On a Friday in early May, from 10:30-12:00 a group met (it was by open invitation to anyone who had submitted an artwork and generally to the public via the blog, facebook and twitter) to have an informal chat about…
- The form the traffic light box artwork Beta Project might next take (ie learn from this first version, and tweak it next time).
- How/who should select artwork submitted and why.
The meeting was held in one of the Beta Area’s hidden gems…
Background to the meeting
11 people in total (including 2 DCC staff) were at the meeting.
- Background to DCC Beta Projects
- Discussion of the items raised in emails, facebook, twitter, blog comments by the public.
- Discussion of what was felt to be the Identity of the Area
- Voting for the artwork
- What Next
- Tour of the building / Discussion of other Betas (for anyone who wanted to stay longer).
Discussion of the idea of the 1 Identity / 11 Boxes / 111 Euro Traffic Light Box Artwork Beta
We sat in a circle and discussed 3 items…
- Control/involvement of DCC.
- Selection process & Quality
Outcomes/Items to Consider in a Future Version:
- Group was unsure over whether there should be ‘quality control’ over what goes onto the boxes. Some leaned more towards there being a quality control process of some sort, others felt that it should be left completely free.
- There was a suggestion for splitting it 50% ‘controlled’ boxes , 50% ‘free’ boxes as there were pros/cons to each approach.
- A question arose around who is responsible for ‘monitoring’ (ie if the artwork is damaged in some way, should it be touched up, or left, and who should do that).
- Online panel that rotates
- Great to have DCC onboard to remove barriers, frees the artist to do a good piece of work (won’t get moved on, etc).
- The group felt that expenses-only was a satisfactory solution. Some noted that some artists might want to stay anonymous (may not even want expenses paid).
- Getting work out there was worth it. Proud that artwork is shown.
- If artwork is for a long time, it’s worth it.
Some possible Betas for boxes were suggested…
- Freely available (potentially multiple artworks)
- Available to an artwork for a period.
- Available to an artist for a period.
Voting for the artworks…
Each artwork submitted was printed off at A3, along with an anonymised copy of their text explanation, and then each one was given a number (1-15 as there were 15 submissions).
We broke for coffee/tea and briefly discussed each person’s perception of the Identity of the Area (the brief was that the artwork submitted should enhance that). We had earlier discussed quality to a large extent.
Each attendee then voted for what they felt were the best 11 artworks (simple ticks, rather than any hierarchy) in terms of the two criteria – quality and meeting the brief. They were allowed to vote for their own artwork if they wished to (keep it simple), but still had to vote for another 10 artworks (This method works fine for larger numbers – for eg 11 – but wouldn’t for smaller numbers.) The two DCC staff voted the same as everyone else, and represented only 18% of the voting (ie 2 out of 11 attendees).
Each voter had their own sheet, and these were later counted which produced the final list of 11 artworks.
The meeting finished 10 minutes early, and then attendees were free to either leave or stay on to discuss other Beta suggestions, or take a brief tour of the building that we were in (historical/religious mini-museum and the crypts).
Recommendations for future similar events…
- Ask people to record their comments onto post-its, which could then be publicly shown (rather than being interpreted as above). (It purely didn’t happen for this event due to ideally having slightly more time to do a really good job on facilitating and recording the discussion.)
- It was a small(ish) group. It gave fantastic feedback and suggestions, but it would be worth re-asking the same questions of a much larger group to ensure fair representation.
- Overall it seemed to work very well, everyone seemed to really enjoy the event, and the artwork selection appeared to produce good results.