Murphy’s Law
Wisconsin Center Will Destroy Literary Artworks
Nationally unique installation done in 1998. Public board didn't vote on its destruction.
Get a daily rundown of the top stories on Urban Milwaukee
Nationally unique installation done in 1998. Public board didn't vote on its destruction. Back to the full article.
Photos - Page 3
It’s a shame that it must be destroyed because it was permanently installed. Good note for future installations. That said, I’m sure there is some way to salvage some elements and recreate it.
It’s interesting that there is no mention of an artist or artists It “was created,” passively. I’m stretched to remember a single work of art I have viewed or am otherwise familiar with that isn’t the result of one or more artists being inspired, going through a process of sketches, drafts, miniatures, etc. until a final work is created. Who is the artist(s) whose inspiration informed the shape, materials, texture, size, font size, etc. for this “work of art.”
Is it really art if there is no artist, or is it simply an installation or design element?
Polaris, sculptor Jill Sebastian was the artist “whose inspiration informed the shape, materials, texture, size, font size, etc.” for this installation.
This seems to be a shame.
Always really liked these.
The words bore additional resonance considering personal experiences going to the center in 2021 for mass vaccination.
Jill, your work has/had meaning (as do/did the words of the authors and cultural figures represented through them).
Sad that there does not seem a good explanation for why there is a benefit to their removal.
I wonder what Baird leadership will think.
Oh, for cripes sake, Bruce…thanks for clarifying! I didn’t see this the first 3-4 times I went through the article. Chalking it up to old age…! 😉
I’ve sent this message to Mr. Marty Brooks’s email address on the Wisconsin Center website:
Mr. Brooks,
We hope your motto is not “Move fast and break things.” If Bruce Murphy’s article today is correct, you are making a mistake by destroying one of the few memorable parts of the Wisconsin Center. Please pause and re-think this problem.
Sincerely,
Larry Hoffman, Ph.D.
“You can’t be neutral on a moving train.” — Howard Zinn
Among the many segments in this installation, there is a strong emphasis on Wisconsin’s Indigenous history and experiences. That is an important cultural legacy with rather scant recognition in public places in Milwaukee.
With that in mind, what will be lost, for residents and visitors, through this planned erasure?
🥺
A lot of time, talent, effort and money went
into this project. How about an encore?
Was this project made with any mandated funds
for art in public buildings? If so, taxpayers may own
this work. Can the authority to alter or destroy it
be legally given to one individual?
Maybe the new design cannot reasonably accommodate
this work, but it’s wrong to to dismiss and destroy it.
How much of it actually needs to be destroyed?
Were any elements pre-built, but installed in a way
that conceals this fact. Have any of the installers been
contacted about this aspect?
It looks like a good number of the largest works
are on casework built separately from and added to the walls.
I’ve done a few similar but much smaller installations, and the 1st thing
I would check is whether the casework can be removed from the wall,
(even if not intact) and in a way that usable areas of the
front panels can be removed intact.
These panels would eventually need to be cut to a shape
compatible with a new environment.
At least one photo shows a panel that can be taken off
by removing 4 fasteners.
Works that are on non–bearing walls might be retrieved
by cutting a section out of the wall. This section might be
reused, or disassembled leaving the front panel intact.
This panel may be weak once separated, so that operation
may need to be done at the new site.
Where nothing else can be done, at least
remove and save the (labor intensive) letters intact.
Everything I’ve suggested should be weighed by
cost/benefit comparison to re-creating the works.
Marty asks important questions. Will anyone ask them in a public forum?
All indicators point to the Wisconsin Center no longer functioning as a public space, if one man (and perhaps his coterie) make all decisions about every aspect of that space, including the casual destruction of publicly funded art.
No one has mentioned what taxpayer-funded “art” or decoration will replace this thoughtfully conceived installation created WITH public oversight.. Apparently it’s none of the public’s business.
The funding program I was thinking of was called
Percent for(the?) Arts. I don’t know if it still exists,
or what legal requirements were attached
to funds that they disbursed.
“The Public Artworks of Wisconsin is an interactive map
highlighting more than 130 art installations commissioned
through the state’s Percent for Art Program.”
The Wisconsin Center is included on the interactive map,
but this does not state which artworks were funded at this location.
Given the demolition timing, a court order to stop may be needed to allow time to check the legalities, unless all options have already been exhausted.
