Love It Or Hate It? Nominate The ‘Worst Public Art In New England’

By Andrea Shea (@asheaarts)
Oct 25, 2010, 7:25 AM
16 Comments

Art critic Greg Cook stands next to Robert Shure’s Boston Irish Famine Memorial, a nominee for the "worst public art in New England" campaign. (Andrea Shea/WBUR)

BOSTON — Have you ever walked past a piece of public art and marveled at how misguided it seems? Maybe you’ve even had a visceral response, and fantasized about making it go away.

If so, Boston Phoenix art critic and blogger Greg Cook feels your pain.

Cook knows oh so well how public art has long been a contentious issue in Boston. Some people love it, some hate it — others think it should be better. Now he’s asking us — the public — to nominate the “Worst Public Art in New England.”

To talk about his project, Cook and I met at the Boston Irish Famine Memorial in Downtown Crossing. It is two bronze-cast sculptures that depict the Irish immigrant story — before and after. One shows a desperate, emaciated family of three. The second trio is healthy and hopeful since coming to Boston. And they’re all covered in pigeon poop.

“I don’t think the poop is the problem,” Cook said with a laugh, “that’s the nature of public things like buildings and stuff. That’s not the issue. I don’t want to get distracted by pigeons.”

The “issue” is that this $1 million historical memorial tops the list in Cook’s “Worst Public Art in New England” project, now posted on his blog, The New England Journal of Aesthetic Research.

It sounds like art bashing, but Cook says that’s not the point. He says he wants to spark dialogue.

“I’m soliciting nominations,” he explained, reporting he’s gotten about two dozen so far. Then Cook said, “we’re going to have some sort of vote through the New England Journal of Aesthetic Research about what is the worst piece of public art in the area, and then organize a campaign to try to get it removed and then replaced.”

Other nominees include the cement, human figures in Somerville’s Davis Square, the granite benches at the Downtown Crossing T station and the giant whale mural off Route 93 in Boston’s South End.

But why do people despise the Boston Irish Famine Memorial?

Cook read off a list of comments that came in with the nominations.

“Simple-minded, facile, maudlin, utterly appalling and embarrassing, poorly executed, the most-cheesy memorial to human tragedy in Boston,” he said.

I pointed to the word “cringing.” “Yea, cringing,” Cook said, adding, “the Disney realism is a joke.”

It sounds like art bashing, but Cook says that’s not the point. He wants to spark dialogue, and ask why we — the public — feel like we’re stuck with public art once it’s installed.

“And I don’t mean to be sort of flip or move too fast on it,” Cook clarified, “it’s not just about trying to like, willy-nilly get rid of stuff, it’s about seriously asking the community about what doesn’t work and how can we make it better?”

Of course not everybody hates the Boston Irish Famine Memorial. Boston resident Jack Timolty, 53, comes to see it quite often. Sitting next to me in front of the statues he explained, “I’m Irish myself, so my parents were Irish immigrants coming over to this country. And I’ve heard a lot about the potato famine in Ireland, and it needs to be remembered.”

In response to that point, Cook said that if this memorial wins — or loses, as it were — its replacement would also honor the famine.

But what does the city of Boston think of Cook’s “Worst Public Art” crusade?

Karin Goodfellow, director for the Boston Arts Commission, can respond to that.

“People have strong opinions,” she said, “And I think it’s great to give them a place to voice them.”

Goodfellow oversees the notoriously tricky public art process for the city. Artists have criticized its complexity for years. She said she recently launched a website to democratize and streamline the system that puts pieces in the ground. It takes years — and lots of money. So then, what does Goodfellow think about the Boston Irish Famine Memorial’s fate?

The commission director said legal issues, red tape, big name supporters like the Yawkey Foundation — not to mention personal taste — make its removal pretty unlikely.

But, you might be surprised that among the Boston Famine Memorial’s critics is the artist who made it.

Robert Shure's Skylight Studios

View this gallery on Flickr »

“Working on public art is very tricky,” sculptor Robert Shure admitted, as so many public artists do.

I visited him at Skylight Studios, his company in Woburn. Recalling the piece’s history, the artist said a committee came up with the concept for the Famine Memorial in 1998 — not him. Then he executed their design — too quickly.

