Art/Architecture in Subway Stations: Are they worth it?

[Whoaccio]

Why would, or should, artists volunteer to "pretty up" a station for free or at a low price? And if it actually were so "easy to just hire some artists", why do we have as little art in the system as we do?

Because they want publicity? Because they may be charitable? People on this forum contributed tons of design ideas for the rail corridor bridge, and I believe willypoon did some design renders for the Spadina extension (actually, wyliepoon makes alot of designs for a lot of things). Part of UofT's engineering had a design competition a while back for improvements on the TTC. All of that was totally free, probono, stuff. None of this will be replacing architects and engineers, but I see no reason why people wouldn't be willing to work pro-bono to submit a mural or tile pattern, which is what I assume Second_in_Pie was referring to.

That the TTC hasn't done something isn't proof it is impossible, either. God knows the TTC has a long list of opting for, uhh, questionable choices. The SRT can run driver less, but it doesn't. Google offered to integrate public transit into Maps, but the TTC opted for in house development. And so forth.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Because they want publicity? Because they may be charitable? People on this forum contributed tons of design ideas for the rail corridor bridge, and I believe willypoon did some design renders for the Spadina extension (actually, wyliepoon makes alot of designs for a lot of things). Part of UofT's engineering had a design competition a while back for improvements on the TTC. All of that was totally free, probono, stuff. None of this will be replacing architects and engineers, but I see no reason why people wouldn't be willing to work pro-bono to submit a mural or tile pattern, which is what I assume Second_in_Pie was referring to.

That the TTC hasn't done something isn't proof it is impossible, either. God knows the TTC has a long list of opting for, uhh, questionable choices. The SRT can run driver less, but it doesn't. Google offered to integrate public transit into Maps, but the TTC opted for in house development. And so forth.

That's pretty much what I was trying to say. And all the stations don't need to be top-notch, world class subway stations. Lower volume stations could even just be a platform with a ticket booth at the end, and maybe a bus shelter "connected" by a roof.

Of course, important high-traffic stations could get some more money for architecture. The DRL would be perfect for each station to be themed reflecting it's neighborhood. Distillery District could be faced with brick, St. Lawrence Market could have murals and mosaics showing a busy day at the market. Union could be done in the same style as the train station above, The pillars in Lower Spadina could be made to look like Condo towers!

 

[Urban Shocker]

But maybe we're thinking on different lines, like two or three drawings or murals vs. Museum station?

The Museum makeover wasn't promoted as art, though - just the power of interior decorating and the promotion of the ROM's collections. By contrast, From Here Right Now, the trompe l'oeil works in the Bayview station - pictured earlier - are by Panya Clark Espinal, represented by Christopher Cutts Gallery, and operate at a different level of altered perception and engagement. She's also got a work, The Jack Pine Remembered, outside the station at a nearbye seniors home - art can crop up just about anywhere, not just on TTC property.

( some good images by C.J. White on this link ):

http://www.canadiandesignresource.ca/officialgallery/?p=7873

 

[junctionist]

The Canada Line hits a happy medium between pleasant enough to ride and reasonable costs. On a continuum, one end is the Queen's Quay LRT station (ugly to the point I prefer to walk to Union), but on the other hand there is Westminster Station in London. Obviously it is bloody impressive, but you wonder if the money wouldn't be better spent elsewhere. The DLR system struck me as a more balanced system in this respect, stations like Canary Wharf (the DLR one, not Jubilee) are impressive enough.

I am also more inclined to support subway art than architecture. From what I have seen, big time architects can't design a subway station. Maybe they were asked to do so by the system operator, I don't know, but "architect designed" often becomes a euphemism for massively oversized. Glencairn comes to mind as a an example. The Jubilee line another.

In sum, stations should be pleasant and interesting, but they don't have to be monuments for all future generations to behold with fear and wonder. The Canada Line shows that stations don't have to have massive vaulted ceilings and palatial mezzanines that feel like they came out of the head of a bureaucrat with an Albert Speer complex. I personally like our older smaller stations. Some were built with unfortunate color schemes, but the renovated Osgoode and St. Andrew's station are quite nice in my opinion. Examples like Pachter's Leafs/Habs mural in College or the mosaic in Dupont are more impressive and unique to Toronto than getting whoever the starchitect du jour is to design an underground cathedral and are a fraction of the price.

But I ask why does it necessarily have to be starchitects designing our stations for higher commissions? Montreal's stations were often designed by local architects. Many are hardly expensive icons, but rather they're invigorated by tasteful doses of colourful patterns, unique fixtures, and some artwork.

