On January 20th our symposium Art in the public space and because of the measures it was completely online. Quite a challenge, but all speakers were very willing to cooperate and fortunately there was a lot of interest to watch and listen from home (or the studio). This symposium was the closing event of our anniversary year. BK Information has existed for forty years, and in 2020 we paid extensive attention to this fact. For example, in order to provide insight into the historical development of art in public space, in March last year we announced 100 key works of art in public space. These are works of art that are or have been artistically, historically, spatially or socially significant. They represent the spirit of the times; they are typical of a particular period in the history of art in public space.

This symposium was the closing event of our anniversary year. BK Information has been in existence for forty years, and we paid extensive attention to this fact in 2020.

In order to find out how works of art have found their way into society, we launched the campaign #watdoetdathier around the summer. Public art is everywhere, even in our immediate surroundings. Let's ask ourselves and others the question #whatdoesthere? We collected as many photos and stories as possible of public artworks everywhere in the Netherlands via Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. What has the artwork been through in the past few years? Is it well maintained or has it become a hangout?

The insights we gained formed the basis for compiling the symposium programme.

The insights we gained from the key works and the #watdoetdathier campaign formed the basis for compiling the symposium programme. We organized six panel sessions in which artists, curators, intermediaries and advisors discussed the future of art in public space. Here is a first brief sketch of the three panel sessions that could be followed live via stream on 20 January.

The role of mediators

Liesbeth Jans, senior advisor at KunstLoc, raised the question of whether new mediators are needed. After all, the existing structures through which commissions used to be realized have largely disappeared and the way in which a commission is given to an artist has also changed. A shift has taken place, from physical to physical and social. This means that other domains are also involved in the process of commissioning art, such as care and welfare as well as spatial planning.

A mediator could play a good role in the decommit.

That is a good thing when it comes to support for art in society. However, there are quite a few bulkheads between the different policy areas that make practice unmanageable. A mediator could play a good role in the decommit. What skills does a mediator need and how do you then become a mediator? An urgent topic where the need for a mediator was not in question, but how to become a mediator is not easy. It is a so-called experience subject. Perhaps art schools could consider including it in their curriculum?

The usefulness and necessity of hassle

Joke de Wolf, art critic and writer, put the question on the agenda for the symposium: "What is the use and necessity of hassle art in public space?". Art in public space is visibly present for all users of that space, and therefore often causes hassle. Passers-by, local residents and interested parties such as shopkeepers and viewers often let it be known what they think of the work even before it is there. Especially if they don't like the work, they know how to unite offline and online with action groups and petitions, and seek their justification in the press, with sponsors or with politicians. This conversation led to a very lively discussion at our symposium. It was generally agreed that residents or users should be informed about the arrival of a work of art and the work itself. However, opinions differed as to the stage at which this should take place and what say the residents or users should have in the matter.

Alternative commissioning

The subject of Jeroen Boomgaard, lecturer in Art in Public Space at the Rietveld Academy, fitted in well with this. He wanted to discuss other forms of commissioning. In recent years the question has arisen of whether a more democratic form of commissioning is possible, in the sense that it is not the elected representatives who bear responsibility for the realisation of art in public space, but those who are most closely involved with it: the residents and users of the places where the works are to be seen. But how do you do that properly? Shared or outsourced commissioning could be one such possibility. This ownership However, this has all kinds of ideological undertones that need to be carefully considered. In short: what does this kind of ownership mean for art in the public domain and how do you ensure that it leads both to residents' feeling that they have more control over their living environment and to an artist being commissioned to make a high-quality contribution to the public domain?

Shared or outsourced commissioning could be one such possibility.

In the discussion, interesting examples were given of where shared commissioning had succeeded, but also where it had not. Sometimes a situation is simply too complex. Then an old-fashioned mandate to a government or cultural institution to realize a work of art is still the way to go, otherwise there will be no work of art.

Special edition

In the next issue of BK Information appears in the form of a special edition an extensive report on the entire anniversary project, including the symposium. Besides Liesbeth Jans, Joke de Wolf and Jeroen Boomgaard, Arno van Roos-malen, Rinske Hordijk/Suzanne Sanders and Rogier Brom also led a panel session.