justforview

I love maps. I probably fall short of being a cartophile, because there are some serious collectors and scholars on the subject, but maps fascinate me. Not only are maps visually beautiful as artistic and design endeavors, but they encompass many of my other interest as well; geography, cities, their planning, sociology, the list goes on. So I was generally excited about the current show at the CAC, Uncoordinated: Mapping Cartography in Contemporary Art.

Until, yesterday I didn’t have time to make it to the exhibit, plus there was the added bonus of free admission to the museum on Mondays as well as a lecture by Denis Wood, author of The Power of Maps, which is required reading for geographers and should be for designers. Reading the description of the exhibit (at the link above) it seemed to sum up all my interest of maps rather succinctly and brought it together with my slant towards cultural criticism. Add the context of a contemporary art institution and my expectations shot sky high. I expected to experience first hand what was offered by another top ten book on my list, You Are Here: Personal Geographies and Other Maps of the Imagination.

So I was pretty disappointed when I reached the fourth floor and walked around and saw very little that seemed to represent what the exhibit promotion seemed to be advertising and what I had imagined from the exhibit description and my familiarity with Denis Wood and You Are Here, even though both were in some way associated with the exhibit. Very few of the works did little more than appropriate the formal aspects of maps, which to me cheapens both the realm of contemporary art and map making.

The lecture saved the night for me. It was a very detailed, information packed, thought provoking look at the history of maps in art practice. Each example of Wood’s, beginning with dada and including my personal favorite, the situationist The Naked City , really dealt with the ability of art to appropriating not just the form, but the language of maps. Wood actually did an excellent job explaining the reason why maps and art have so often been married to communicate ideas and information, not just geographic but philosophical and social, in contemporary culture.

For those that missed the lecture, or also found the exhibit a bit short on substance, stay tuned for the re-release of Wood’s book The Power of Maps, which will include a new chapter on map art.

But please don’t use guerrilla tactics to advertise to me. I saw this at the exit to the fountain sq. garage today and can’t help but wonder a couple of things. First, is it from a street team, and if so is there any enforcement? As an admirer of street art and the like I have to be offended. I understand that corporations have rights and even that their ability to co-opt these things in some way legitimizes them.

Still, it is against the law and it just seems wrong for corporate interest to appropriate tactics used by individuals because much the same corporate interest have reduced their power. I guess it goes both ways, corporations appropriate individuals’ tactics as much as is the case here (in one of the 3CDC’s brand colors, no less). But what gives individuals the power to resist the corporate dominance of public space, particularly through advertising in this case, is that individuals often can’t be traced back to a corporate entity and don’t really receive any personal gain from it. The risk is the same, but the payoff is much higher for corporations. Shouldn’t the punishment fit the extent of the benefit gained through illegal means.

If you haven’t already you should check out VisuaLingual’s blog. It already has some great post and is sure to keep everyone updated on local design-minded happenings.

Maybe someone out there can explain something that has bothered me since I moved to Cincinnati. How is it possible for the Reds to be the first professional baseball team? It is a game, you need at least two teams to play. How is it of any consequence to be the first? Was the second team declared two seconds later? What is the deal with this constantly referred to stat about Cincinnati?

To me it seems like another case of Cincinnati just creating achievements rather than actually doing anything.

A few more ghost signs around the neighborhood and downtown

The Belmont Cafe building and sign being demolished to make room for a parking lot

Rosco’s on-site sign appears to be repainted recently, but the storefront is closed

I am curious of the date of this huge Paramount Vodka sign

Need Money see WILL is vine covered

Rugs, Baking: Downtown off fourth

Hard to get a shot of this one along Vine

Detail of the above sign’s type

More layers than I can decipher

This article should clarify things but it seems like the reporting is being decidely divisive. The “opponents” of the plan aren’t actually opposing the streetcar.

The statement that “backers of the proposal agree that the longer progress is delayed, the lower the chances that a streetcar line will be built.” is only true if there is reason for it not to be built, which isn’t true, if it is well planned and not rushed through.

In my opinion, the opposition wants to insure that the streetcar works well and not just built, not even that it doesn’t get built.

