I didn't even get shortlisted on this one which was quite a blow, even though I keep on telling myself to manage my expectations on competitions. I'm hoping this post will help me analyse where I went wrong.
Here's the background:
MVV Environment Devonport Ltd, a company completing a huge energy-from-waste incinerator, invited proposals for a work of art near the entrance to its facility, next to a busy road junction in Plymouth.
Here's some excerpts from the brief:
- The artwork must be site-responsive and engage with the specific context of the location, community and those who will come into contact with the work.
- Artists will consider the relationship of the site with local residents and the surrounding community.
- The site for the commission is not otherwise an area where contemporary art is located and artists should consider how their work will engage with this audience.
- Artists should consider the context of the plant in terms of its commitment to green energy and carbon reduction.
I was shown around the site by Jane Ford, MVV's very helpful community liaison officer, who suggested using scrap or waste from the incinerator in the design.
As one might expect, there's been a lot of local opposition to the incinerator. It's huge and although it will deliver a big reduction in Plymouth's carbon footprint I can understand people living nearby being worried about noxious fumes, smell, noise, and having a gigantic box blocking their view.
As one might expect, there's been a lot of local opposition to the incinerator. It's huge and although it will deliver a big reduction in Plymouth's carbon footprint I can understand people living nearby being worried about noxious fumes, smell, noise, and having a gigantic box blocking their view.
The location is really tricky. Jane gave me a drawing showing the proposed base for the sculpture on the banks of the Camel's Head Creek, which is at the bottom of a 3 or 4 metre high bank next to a busy road junction.
To my mind, this meant my design needed to achieve three key objectives:
- Get over the message that the plant was investing in the future - slashing Plymouth's carbon footprint and in that way, preserving the environment for future generations.
- Engage with the local community in a way that lets it move on from its opposition to the plant.
- Address 2 audiences - people driving past at road level (who won't see the bottom 3 or 4 metres of the sculpture) and people on foot at creek level.
I came up with what I thought was a "killer" idea for Objectives 1 and 2. A "future generation" was right there, in Weston Mill Primary School, opposite the sculpture site, on the other side of the road junction.
I went to see the school's art coordinator, Jennifer Usborne, and came up with a scheme under which all 340 pupils would each paint a tile that I would then incorporate in my design. I proposed combining this with a nature walk along the creek so the school could visit the sculpture and the area would become an attractive place for families to come and admire the handiwork of their little ones.
On Objective 3 - addressing audiences in cars on the road and on foot at a much lower level - my initial proposal was this:
I wasn't entirely comfortable with it. I thought it looked a little ungainly, mainly because the "stalk" of dustbins was too thick.
Anyhow, I submitted it, along with a statement etc, on 24th June, the day before I set off for the New Designers show in London. While I was there, I encountered this over the entrance of Westminster City School:
I'd asked Jane how I should re-submit my proposal and as a result I sent this sketch and 2 other photos (the seed head and a mock up of the view from the road) plus an "addendum".
A long silence ensued and I eventually heard that I hadn't been shortlisted on 16th September. The feedback I got from Jane was as follows:
I suspect the scale issue had to do with the size of the dustbins in relation to the tallness of the masts but I couldn't get Jane to elucidate.
The five shortlisted designs are on the MVV website - here's links to them:
I went to see the school's art coordinator, Jennifer Usborne, and came up with a scheme under which all 340 pupils would each paint a tile that I would then incorporate in my design. I proposed combining this with a nature walk along the creek so the school could visit the sculpture and the area would become an attractive place for families to come and admire the handiwork of their little ones.
On Objective 3 - addressing audiences in cars on the road and on foot at a much lower level - my initial proposal was this:
I wasn't entirely comfortable with it. I thought it looked a little ungainly, mainly because the "stalk" of dustbins was too thick.
Anyhow, I submitted it, along with a statement etc, on 24th June, the day before I set off for the New Designers show in London. While I was there, I encountered this over the entrance of Westminster City School:
Scrap plastic bottles forming a giant seed-head!
I decided I should rethink my design and I eventually did this almost from scratch, coming up with this:
A long silence ensued and I eventually heard that I hadn't been shortlisted on 16th September. The feedback I got from Jane was as follows:
Your submission generated a lot of discussion, however it was felt that there were issues with scale in your proposal. The concept of working with the local primary school was a very positive aspect of your application.
I suspect the scale issue had to do with the size of the dustbins in relation to the tallness of the masts but I couldn't get Jane to elucidate.
The five shortlisted designs are on the MVV website - here's links to them:
I'm surprised that most of these designs take no account of the big difference in height between the proposed foundations at creek level and the road, particularly as the need to take account of the setting was spelled out in the brief.
However, there's some big lessons I can learn from this project:
Positives
- The school idea was a cracker
- I totally rethought the design when I encountered a new idea - a lesson from the Derriford Hospital project
Negatives
- I should have produced a much more polished submission on a single design board.
- It would pay to get proficient at 3D modelling so I can make snazzier submissions
- I should have worked harder on developing a homogeneous design. My submission was a collection of bits and pieces.
- It was a mistake to submit before the deadline. Having to submit an addendum meant my submission was even more scrappy.
Anyhow, Jodie made a big thing out of making sure you read the brief and address it, which prompted me to talk to her afterwards for a little whine. I addressed the brief on this project and it was clear to me that some of the shortlisted artists hadn't! I was misled by it!
Apparently, they are now talking about moving the whole idea to a different location - one that sidesteps the issues that had dictated my "two-level" design. So I feel a little hard-done by.
A similar sort of thing happened on the Derriford sculpture project. I spent a lot of time and effort making sure that my design was achievable only to discover that the alternatives were nowhere near as "developed" and that the selection process (so far?) seems to have focused mainly on aesthetics and almost ignored the practicalities!
UPDATE 2:
The idea of getting pupils at local schools to paint tiles for something to do with the plant might get resurrected. It might turn into objects on a nature trail through the woods.
UPDATE 3:
The winner ended up being a bell cast from scrap metal coming out of the incinerator, proposed by A Mackie (see link above).
I think the idea was clever although the proposed support structure looked really ugly. I understand that aspect has been redesigned.
As already noted, the installation has also been shifted to a different location - one that sounds a lot less visible to passers-by.
No comments:
Post a Comment