You mention Dupont's mosaic, but it's Dupont itself which is interesting. It's not a 'starchitect cathedral', but its beauty is in the details, like the rounded platform benches built into the walls and clad with the same orange tiles, the round lighting fixtures and the twin "bubble" entrances with small plazas around them. Sometimes it takes private architects to achieve cohesive results like that. I'd also take Yorkdale station to anything on the Sheppard line, even though Yorkdale presently has no artwork.

It's also interesting to note that the 1978 Spadina line stations' artwork was partly funded by private donors, as noted in a report ("Spadina Subway Art and Architecture Tour", available at Robarts Library).

 

[junctionist]

My answer to the thread question is that of course both are worth it. For many people they make public transit more interesting and express the importance of the subway system as something that everyone should use if possible, not as just a service reluctantly provided. They are markers of civic pride and prominent neighbourhood hubs. They leave a good impression on tourists, who often use the system.

The public transit system is where good design can be made available to the masses and inspire citizens. It can one of the best opportunities to invest in architecture and consequently the city.

 

[EnviroTO]

With respect to Toronto tax money that we would be saving, it would come from other potential Toronto expenditures (streets, homeless, etc) or (through reduced taxes) it would not be taken from the taxpayer in the first place (the less likely option). If the province and feds are kicking in dollars, then any money saved could be redirected to other provincial or federal initiatives (housing in Nunavut) or given back to the taxpayer through tax cuts.

But would a Toronto without squares, parks, street tree plantings, and public art be a better city just because it has lower taxes? I don't think lowering taxes is the least likely option... it is the MOST likely option. Every year the discussion is what budget needs to be trimed to lower taxes, keep taxes below inflation, etc. The budget is set to have as little tax impact as possible while delivering the priorities set by council. If city council was elected based on basic maintenance and homelessness none of the councillors we have been electing would get in. Lower taxes and big projects that improve the public realm get more votes than anything else. Under more conservate leadership Toronto had below inflation tax increases for many years and homelessness grew and transit didn't get much investment (i.e. when we supposedly could afford it most).

 

[EnviroTO]

Because they want publicity? Because they may be charitable? People on this forum contributed tons of design ideas for the rail corridor bridge, and I believe willypoon did some design renders for the Spadina extension (actually, wyliepoon makes alot of designs for a lot of things). Part of UofT's engineering had a design competition a while back for improvements on the TTC. All of that was totally free, probono, stuff. None of this will be replacing architects and engineers, but I see no reason why people wouldn't be willing to work pro-bono to submit a mural or tile pattern, which is what I assume Second_in_Pie was referring to.

Artists most of the time barely make ends meet. How are they supposed to afford all the materials required to paint or tile a whole station? If they don't get paid during a billion dollar project then when will they get paid? There aren't a lot of full-time sculpture jobs out there. When the city pays for a piece of art it doesn't come in the form of an idea, it comes in the form of an installable product.

 

[officedweller]

The Canada Line stations WILL have public art - they will rotate around the stations. They haven't been installed yet because the line opened 3 months early and the artists haven't completed them yet.

The art for YVR Station was pictured in the newspaper (goes with YVR's native art theme):

Rotating art will brighten the stations on Canada Line
The only permanent piece will be at YVR-Airport Station

By Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun
August 15, 2009

Musqueam artist Susan Point's cedar sculpture will be a permanent fixture at the YVR station for the Canada Line.
Photograph by: Jenelle Schneider, Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Sun

Canada Line passengers waiting for a train will have something to pique their interest: a series of public art pieces installed at stations along the 19-kilometre line.

The artwork is part of a Canada Line Public Art Program, which aims to engage the public and liven up the stations with "playful" pieces, said Jane Bird, CEO of Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc.

The pieces include a sculpture entitled La Chaise by Seattle artist Marie Khouri, which will likely be installed at Olympic Station.

The bright colourful work by artists Victor Cicansky and Joe Fafard, both of whom are represented by local galleries, and a train design by Yayoi Kusama, one of the Biennale partnerships, will also be featured. Some 10 pieces of artwork will be rotated around the rapid transit line and changed over time.

"The theme is they're all temporary," Bird said. "This was meant to be a first splash on opening day to get people thinking of art."

Only the YVR-Airport station will have a permanent fixture: a first nations sculpture by Musqueam artist Susan Point. Entitled Cedar Connection, the 10-foot-high, 10-foot- long and 11-foot-wide sculpture made of western red cedar is designed to reflect what the area once looked like.

The sculpture aims to depict the first nations people and their relationship with the great rainforest and the Fraser River.