A few weeks ago a post on MishMash showed some examples of extreme yard decorating and Building Cincinnati recently asked what examples there are of this in Cincinnati. The original post got me thinking and now seeing it come up again at a local level I can’t resist sharing my opinion and rather than ransacking Kevin’s post I thought that I would dedicate a little space here to a few thoughts. Actually, this is not so much about bad neighbors, but good ones. The sites shown below aren’t to say that either Kevin’s or MishMash’s post are wrong. They are just a few examples of places that I have had the chance to experience that I feel have wrongly fallen under this label of bad neighbors in one way or another.

But, I must also admit, as someone who is part planner and part graphic designer I am caught between two instincts. As a planner I see the value of zoning and deed restrictions, but as a designer I love the cacophony of aesthetic values that are manifest in the environment. I understand that zoning for aesthetic purposes is a powerful tool for municipalities. But I also think the connection to the public interest in tenuous. Sure, it allows places to be competitive with other municipalities and for people to enjoy their property rights, but can aesthetics be a nuisance? I guess the technical answer is yes, but I beg to differ. Some of the original court cases that supported zoning for aesthetic purposes where pretty loose interpretations of the constitution and have really been expanded to encompass a lot more over the years.

There are a few places that I have seen that, yeah, are a little of the wall and not my personal taste, but because of their failure to blend in and accept the standard remind me that we are individuals and unless we express that it would be a pretty boring place. The way in which people choose to do so is part of the fun. Some of these projects have been classified as folk art and while I think that is an appropriate description they are more than that, so I call them Public Folk Art. Maybe public isn’t much of an addition to folk art, but I think that it is appropriate in the context of planning and development. It separates it from the yard decoration and places it among the individual acts that are privy to public viewing, in this sense it is not that different from street art.

One example was on MishMash and deserves some clarification. It is a place near and dear to my heart, the Heidelberg Project by Tyree Guyton in Detroit. A number of years ago I was visiting the area and was practically dragged to this place, not because of my resistance, but because of someone else’s excitement. Since then I have been back about 5 times. Every time I am in Detroit I make it a point to go. And I am not the only one. I once read that it was the second most popular attraction in Detroit. There is a lot of interesting history about the project that makes it, to me, one of the most important public art projects ever. The dire state of Detroit has given rise to this very unique strategy at community development through art. This place is anything but an example of a bad neighbor. Sure the drug dealers who’s block was ruined because of the visitors to project are probably upset, but since when do they matter. In fact the sign for the project makes it very explicit that this is a neighborhood where people live and that respect is given.

One of two signs that give a brief explanation of the project

The sidewalks, streets, and more are painted with some of the most unusual stuff ever.

“Junk” collected from the area around the neighborhood a lot of it from vacant houses and lots where people come and dump their garbage is used to create sculptures and decorate the light poles and homes.

Nearby abandoned houses are given “special” treatment to draw attention and positive activity to them.

The small parks, that Detroit is currently trying to sell, have been made into sculpture gardens.

House along a Elliot Street.

The Hiedelberg Project is primarily scattered around a block, near Gratiot and Elliot, but the artist has also ventured out to other houses in Detroit that the city has lost sight of.

I know much less about this project, but it is called the Magic Garden. You can read more about it here & here. It’s in Philly, along South Street an area that has seen a lot of redevelopment in recent years, and is the work of artist Isaiah Zagar. I only spent a little while peering in to the place, but it was amazing. There are tunnels and passageways and great little details. The project has spread beyond the initial lot and looks like it is growing onto the adjacent buildings. While it has become an attraction in the city it wasn’t always well received.

Lastly, there is one place in Cincinnati that, while on a much smaller scale and less visible, is along the same lines. I endearingly call it the Compound. I may not even have known about it if not by chance. It is the first place that I lived when I moved to the area about two years ago. The owners have created a really cool urban wilderness area complete with gardens, a pond and some other little amenities. Tucked away in the corner of what can either be Mt. Auburn or OTR, depending on what map you look at, the compound is filled with little artworks by Roger, a former, resident. It hasn’t received either the positive or negative attention that the other two sites have probably because it is a well kept secret. But I would bet that anyone one who has spent some time here has some good memories of it. Photos courtesy of Visualingual.

