DN Editorial: Strauss' Very Public Art

WE GIVE A hearty thumbs-up to whatever smart person decided that it was time for a Zoe Strauss photography exhibit (at the Philadelphia Museum of Art until April 22) and two thumbs-up for Strauss herself, who thought of displaying her images on 54 billboards around the city.

There are many wonderful aspects of this very public, very temporary way of displaying art.

First, we wish more billboards were devoted to art and fewer to strictly commercial messages. We need more presence of art in our lives, and billboards are a great canvas for high-impact works; it's a perfect way to have art confront us where we live, rather than confined to the walls of museums and galleries. (And cheers to Clear Channel Outdoor and Krain Outdoor Advertising, for donating their billboards.)

Second, we applaud public art that isn't another mural. Until now, we have admitted this only to close friends, but we can't help thinking that the city is, to riff on a phrase from Councilwoman Blackwell, a little "muraled-out." We know the program run by Jane Golden is noble and good, but murals are only one dialect in the very rich language of public art, and for too long, our public art seems to have been dominated by murals. (Consider, in raw numbers: 3,000 murals vs the 1,400 public artworks inventoried and maintained by the Fairmount Park Art Association.)

We worry that despite the value of the program, the money that goes to Mural Arts ($1.5 million from the city as part of its $6 million budget, as of 2007-08, the last time they posted an annual report) and the attention focused on a single program aren't ideal for encouraging the full range of expression that we need for a thriving public art scene. Besides, we think aged brick buildings can be things of beauty unto themselves, especially at a certain time of day when the light is fading. There's no shame in bare brick, or blank walls.