I like this editorial in the Reading Eagle, out of Reading, Pa., from Tuesday, Aug. 19 about the mayor of the city appointing a “new” Public Art Task Force for the city, to help decide on public art projects and to be financed with .5 percent assessment on city development. What the editorial board of the paper is suggesting is that the city look at the models some other cities use in deciding what goes on display for public art, and to give the people of the city a say in what decorates their streets.

I think this is a great idea, and there is obviously a back story in the Reading area that goes with this. It seems that there was a Fine Arts Board in Reading that made public art decisions for 31 years, a good many of which the people of the city didn’t agree with. That disagreement was apparently met with a somewhat snobbish attitude from the board. Eventually they were fired. According to the first comment after the editorial, however, a good number of the members of the new board served on the old board. How this will play out is anybody’s guess. It’s good, interesting fun no matter how you parse it. I hope the board is smarter this time around.

I imagine this is a problem in a lot of medium-size towns and cities across America. You have “experts” appointed to positions of authority in determining what is good public art and what is not. The problem, however, is that taste in art is a purely subjective thing. It can be based on one’s ability to think abstractly, one’s level of education or lack thereof, or on one’s desire not to have to think when faced with art, but just to simply feel. There’s almost no way to win in a situation like this, for any one. It just gets worse when the “experts” look down their noses at the plebes of a society who don’t have the taste to understand the choice. Truth be told, however, how many times have you yourself – be honest now – seen a large piece of outdoor sculpture, or a mural on the side of a building, and said to yourself, 'What the heck is that?'

The Eagle’s editorial board suggests that Reading look at the examples set by two towns in South Dakota, one of which is to invite a host of artists to display pieces in a central space and have folks vote on their favorite – ah, democracy. The other is to find a theme, like presidents or sports figures or whatever…

I happen to like the first idea the best, though I should be careful what I wish for, and that’s the art snob in me speaking. I do, however, think the public will should be done when art is presented in its name. Invite 70 or 80 artists to present ideas, let everyone take a look and choose the one that speaks to the most people. That way no one could say they didn’t get their say.

Here’s a link to the Reading Eagle’s editorial. Check it out.

- Noah Fleisher, Aug. 24, 2008