A number of dead trees have turned into something like totem poles with figures carved and painted on them

Toys found on the lot and in the buildings during rehab work have been hung and placed on trees

Some of it can be pretty sinister, but in context makes all the difference.

You can spend months exploring and still not catch everything

For more on the compound check out Visualingual’s book, Compound Alchemy,

A recent article in the NY TImes Travel section shows how street art is an attraction in the city. I am sure some think that this is crazy, but the whole street art world has exploded in recent years. Helped along by artist like Barry McGee and Shepard Fairey, street art has become a major force in contemporary arts. Many art galleries and museums have caught on, but as the article suggest the life of street art is in the streets, in the spontaneous encounters and seeking it out.

This may not come as a shocker to some, but street art is one of those qualities that people base their judgment of a city on, and its not always bad. In fact street art is an important contributor to the cool factor of a city. It is part of the character of a place that can’t be produced in a board room, it can’t be copied and pasted from another city, well almost. If someone is looking for a “cool, hip” city they aren’t simply looking for the martini/ sushi bar, they want the rough around the edges too. Street art signifies that there is art and creativity, but not the safe Sunday afternoon watercolors, but art that really pushes the limits of aesthetics and in many ways democracy. Street art is an expression of a new generation of artist that have a very different conception of what is beautiful and what is worthwhile and valuable.  It questions the idea of art as artifact and pushes for the experiential aspects of art and urbanity. So, while it is not for everyone it certainly speaks to the tolerance, creativity and culture of a place.

So where is the street art in Cincinnati? We are certainly not without any, but it is different from many of the so-called desirable cities. Most of the street art in Cincinnati is a bit more primitive and incidental than that of NY, Boston, San Francisco or Portland.

I spend most of my time in OTR so this is where I have encountered the most and best examples of street art in Cincinnati. But I can’t help but wonder, and trust me I do, what would this place be like if street arts where more prevalent, more tolerated and of better quality? No one is saying that this should be legalized, that would do more harm than good. The illicit nature of street art and graffiti works as a filtering device and is part of the art. But in OTR there is so much apprehension about the ideas and ideal “quality of life,” and being “safe and clean,” that any uncommissioned object, anything does not have a proper place in the predetermined order is quickly on the radar and dealt with.

Here are a few shots of some sites that I have caught in the neighborhood. Unfortunately most have come and gone pretty quickly.

Seen between Main and Sycamore Streets, no longer there.

Along Race Street between 13th & 14th

In an alley off of Vine, near Clifton

This was more of a memorial for a murder victim, but has been removed

Along McMicken

Another temporary memorial, at 15th & Clay

The boundary between the built and natural environment is a tenuous one. They are inseparable. Even in heavily built areas the natural processes of growth and decay are evident if you look close enough.

There is a sort of continuum between natural and built environments The Urban Wilderness is the space where natural processes and built form are clearly integrated. Cincinnati and Over-the-Rhine have an infinite number of these areas. Exploring them is to experience the dynamic between the two environments and the evolution of the city.

These photos are from an area in OTR where the public right of way and infrastructure has been almost completely overgrown with the urban forest.

Outdoor advertisements that have been allowed to fade are commonly referred to as ghost signs. The term carries with it more or less specific qualities, but in general they are hand painted and were made in the first half of the 20th century and earlier before most cities started heavily regulating the outdoor advertising industry.

They are an important representation of the commercial graphic arts of the time and even though they have become obsolete they survive as reminders to what once was. They speak to the social, economic and physical character of the past and the time that has passed. Viewing them in their contemporary context often provides an interesting juxtaposition.

Cincinnati and OTR in particular is filled with these. While they may be interesting from a visual perspective alone, they are also significant contributors to the historic character of a place. There patina cannot be emulated. Only time can create the story that they tell, the sense that they give us.

While hand painted signage is still created in OTR and other neighborhoods there is a significant difference in the scale, placement, quality and techniques of ghost signs. I am a fan of both old and new, but want to see more efforts to identify exceptional examples that may merit some degree of preservation effort.

along McMicken in OTR