“Of course I was a lot younger then, and if I had to do it all over again I probably would’ve tried to get more time,” Shure said. “But I mean, when you’re dealing with committees and you’re trying to earn a livelihood, it’s very difficult, especially if you’re not a politician and you’re an artist.”

Shure knows how un-popular the Irish Famine Memorial has been with critics over the years. He also admitted it doesn’t feel very good to know it tops Greg Cook’s list of bad public art. But the sculptor has gotten plenty of commissions besides the Boston Famine Memorial — including a plaque for the Ted Williams Tunnel, and the bronze markers along the Freedom Trail — so this one particular piece hasn’t hurt his ability to make a living.

And so, now, what are we — the public — supposed to take away from all of this?

It’s a tough one. As always, art is a subjective experience. And — good or bad, like it or not — public art is all around us.

What do you think of it?

Greg Cook, the art critic behind “Worst Public Art in New England” wants to know — and, as he puts it, “May the best worst piece win.”

More: Submit your nomination

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on wbur.org.

John

Ironically, I used to enjoy eating my lunch at that spot before they ruined it with that eyesore.
http://therapieboston.net Heleni Thayre

I hate, hate, hate the group of bronze statues memorializing women on the Commonwealth Ave “mall” (the strip of parkland between the east and west lanes of Comm Ave) a few blocks from the Mass Ave end.

Why am I so repelled by it? First and foremost the quality of the sculpture from which the statues were cast is horrifying poor – lacking in detail of garment or face, wholly lacking in grace, kitschy and heavy handed. Everything about it is awkward. I can scarcely bear to look at it and would like to close my eyes while passing it, but that is dangerous while riding a bike. Women deserve better than this.

In contrast I find the exquisitely crafted statue of Polish revolutionary hero Tadeus Kosciuszko on the Boylston St path of the Boston Public Garden to be one of the finest in our city. I seek out the opportunity to view it.

Thank you so much for the chance to vent about something that causes me pain every time I see it.

Heleni Thayre
Patrick Kennedy

Did Cook have any thoughtful criticism on the substance of the memorial that were cut for time? Or does he really just dislike it for no particular reason? All I hear here is a smug self-appointed taste-arbiter giggling about poop and approvingly reading off a list of mean-spirited comments about a memorial to 1.5 million people who starved to death. “Simple-minded, facile, maudlin.” I wonder if these critics would be so quick to sneer and use these loaded words about a statue that (rightly) honored the victims of other well-nigh-genocidal disasters affecting members of other Boston communities, such as the earthquake in Haiti. What is it about the memorial that so offends Cook and his ilk? Its “realism”? There are scores of realistic statues around Boston predating the apparent enlightenment of the art world, when critics suddenly decided that only statements made in the abstract could have value. Scores of statues honoring long-dead city fathers and other Yankee “great men” that clearly will never be torn down at the behest of a smarmy contest. It is a horrific insult to suggest that a different standard should apply to the Irish Famine Memorial and that it should be destroyed to satisfy some heartless, thoughtless, decadent cynics’ subjective idea of taste.
John

One can dislike an ugly statue without dishonoring the victims of the famine. There is no need to add insult to injury by remembering them with such a poor memorial.
Tim

I remember when those Irish Famine statues first appeared. I was horrified by the facile depiction of the consequences of the famine with “before” and “after” statues of Irish immigrants. Immigrating to the United States and becoming successful and healthy is not as easy as buying a face cream and applying it “…for as little at two weeks!” The message of the statues is bizarrely self-congratulatory and the statues themselves are poorly executed.
PK

But can anyone explain what exactly makes it “poor” public art? Any more or less than, say, George Washington on a horse? Besides “I don’t like it.” (Or, worse, the vitriol expressed by Cook’s two dozen nominators.) What precisely are the objective criteria this piece of art is failing to fulfill? If the problem is that “the starving family looks exactly like a starving family,” then that is a non-problem except in the minds of a pretentious minority. If the problem is “It makes me uncomfortable when I’m trying to eat my lunch,” well, then, I’d say mission accomplished.
http://gregcookland.com/journal Greg Cook

