Comments on: Art and Nature Park Public Forum TONIGHT http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/2008/06/19/art-and-nature-park-public-forum-tonight/ The IMA blog is a space to discuss everything related to the Indianapolis Museum of Art. Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:25:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Noelle http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/2008/06/19/art-and-nature-park-public-forum-tonight/#comment-3364 Noelle Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:12:51 +0000 http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/?p=497#comment-3364 Let me lead you to a <a href="http://www.imamuseum.org/connect/currentnews" rel="nofollow">press release</a> on the IMA Web site that may give more insight into the change in plans for the Park, part of the IMA's broader mission to promote environmentally-friendly and sustainable practices: "Following a detailed study and anaylsis of the site, and in consultation with artist Mary Miss, the IMA has also decided not to pursue a planned 1,500 square-foot bridge and walkway which was to connect the IMA with the Park. As plans progressed, IMA realized that the bridge, to be constructed from 600 tons of steel, would have an enormous impact on the natural environment, in conflict with the Park’s mission. The IMA and Mary Miss now are exploring other possible ways to collaborate, including an independent permanent sculpture that would address some of the environmental issues the artist has explored throughout her career. Visitors will have access to the Park using the historic Pony Truss pedestrian bridge and through two new pedestrian entrances on the north and south sides, which will allow for more circulation around the IMA’s entire campus." Let me lead you to a press release on the IMA Web site that may give more insight into the change in plans for the Park, part of the IMA’s broader mission to promote environmentally-friendly and sustainable practices:

“Following a detailed study and anaylsis of the site, and in consultation with artist Mary Miss, the IMA has also decided not to pursue a planned 1,500 square-foot bridge and walkway which was to connect the IMA with the Park. As plans progressed, IMA realized that the bridge, to be constructed from 600 tons of steel, would have an enormous impact on the natural environment, in conflict with the Park’s mission. The IMA and Mary Miss now are exploring other possible ways to collaborate, including an independent permanent sculpture that would address some of the environmental issues the artist has explored throughout her career. Visitors will have access to the Park using the historic Pony Truss pedestrian bridge and through two new pedestrian entrances on the north and south sides, which will allow for more circulation around the IMA’s entire campus.”

]]> By: Ablerock http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/2008/06/19/art-and-nature-park-public-forum-tonight/#comment-3361 Ablerock Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:24:54 +0000 http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/?p=497#comment-3361 What was shaping up to be one of the rare examples of excellent landscaping and architecture in Indianapolis has been relegated to a mere revolving outdoor gallery. I'm not a fan of the art rental approach downtown and I'm curious as to whether it will improve at the IMA. Above all, I was looking forward to using the bridge. It looked to be one of the most beautiful, compelling bridges in the country. A structure of which the city could be proud and find inspiration in. Deleting it and the other permanent structures is a huge disappointment. That being said, the IMA did a great job in selecting the first round of temporary pieces for the park, as I'm sure they will in the future. I also agree with the IMA that a lack of permanence will free artists to take bigger risks. I'm sure I will swallow my disappointment at the loss of the bridge and enjoy the Art and Nature Park. What was shaping up to be one of the rare examples of excellent landscaping and architecture in Indianapolis has been relegated to a mere revolving outdoor gallery. I’m not a fan of the art rental approach downtown and I’m curious as to whether it will improve at the IMA.

Above all, I was looking forward to using the bridge. It looked to be one of the most beautiful, compelling bridges in the country. A structure of which the city could be proud and find inspiration in. Deleting it and the other permanent structures is a huge disappointment.

That being said, the IMA did a great job in selecting the first round of temporary pieces for the park, as I’m sure they will in the future. I also agree with the IMA that a lack of permanence will free artists to take bigger risks. I’m sure I will swallow my disappointment at the loss of the bridge and enjoy the Art and Nature Park.

]]> By: The Urbanophile http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/2008/06/19/art-and-nature-park-public-forum-tonight/#comment-3338 The Urbanophile Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:16:07 +0000 http://www.imamuseum.org/blog/?p=497#comment-3338 I must say that I'm disappointed to see that the original plan has been scaled back. The loss of the super-cool, mega-awesome bridge is a big loss in particular. I thought the original plan was pretty close to a home run. I guess fund raising must have lagged. We'll just have to see how things turn out. Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend the session. I would have prioritize the bridge, then spent the remaining money on exhibits as funds allowed. Incorporating a mix of temporary works with the permanent ones wouldn't have been a bad tweak. I think pursuing an incrementalist approach to the original vision, perhaps incorporating this temporary work aspect, would be better than scaling back to the current plan. That's just my two cents. I must say that I’m disappointed to see that the original plan has been scaled back. The loss of the super-cool, mega-awesome bridge is a big loss in particular. I thought the original plan was pretty close to a home run. I guess fund raising must have lagged. We’ll just have to see how things turn out. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to attend the session.

I would have prioritize the bridge, then spent the remaining money on exhibits as funds allowed. Incorporating a mix of temporary works with the permanent ones wouldn’t have been a bad tweak. I think pursuing an incrementalist approach to the original vision, perhaps incorporating this temporary work aspect, would be better than scaling back to the current plan.

That’s just my two cents.

]]>