. And that is why
we need much more careful management and choice of these sites overseen
by a sympathetic expert in environmental, cultural and historic canal
matters – all of them at once! What we seem to have at present is
box-ticking – a bit of art is good for you - tick- some community
involvement if the local schoolkids can have an input - tick - and make
it look less like a historic transport system and more like any other
municipal park – tick.
The canals are also suffering from an infestation of
park benches of various sorts and although these seats are not primarily
designed as pieces of sculpture in the abstract they perform like
sculpture, man-made intrusions that create unforeseen visual problems.
Regardless of what they are nominally for they are large lumps of stuff
inserted into an existing milieu and, like it or not, they have a strong
visual impact. That impact may be gentle and sympathetic or brutal and
obtrusive but please don’t kid yourself they have no impact at all. Just
because the majority of us are not consciously visually aware of the
effect they are having on the environment these seats, like road signs
and adverts everywhere else, affect us all constantly. But they are a
good thing, surely?
The original spirit of what they are intended to do is
undoubtedly benevolent – resting places, a viewpoint perhaps to heighten
the appreciation of a particular place, a pause for peace and
contemplation. (Kind to the elderly – tick.) Now generally it could,
perhaps should be regarded as simply churlish to moan about such a
generous gesture, but if, by thoughtless positioning, that bench spoils
something special that is already there then it is misplaced benevolence
and a waste of good nature which we can ill afford. The Montgomery Canal
has sprouted a fresh crop of seats lately. They are innocuous enough in
themselves, carefully made in good quality oak, though it seems a pity
that the designer has felt it necessary to cut the planking into
slightly wavy shapes, reminiscent of cheap wainy edge planking I
suppose, or perhaps of wavy water. At least they are not painted pale
blue. But these seats are more than gentle comfort stations. They are
stolid statements of presence, of ownership, of the intervention of
grant aid to improve the canal to make it more accessible (tick.) They
have to be seen to be doing their job- they have to be seen, to be
making their statement about intervention and improvement, to show that
someone has spent money on providing a practical facility for the
community. (tick.) Why else put one at the Wern where there are two
benches already and a picnic table in the car park? Why else put another
at Maesbury that already has a bench every quarter of a mile?
Last year the restored Shropshire Union narrow boat
Saturn was involved in a little bit of historic film making for the
BBC. For the location we needed to find a piece of relatively unspoilt
canal, accessible by a horse drawn cart, one without visual anachronisms
like signs, litter bins, concrete bollards (or park benches.) We found
just the space by Spiggots Bridge at Maesbury Marsh, a classic canal
bridge in pleasant weathered brick and a perfect timeless situation for the historic job in
hand. This year we would be too late because a brash new seat has been
installed right next to the bridge spoiling that classic simplicity,
visually degrading yet again another piece of historic canal
architecture. Why couldn’t they put it ten yards away where it would not
impinge on the atmosphere that they presumably want people to enjoy? It
is pretty permanent I’m afraid – it’s set in concrete foundations that
look as if they will outlast the seat by a hundred years, and perhaps
the bridge as well. And no, I haven’t got a photo of the bridge before
the seat was installed – I don’t usually expect to photograph absolutely
everything that might get spoilt by thoughtlessness. Perhaps I should,
but it would be a pessimistic and depressing policy to have to follow. |
Trevor Wharf, Llangollen Canal |