@Patrick Kennedy: First let me say that the Irish Famine Memorial was a piece that a number of people nominated, but that it’s not at the top of my list of worst public pieces in Boston. (The top of my list is the benches in the downtown crossing T stop.) But I agree with some folks here and some people who nominated it that the Irish famine deserves a memorial that better honors the victims of that great tragedy. The issue is not about realism or abstraction, or making people uncomfortable to eat their lunch there (which could be a worthwhile accomplishment), or different standards for the Irish. (I’m Irish-American.) The problem is that the people depicted by the statue — especially the starving figures — are overwrought and cheesy. And so they do not convey the depths or complexity of that horrible event. The victims of that tragedy and the survivors who came to America to create better lives for us, their descendants, deserve better.
PK

Greg, thanks for your detailed response. I guess I just don’t see it as cheesy, but some obviously do, so these things are subjective, which perhaps was the point of your project. It’s just unfortunate that the two pictures on your blog are in fact of Irish famine memorials. Not an artist myself but surely a member of the public, I don’t see either memorial as radically worse or better than the many other sculptures around depicting recognizably human figures, so it’s difficult to imagine what, realistically, would replace them. A slightly better-done realistic statue? Probably not gonna happen. An abstract sculpture meant to evoke starvation in general? That might be fine, but it would be a shame for the many Irish-Americans who connect with this one in particular already. I do suspect an unconscious bias on the part of at least some detractors.(See “bizarrely self-congratulatory” below, and other comments I remember from when the statue was new.) But everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, especially about something that exists seemingly permanently in a public space as opposed to behind walls in a museum. Obviously, you’ve provoked a lot of thought and discussion about an interesting topic.
Bruce Petschek

In my opinion the Irish famine memorial statue is the boldest, most
thought and emotion stimulating piece of art in Boston. Octavio Paz
once said “What distinguishes modern art from the art of other ages is
criticism” I think that a campaign to label “bad public art” results from a lack of skill in changing lenses. Myself, I appreciate when a piece of art challenges me to use a new lens that I have not used before. The claim that a particular group “deserves better” is a manipulative phrase camouflaging the lack of a substantive argument. I can see how this particular piece would be a target of such a campaign because we Americans really abhor any reminders that there is suffering anywhere in the world and for sure a statue that so skillfully and unquestionably depicts starvation just makes it hard
for us to enjoy our fries and sodas. It’s quite possible
that years from now when we are not so addicted to overeating that we
will appreciate that work for it’s exceptional stirring and provocative qualities that are evidenced by this discussion itself. If the history of art financing had been regulated by contemporary notions of popularity I think we would have none of the great works of art that are in the world today.
John

I think that a campaign to label “bad public art” results from a lack of skill in changing lenses. – Posted by Bruce Petschek

– It does look better when I take my glasses off.
John

So much public art looks horrible because it is designed by committee and has to please everyone (especially if it commemorates something and the backers are more concerned with getting the commemoration than in producing art). Instead of one artist’s vision, you end up with lowest common denominator boring works.
Miles

Dear john,
i was reading this blog…it appears you have nothing better to do in life. i go to school… you sit at home and bully people who are trying to give their honest opinion.

P.S. The message i’m try to tell you is GET A LIFE! and don’t cyber bully people.
Peter Lake

Where do I vote?
And would it be giving too much away to say I agree about “Famine”.

But why stop with it being the worst public art in Boston?
I may be the worst ANYWHERE, especially since Saddaam Hussein’s statue was toppled.

If it weren’t made of a lasting material I’d say it was a parody.

Alice in Wonderland or Balto — in Central Park — both modest, realistic portrayals of a fictional and real character elicit more admiration and joy. Check out Balto’s nose — polished smooth by his admirers.

No one’s admiring “Famine”.
David Seaman

Art is subjective and if it exists, then it has value. Thank God we live where John has the freedom to eat his lunch elsewhere.
I have tqaught music -many ages- for thirty years and on my board was writtern, “There is no such thing as bad art.” If it exists then it’s important to somebody. that should be enough.
John

I don’t think that I’m cyber-bullying anyone. I’m expressing my opinion on the topic in a forum designed for that. Unlike the person who criticized me, I didn’t engage in insults.

It was a nice spot to eat lunch. It was an open place where people gathered. Now it is dominated by ugly statues.

Not all art is good. http://www.museumofbadart.org/ All art, especially public art should be subject to criticism.
Nick Knight

I think its all how its done. In Ireland they have the “Tart with the Cart”, with similar realism and it is very popular.