The main body of the artwork represents an old-growth tree stump, with a flowing water-line motif representing the river. Inside the sculpture is a tufted weaving pattern that represents the tapestry of life.

An owl and a human face within the tree stump relate to the oral tradition within Salish culture. The owl is the keeper of wisdom and a messenger within the story of life, while the human face is a tribute to Musqueam storyteller Dominic Point.

InTransitBC is partnering with the Biennale for the public art project.

It has also asked the City of Vancouver to waive its City Retail Compensation fee, which allows it to lease retail operations in Canada Line stations, in exchange for dedicating the money to the public art program.

ksinoski@vancouversun.com

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

 

[adma]

Examples like Pachter's Leafs/Habs mural in College or the mosaic in Dupont are more impressive and unique to Toronto than getting whoever the starchitect du jour is to design an underground cathedral and are a fraction of the price.

Though Dupont, technically, is "architect designed" (Clifford & Lawrie). Indeed, the most aesthetically humdrum/kitschy/dismal stations on the 1978 Spadina line--Wilson, St Clair West--were the ones that were attributed to "TTC Design Staff". And their failings have a lot in common with the earlier ones of the north Yonge line (where the TTC design staff first entered the polyester leisure suit age), as well as, slightly later, the B-D pendants of Kipling and Kennedy.

Yeah, Kipling and Kennedy. The most soul-destroying stations of all. And they're in-house creations; not architect (let alone starchitect) creations. About the only argument on their behalf is the "fraction of the price" argument...

 

[Whoaccio]

I've got nothing against architects. I mean, isn't it sort of a definitional requirement that a anything like a subway station has to be designed by someone who is an architect? So I didn't want to give the impression I want everything to be designed by some TTC paper pusher.

What I don't want was that very same TTC paper pusher to get the architect to design Toronto's equivalent of Giza. From what I've seen, TTC projects just taken on a life of their own where goals and requirements steadily balloon until the point where the final product in no way resembles what was originally intended to be. As in, someone thinking "Well, we've hired Norman Foster to make this station in Vaughan that will serve 2k people a day, but Canary Wharf was pretty cool, so I might as well try to get him to do something just as nice, then when it comes time for promotions I will say I built the coolest subway station in Canada!" Maybe the TTC staff feel like they are wasting money to get Will Alsop to design a modernized version of this or this?. Aren't we supposedly living in the age of "architectural modesty"? More Jack Diamond, less Libeskind.

EDIT: Or actually, hell, hire whoever. I don't care. Just don't loose sight of what the project is supposed to be. If somebody, anybody, is designing a low volume suburban subway station surrounded by park'n'ride lots and the 407, they are an idiot if they build something that costs more than is prudent to ensure it doesn't cause a rider's eyes to bleed.

 

[interchange42]

Why would, or should, artists volunteer to "pretty up" a station for free or at a low price? And if it actually were so "easy to just hire some artists", why do we have as little art in the system as we do?

The answers are 1) that artists worth hiring are worth their hire, and 2) that significant works, able to stand the test of time in these high traffic situations and in these out-sized environs, must be carefully considered: generally they do not come cheaply.

What do you do, Second_in_pie? Maybe you'd like to do it for free, or at a low price, and do it in public, so that we can all undervalue it too? Meanwhile, consider taking an art tour of the subway system, after which you can get back to us concerning which pieces you think might be the cut-rate standouts.

42

If I was able to produce art on anything bigger than standard size paper, sure I'd be willing to take a day to contribute to my theoretical neighborhood subway station. I was merely hoping that some people with a shred of artistic talent and community spirit would be thinking less about the money and more of the benefits for their community. But maybe we're thinking on different lines, like two or three drawings or murals vs. Museum station?

Second_in_pie: what do you do to make a living? If you were asked to do that for free on a major public project (the government didn't value it enough to pay you, but they would like you to do it for free), would you do it happily? If the government had enough money to pay everyone else who was contributing to the project, would you not be insulted that you were asked to contribute voluntarily?

Because they want publicity? Because they may be charitable? People on this forum contributed tons of design ideas for the rail corridor bridge, and I believe willypoon did some design renders for the Spadina extension (actually, wyliepoon makes alot of designs for a lot of things). Part of UofT's engineering had a design competition a while back for improvements on the TTC. All of that was totally free, probono, stuff. None of this will be replacing architects and engineers, but I see no reason why people wouldn't be willing to work pro-bono to submit a mural or tile pattern, which is what I assume Second_in_Pie was referring to.

