Public commissions: the Tower of Babel

Art Business News, July, 2004 by Joshua Kaufman

When an artist who creates art on a monumental scale gets the much-anticipated phone call that he has won the commission for a large work to be installed in a plaza, lobby, airport, or traffic circle, that initial wave of excitement often turns into a headache, due to the many challenges involved with such undertakings.

Throughout the ages, works of public art have been commissioned by rulers to glorify themselves or to fill temples with representations of the gods. There has always been tension between those commissioning the works and the artists creating them. The tales of the battles between Michelangelo and Pope Julius II, or Da Vinci and Rembrandt's trials and tribulations with their benefactors, are legendary. Even today, when an artist who creates art on a monumental scale gets the much-anticipated phone call that he has won the commission for a large work to be installed in a plaza, lobby, airport, or traffic circle, that initial wave of excitement often turns into a headache, due to the many challenges involved with such undertakings.

The contemporary artist who receives a commission is usually faced with a unique set of challenges, which can be mitigated, if not prevented, by proper upfront planning and negotiation.

The commissioning process often begins with the city or the developer hiring an art consultant who undertakes some form of juried competition requiring artists to submit drawings or plans, based on the site and the required guidelines. During the early stages of such competitions, fees are often not paid to the artists. However, in properly run competitions, and after the first cut-off when more detailed plans and maquettes are requested, artists are usually compensated for their efforts.

A Term Sheet or Letter of Intent, in which the veral time frame, description of the nature of the work and the budget are articulated, must be agreed to and signed. The artist's plans are then usually made a part of the permit process. Their designs are presented to the zoning board, fine arts panels and the like, and become part of the overall approval process granted for the new building, terminal, train station, park, etc. At this point (if not sooner), after a work has been accepted by the developer or the city, and it has gone through the various zoning and public hearing processes, a full contract is presented to the artist.

Tower of Babel

Next comes the part of the process that I refer to as the "Tower of Babel," where there are many people involved and no two speak the same language. Quite often, the first draft of a contract that an artist sees is the developer's standard builder/subcontractor agreement in which the preparer uses the word processor function of "search and replace" to replace the term "electrician" or "plumber" with "artist," The artist is expected to sign this document with no questions asked. Pity the developer who submits such a contract, or the artist who signs one. This is the making of a disaster. It is imperative that both parties understand the framework in which the other works.

The creation of a monumental piece of art and its installation is not the same as laying pipe, wire or pouring concrete, and it cannot be treated as such by the developer. An artist must realize that there are certain restrictions inherent in a building project where works must be on-site on time and must conform to the agreed to plans.

There must not be deviations for artistic reasons without clearing them with the developer.

Two paramount disciplines that artists need to appreciate are budgeting and engineering. All too often artists, from the novice to those who have been in the business for 50 or 60 years, don't understand the engineering concepts of taking a small work, enlarging it and having it placed in an outdoor environment. When a work is placed outdoors it is subject to wind, traffic, acid rain, pollution, cars, tornadoes, hurricanes and everything else that man and nature can throw at it. As such, the engineering components of an outdoor piece are critical and often beyond the scope or skill set of the average artist. It is imperative that an engineer be brought aboard the artist's team (and is included in the project's budget). Or the developer, as a builder with such resources, may make an engineer available to the artist.

Unfortunately, the reality is that the builder and the artist often do not deal with the issue until the builder's insurance company responsible for insuring the piece brings in engineers to test the piece. Then, all too often, the insurance company refuses to insure the work because of various structural problems that are not readily apparent to the builder or the artist.

The reality, however, is that the majority of the artists who work on public art commissions do not end up making any money and in fact it is not uncommon for them to lose money. They simply do not have the accounting skills to predict and manage the costs of a construction job. People with such knowledge should be brought in to assist the artist.