Ballast (2005), by Richard Serra is a permanent, site specific installation of two 80-ton rectangular slabs of metal, which stretch up 50 feet from a plaza at UCSF Mission Bay. Facing each other, the 14-feet-wide, six-inch-thick slabs are separated by 133 feet. They both tilt slightly in opposite directions. The plaza lies between a row of retail/restaurant buildings, and a sitting area shaded by trees. The 'blades' as Serra refers to them, will become increasingly rusty over time as they are completely exposed to the elements. The sculpture's presence is both powerful and a sensitive response to the area.
According to the program's chancellor Mike Bishop, Ballast is the centerpiece of the UCSF Mission Bay's public art program. The program was launched in 2003 with the goal of "creating a visually stimulating environment and a permanent legacy to the city." i However, as expressed in an interview following Ballast's installation, visual stimulation in not Serra's goal: "If people are looking at sculpture as an object, that's just not the dialogue you enter into with this piece," Serra said. "There are a lot of people around still making objects, but I'm interested in a situation where what we call the sculpture is a catalyst for walking and looking and thinking about what you're looking at." i
This contradiction is one of many that Surround Ballast, and make it an example of a common theme in the public art world: The intended value of an artwork is often eclipsed by its patron's intent to boost status and power.
UCSF's emphasis of the visual sense represents an old attitude toward public art. Historically, it has served the institutionalized construct of art as a symbol of power -- a symbol that is read visually. Judith Baca, in Who's Monument Where, explains how this propaganda tool, where public art acts in the service of dominance, has shifted "from the triumphant bronze general on horseback... to its more contemporary corporate versions." The new interpretation of an old 'cannon in the park' symbol "inspires a sense of awe by the scale and the importance of the artist." ii The fact that UCSF not only tends, but openly establishes a goal to bring critically acclaimed artists' work to their campus, is an indication of their 'cannon in the park' mentality. And certainly, Richard Serra is an acceptable candidate for such propaganda. With works selling for seven figures, his name is as reputable as most in the art world.
It's interesting though that his status seems to matter more to his patrons, than to himself. One of Judith Baca's main concerns is whether public art can avoid taking the side of dominance in a society where the wealthy and poor are increasingly polarized. iii Richard Serra shares this concern. In an interview directly following the installation of Ballast, Serra expresses his happiness to the fact that workers on the site "who have no involvement with art at all, became involved. If you're working in public space, you'd like to have the possibility of reaching those people who don't go to museums," he said. "That's the whole reason to do it." i While it's good that Serra wants his art to affect this demographic, the people avoiding museums are the same people UCSF aims to distinguish itself from by commissioning expensive art by critically acclaimed artists.
The way museum attendance has shifted to a primarily white, rich, and upper-class demographic, is something Ben Davis writes about in Art and Inequality. He presents data to argue that it is directly related to the extreme exclusivity of the art market. It's ironic that Serra is considering people of all classes, while he is connected to a market whose success is at the mercy of an "eccentric, old-fashioned sphere that produces unique goods for a high-status audience eager to distinguish itself from the masses." iii I'm not questioning Serra's moral convictions. But the fact remains that Ballast exists largely because of the name attached to it - a name that continually draws attention from the art market as well as museums.
The slight tilt of the slabs creates a friction with the perfectly orthogonal buildings around them. And their imperfect rusty surfaces (which are beautiful) could be read as a critique on modern popular aesthetics. But these values are given less potency because of their inherent association with the university system. Aside from the fact that universities are controlled by the same people who are spending millions at the art market, the university system, as Erin Sickler points out, contributes to the delusion that common people can make money in the art market: "The vast sums of money floating through galleries and auction houses has helped to conceal the fact that most artists will never earn a living from their work." iv When people see how much money artists like Richard Serra are making, they give money to universities in exchange for MFA degrees- usually only to become broke and jobless.
Fin read more