Public needs to be part of our public art

Published online on Monday, Oct. 26, 2009

I was among those checking out the mural in the Tower District on Monday afternoon. Some of us stopped and viewed at a distance from the sidewalk on the east side of Wilson Avenue. Others did a slow crawl in their vehicles and sped off.

Considering the hullabaloo, I expected to find something shocking -- or, in the least, mildly disturbing. Boy, was I wrong. While the 125-foot-long mural, a collaboration of eight local artists, isn't Norman Rockwell, it offers a fairly tame interpretation of San Joaquin Valley life.

Some of the painting's dominant features include an unclothed woman with water flowing from her chest, a newborn resting on fruits and vegetables, a double portrait of a farmworker and three menacing men.

The woman symbolizes nature, said Ramiro Martinez, one of the artists. Water makes agriculture possible, and the bad guys represent greed. The portrait was done by an artist whose father worked in the fields, Martinez said.

But even among artists, there are disagreements.

"I think that some people have legitimate complaints," Martinez said. "The blood out of the sky is a little bit apocalyptic."

The furor in the Tower is as old as art itself. Good art is supposed to make a statement. When it does, people are upset.

What's the answer?

Fresno, which is just getting its walls wet with murals, needs guidelines on how to decide what is acceptable public art. The bedrock of the policy must be communication with neighbors where art is displayed. Public art -- even when it's the work of one artist -- is a collaboration.

In this case, the collaborating is coming after the fact. Martinez, for example, altered some of his work. Originally, he painted the woman with water flowing from her mouth, but some people thought she was vomiting.

"I didn't want the mural rubbed out," Martinez said. "I still wanted to have the water flowing from her, but I shut her mouth and moved the water down."

Martinez made his changes about midnight Friday. Clearly the mural is a work in progress. Some artists might see this as censorship. I think it adds to the mural's story. Just as the newly added "Don't kill art" and "Art lives" now enhance the work.

But just as the artists can't expect residents to be silent about public art, neither should residents make snap judgments. They should talk to the artists and learn what the mural is about.

Community leaders and artists have work to do on creating a public-art policy. They might want to talk with people elsewhere -- especially in San Diego, where murals are commonplace.

There is a subplot to this story. Say "Tower District" and some people immediately think "young," "artsy" and "liberal." These words describe some folks in the Tower. But many of its residents are uninterested in art, conservative and well into their years. It's always dangerous to stereotype or to assume -- perhaps more so in a neighborhood as diverse as the Tower.

Finally, The Well Community Church, which operates the thrift shop on whose wall the mural is painted, did the right thing in delaying a decision about the painting's future. It could've caved to complaints and had the wall painted over. Instead, executive pastor Tim Goetz acknowledged that the church didn't do its homework with neighbors and artists. Now, he's trying to find a workable solution.

Whatever happens, the mural has focused attention on public art and the need for a sound policy. As boring as this sounds, the right guidelines will make Fresno a more lively and colorful city.