Whoaccio: what do you do to make a living? If you were asked to do that for free on a major public project (the government didn't value it enough to pay you, but they would like you to do it for free), would you do it happily? If the government had enough money to pay everyone else who was contributing to the project, would you not be insulted that you were asked to contribute voluntarily?

Artists deserve to earn a living for producing their art. Worse than merely being insulted by those whose attitude it is that they should do their work for free, the vast majority of artists in this country wouldn't have the change for a hamburger in their pockets. Artists are worth hiring, just like you two are for whatever you do.

42

 

[Whoaccio]

Whoaccio: what do you do to make a living? If you were asked to do that for free on a major public project (the government didn't value it enough to pay you, but they would like you to do it for free), would you do it happily? If the government had enough money to pay everyone else who was contributing to the project, would you not be insulted that you were asked to contribute voluntarily?

No, I wouldn't feel insulted. I'm not artistically inclined, so I doubt the TTC would ever want me to design anything. I would be willing to contribute what I know about route planning if the TTC issued some kind of public consultation thing. I contribute my time to wikipedia for free. Legions of IT people spend what must be billions of dollars of personal time developing open source software, guides and such. Tons of musicians do pro bono concerts for charities and projects deemed in the "public interest." As it is the TTC doesn't pay buskers to perform in the system. The Spacing universe has had more than few examples of late of not for profit community groups donating their time to artistic improvements. People donate their time to things like community gardens, I assume because they find it worthwhile to contribute to the community. The entire charity industry is defined by people foregoing the fruits of their work for what they consider to be the public good.

Artists deserve to earn a living for producing their art. Worse than merely being insulted by those whose attitude it is that they should do their work for free, the vast majority of artists in this country wouldn't have the change for a hamburger in their pockets. Artists are worth hiring, just like you two are for whatever you do.

I don't know why you keep implying that we want to turn poor artists into modern day slaves. If someone doesn't want to do something that is fine, neither of us wants to have the City recreate a kind of gulag archipelago of conscripted bohemians. I think there is reason to believe if Toronto asked individuals to contribute ideas for, say, station color schemes or wall murals people would voluntarily contribute. Why are you treating community volunteers like scabs?

 

[interchange42]

I am not dumping on community volunteers. The examples of work that you list that volunteers accomplish are great, and important. That discretionary work is not what we are talking about here though. Art in TTC stations is mandated as a percentage of project costs, as it is for all major projects in the city. Because of that, TTC art commissions are trophy assignments for artists, and are the kind of major works that put bread and butter on their table, allowing them to be artists in the first place. If IT professionals were asked to donate the major part of their year's work instead of being paid for it, they would not be IT professionals for long.

Based on how easy you and Second_in_pie think it would be to "pretty up" a station, I intuit you undervalue the art we already have. The long-lasting tile and enamel panels that make up the bulk of art in the system are expensive to produce and install, so you don't want just anybody doing it. It takes coordination between all involved - architects, engineers, artists, TTC muckety-mucks, to pull off successful installations of art.

I will grant that every artwork is never going to please everybody. While I think a number of stations on the system are brilliantly accentuated by the art - including but not limited to

Dupont,

Downsview,

Eglinton West,

Bayview,

Bessarion,

Yonge-Sheppard (on the Sheppard line),

others, particularly Micah Lexier's Ampersand, where he had locals write out "Sheppard & Leslie" on every tile at Leslie,

is a disaster. I though it sounded interesting when I heard the plan, but the results are anemic and annoying.

Despite some disappointments I am glad we aim to bring life to these spaces. So many people pass through the network every day, there is no reason the system should be made up of spartan, soulless environments: it should reflect and enrich the lives of the people that use the system, so it's worth paying for that.

All photos sourced from CJWhite's comprehensive TTC Stations set on Flickr.

42

 

[Archivist]

I agree fully with interchange's comments and would further ask those who suggest that artists should give their work for free. This isn't Wikipedia - and I would suggest that the comparison is insulting. Would you, for free:

1) Commit to a deadline?
2) Commit to meetings with architects, engineers, TTC bureaucrats about your artwork? Work with others to help define the limits, possibilities, of your project? Refine it with regard to their input?
3) Not request that your own expenses be reimbursed?
4) Commit to ephemeral activities like putting together a budget for the artwork, submitting receipts, answering emails, etc.
5) Commit to being onsite for long hours during installation to ensure that it is done properly?

I'm so on board with interchange's comments. We all do stuff for free because we find it pleasurable. It doesn't count.

 

[LordWanker]

This probably would not count as subway art but a stretch of track just after Dundas W stop on the Bloor/Danforth line has wonderful graffiti murals on the south side.