Post navigation

Prev: (06/11/08) | Next: (06/12/08)

Capitol Hill Light Rail Station Forum

I really enjoyed the conversation at the Capitol Hill Station Art forum tonight. It had the potential of having a really negative tone, but the forum moderators did a great job of setting the scene for a positive, open discussion.

Mike Ross and Ellen Forney both spoke about their proposals. Ellen had clear support from the crowd. (I was pleased for find out that she has designed a mural that will soon cover these ugly boarded up windows at the old Jack in the Box location. It’s called “Joe’s Mouth”. You will soon see why.)

Mike had a really great statement about his proposal, including his reasoning for using the war planes. I liked specifically that he supported everyone’s different views on the topic, emphasizing that powerful art evokes thought.

There were also some great points made by the audience members, including a Vietnam war vet against it and a military wife in support.

I walked away pretty torn overall. I’ll be interested to read what the papers have to say tomorrow.

Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Charlette
Charlette
15 years ago

I guess I have a different perspective of the forum that is much more sceptical. I do have to admit from the advertisement of this forum and this being their second presention this seemed more like a promotion to garner public approval rather than a forum to really hear public comments. I can’t see why they wanted to be beaten up more given their heated first meeting.

Susan Brenner, a Capitol Hill resident for 20 years said “this is not Capitol Hill”.
Another person said “glad people speaking up against the project”
Another person said this art is “Edgy and stimulating” repeatedly.
One person said he did not want the art to reflect grief.
Overall, the comments did seem to reflect “unanimous disdain” as the Seattle PI called it of the initial meeting.
Only two persons seemed to really support that art piece with such enthusiasm (I frankly had to wonder if these were friends of the artists or “plants” as someone suggested after the meeting. )
Another person did not like Transit dictating what art is.

Alot of people pointed out that this is what art is supposed to do – make people think and talk but I don’t this art is really getting people to talk in a good way. It may end up being more devisive.

The pointed comment of the meeting that the newspapers have already noted is when George Baken who is publisher of the SGN Seattle Gay News and Navy Vet said he just couldn’t get past that these were planes ment to kill and destroy and are used against humanity.
This brought up a discussion of post traumatic stress disorder and the effect it would have on vets and the public. I think it was a new perspective that had not been brought up yet.
Its a bit alarming to think an art piece unknowing to alot of us can continue to evoke emotional trauma and difficult memories and yes even pain in a person.
I don’t think one has to be an expert in stress disorders to realize how the suspension overhead of two disassembled jets about to crash into each other (excuse me “kissing”) could provoke anxiety in a vet.
To compare, I don’t believe the suspended cars at SAM evoke the same kind of feelings of destruction.

I also voiced my concern there did not seem to be community involved in the process and pointed out that the Jimi Hendrix statue just one block South was a prime example of art that has become endeared to the community. I was curious how many people present were for and against the proposed art given there was a sizeable turnout of the community and asked for a show of hands. The moderator promptly cut me off and loudly voiced that this is “not a democracy or a majority rules situation”. Oh really? (obviously). I encouraged transit to listen to the community and then the moderator deferred to Michael Wells of the Chamber of Commerce (to I presume show how the art was selected) who confirmed that only a group of ten selected the art. It should be noted that Capitol Hill has about 40,000 residents and hundreds of business owners. Unfortunately it appears the community does not have a say as Sound Transit has the final word but they assured the forum their comments do have weight and to send in their letters.

The Director of the Capitol Hill Arts Center commented Transit should address concerns not being addressed and those who cannot advocate for themselves. He stressed the art may be effecting others and to take responsiblity.

After the meeting closed I did talk to Mike Ross if he had received any feedback from the community in regards to his art before he had submitted his plans and he stated he had not.

It appears the community is not accepting of this art and I don’t see much light at the end of the tunnel in acceptance anytime in the future.

sparklingallison
sparklingallison
15 years ago

I agree that there were some really strong points against the art that were brought up during the meeting, and I was especially moved by George Baken’s comments. However, I think there were more than just two people who supported the piece with enthusiasm at the meeting. It was fairly split with strong ‘fors’, strong ‘againsts’ and lots of inbetween.

Regarding your request for a vote in the room. I thought this was completely inappropriate as did many other people in the room. There were gasps. When the moderator said “this is not a democracy or majority rules situation” he was referencing the forum itself, not necessarily to how the art was chosen. The moderators job was to promote open dialogue about the art, and taking a vote would have created a much mroe devisive situation.

Re: Only a group of 10 selected the art. The committee actually selected the artist (not the art), and now Sound Transit is getting feedback from the community on that artists proposed art. I think this is a completely reasonable way of tackling this kind of a project as it allows people with strong opinions one way or the other to participate. It also has allowed undecided folks, like myself, to get information, ask questions and participate in the dialogue.

Charlette LeFevre
Charlette LeFevre
15 years ago

My mistake, I thought this was a forum for public comment. George Baken’s comment was one of the strongest as an editor with a military background and is well worth noting. I did have several people come up to me after the meeting and state how rude the moderator was to cut me off and a show of hands would have been harmless. I fail to see how a vote would have been devisive but I don’t think Transit would not have wanted to see a majority opinion. They already know from their first meeting the majority of the community and by all current accounts is opposed to the art.

I believe the committee and Transit have a tough job ahead of them.

sparklingallison
sparklingallison
15 years ago

I’m not sure where you’re getting a majority opinion opposing the art? Was there a poll taken somewhere? As I said in my previous post, I think it was fairly split with lots of people in the middle.

jseattle
jseattle
15 years ago

surely have an opinion, too. It doesn’t reflect well on any side of the argument to assume that the public ‘has spoken’ on this topic.

So, I’m not clear what is going to happen next. Sound Transit is either being really smart about this or being dumb. Can’t figure it out.

In the meantime, would it be useful to have a quick ‘show of hands’ to gauge opinion of a larger cross section of the Hill?

sparklingallison
sparklingallison
15 years ago

The same argument holds true for voting here on CHS… it wouldn’t reflect “the public” any more than those in attendance at the meeting. I’m game for an informal poll though. Can we also include an area for people to include comments?

Meg
Meg
15 years ago

A quick show of hands? Just a good ol’ random street questionaire? We could randomly ask people on the street/at the park/inside vivace what their opinion is. Of course, many people probably dont even have a clue whats going on in the first place but perhaps we could devise a short but sweet overview of the project to present when ‘polling’. It wouldn’t be “official” but it can be used as reference.

Charlette
Charlette
15 years ago

Gasp! you mean actually ask the public? :)
The public was invited to these two past meetings and those in attendance it would be fair to say were those that are active in the community. If the newspaper accounts are in any way accurate with “overwhelming disdain” (Seattle PI) and “unanimously opposed” (Capitol Hill Times) and from what I saw at the meeting, than I think I am safe in saying the majority of the public does not approve of this art.
Even so, I think a street poll would be good. The Capitol Hill Community Council used to stand on the corner of Denny and Broadway and ask the first 100 people. Perhaps this can be done again which is next to the future station site.