Great insight into a very disturbing news item. If, in fact, any part of this incredible installation can be saved without blowing the budget, it must be. If it’s not feasible to save, then we must find a way and place and money to recreate it somewhere else in the city. It is too important to simply let it go! Maybe for one of our downtown area or lakefront parks? The MAM or new MPM grounds? Couture or Vel Phillips plazas? Murals? Third Ward streetscape? Under the 794 freeway? Let’s spread the word and at least try to make this happen. Certainly a private/public partnership could keep this valuable piece of our heritage from going away.
If nothing else, they should allow a good local art photographer a chance to fully document the present installation in high quality photos that can then be installed as “art of art”. I can understand the desire to take it down, possibly replace it with something “newer”, but to simply remove and forget is wrong. Sometimes the best art is that which is found decades later tucked in a closet or warehouse, ready to be enjoyed by a new generation.
As always, there is nothing more incendiary, controversial or enlightening than public art and Milwaukee has had its share.
Perhaps the new convention center can bring back The Blue Shirt.
While reading lobk’s ideas, I realized that this
exhibit was doomed by its location. It’s big, and the
Wisconsin Center is big, but who other than the
Center’s employees can take it all in?
Conventioneers’ days are full. When each day’s business
closes, so does the center. Tour guide materials and
promotions are going to direct them (as well as Milwaukee
residents) to other attractions.
As iobk suggests, it needs to be more conspicuous
and accessible. However, these works were not
built for outdoor exposure The Grand Ave. Mall and our
skywalk system may have the lineal feet needed,
but does it have enough good places to
accommodate such a large body of works?
Being indoors, it would provide all-weather and
all season access.
Anywhere else? …before it’s all destroyed?
@blurondo…OMG–Blue Shirt!
Seriously, I actually liked it, conceptually speaking. It was big, colorful, translucent. My only real question was: “It’s the airport, why a blue shirt?”
Seemed like, in the lack of context, some Milwaukeeans created their own, i.e., that the artist (whose inspiration informed the shape, materials, texture, size, etc.” of the proposed installation) was condescending to the city’s blue collar history. Frankly, if you gotta dig that deep, you’ve probably got a chip on your shoulder about your blue collar history… 🙂
@Marty Ellenbecker — Agreed. Such a great concept, why hide it on the second floor where only busy conventioneers will experience it as they hustle between meeting rooms? In whatever future form this might take, it deserves a more public venue.
In a way, this reminds me of one of the more contemplative human-made spaces in San Francisco, the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial.
https://youtu.be/J8GA_iAEvpQ
That its home is the wonderful Yerba Buena Gardens and it is available 24/7 is a huge bonus.
Good conversations on this wonderful piece of art that needs to be saved or recycled.
If memory serves, there are other interesting pieces of art throughout the Convention Center. Will they be destroyed as well as the renovation work continues?
I believe it was the Burke Family Foundation that underwrote much of the public art in the current building. The 1% for Art program for new building projects in the City of Milwaukee had success during the 1990”s but we hear nothing of it these days. What happened?
Marty, in response to your question …”but who other than the
Center’s employees can take it all in?” The works are individually accessible and inviting, As with Lake Michigan, or any expansive vista, there is rhythm and flow and no need to take it all at once. Part of its beauty and power is its elegance and grace.
This work, these words, this history also humanizes and grounds an otherwise mostly generic space. That was intended by the makers and the dedicated arts board that oversaw the process of its creation.
The other big question here is: What has one man decided to replace as the storytelling and imagery within the Wisconsin Center District?
Lord Acton warned about the inevitable corrupting results of granting anyone absolute power. A publicly funded and owned space is not the same as one’s sovereign home or even a corporate headquarters. Public art is not wallpaper, nor is a convention center a corporate campus or private sandbox.
Calling someone a CEO does not change the fact that taxpayers are the actual funders and owners of this space. Representative bodies must represent and oversee the people’s interests, the community’s interests.
We will have no public spaces, no places of belonging for all, if all decisions about them, and about our civic culture, are made unilaterally, especially by a single person. Milwaukee will increasingly become an impoverished place within its public spaces, which should be alive, inclusive and reflective of the greatness of our city.
I went to a couple of conventions at the center and I always looked forward to finding the quotes that moved me. It was also nice to decompress between sessions, sit there in the space and read the lines and wonder about the meanings and why that quote was picked above others. It was a lovely feeling to be literally surrounded by beautiful prose and poetry. It is really disheartening to read that the decision was made by a single person without the consideration of others– but that seems to be the trend these days.