By Susan Myers, Project Manager, Fairmount Park Art Association
In preparation for the Knight-funded public art project Open Air by artist Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, the Art Association’s Project Manger and Development/Communications Manager recently had the opportunity to travel to Montréal and view Lozano-Hemmer’s installation, Articulated Intersect, commissioned as part of the Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal’s Triennale Québécoise 2011. The outdoor artwork, like the artist’s proposed Open Air project for Philadelphia, used powerful searchlights to create three-dimensional light sculptures in the night sky, so we were eager to experience the work first-hand. Unique to this installation, however, was the artist’s use of large “joystick-like” control tubes that invited viewer participation by allowing individuals to draw, direct, and control 18 searchlights on scaffolds and on the rooftops of numerous buildings adjacent to the project site. In addition to being at the project site under the canopy of lights, it was also a visually rich experience to see the searchlights moving over the city as we emerged from our hotel and initially walked to the site. We were given a full tour of the installation by the on-site Project Supervisor, including a look at the operational computer control room, and appreciated talking with him about the details of the installation and the day-to–day concerns of maintaining a large public artwork.
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, "Articulated Intersect, Relational Architecture 19", 2011. Triennale Québécoise (curator: Marie Fraser), Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal, Québec, 2011. Photo by James Ewing
Staff also benefited from meetings with Marie Fraser, the curator at the Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal, as well as with the Production Manager for the Articulated Intersect project and the museum’s PR staff person. We came prepared with a long list of questions for them, and they were all very generous with their time and attention. Since Rafael Lozano-Hemmer is based in Montreal, we were treated to a tour of his studio and had the chance to meet a few members of his studio team. It was evident that Lozano-Hemmer has an impressive group of programmers, technicians, and fabricators that are enthusiastic about helping him articulate and realize his artistic vision.
The trip was a great success, and we returned to Philadelphia eager to continue to move our project forward. Currently, Open Air is scheduled to premiere in September of 2012.
- Information and a video of Articulated Intersect can be found on the artist’s website.
- Information on the Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal’s Triennale Québécoise 2011 can be found at the museum’s website.
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, "Articulated Intersect, Relational Architecture 19", 2011. Triennale Québécoise (curator: Marie Fraser), Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal, Québec, 2011. Photo by James Ewing
Very sad irresponsible exhibition. Shows no regard at all for the harmful human health and ecological consequences of light pollution. Light trespass should not be an option anymore.
An insult to the eyes and ears and an invasion of privacy. No art should remove views of the night sky which itself is greater than any artist’s ego. This is an insane idea and should be stopped.
Would you like someone to place an ugly piece of sculpture on your roof & your neighbor’s roof and light them up all night with obscenly bright flashing lights?
The night sky belongs to all of nature, not to the massive ego of one artist.
S Pauley MD
In as much as I love art and honor creativity, and appreciate the inventive articulation of posing thought provoking artistic expression, this is a bad idea. Not that it isn’t obviously a concept in art, it is not new, nor unique. It has been used by 20th Century Fox for half a century and was a big deal at the worlds fair in Chicago and in New york where lights were shined into the sky with the high powered carbon ark lamps, of the day.
Modern understanding of our place on our Planet, Earth, demands attention to a greater calling than self-promoted techno art that brings harm. The International Dark-Sky Association and lovers of dark night skies all agree that the beauty of the stars outshines any artificial lighting for any non-essential purpose.
Please know that this is not unique, nor, important in moving the art of humanity to new horizons or understandings. It does not bring anything novel that has not been done many times before. Just new operators behind the light switches.
A light show running for hours every night and for days on end. Is a horrible idea, a huge waste of energy, and a real destroyer of nighttime darkness. A really bad idea !
I’m appalled that the Association for Public Art is pursuing the Open Air project. It must mean that either the Association for Public Art is ignorant of the harm done by light pollution, or does not care despite being cognizant of the damage that Open Air will do. I am an avid supporter of the arts and my wife is an artist. I am happy to grant artists great license in the pursuit of their work, but I draw the line at senseless destruction.
If Lozano-Hemmer’s point is to glorify human disregard and distain for the natural environment, then that statement comes through loud and clear. But that message is made nightly when the light pollution of Philadelphia drowns out the stars and deprives the people of the most awe inspiring sight they will ever see.
A recurring theme in modern art has been the critique of the conventional madness of contemporary life, holding up a mirror to humanity’s failings. The Association for Public Art has chosen instead to celebrate and propagate madness. Future generations living in an even more degraded world will name you accomplices.
This isn’t art, it’s light pollution. This makes me pray for a solar flare to knock out the power grid.
Enjoying the night skies without unnecessary light polution should be the right of every individual, without an “art” project that will pollute even the most light polluted skies. To think that any organization would back such a project is unbelievable.
Everyone that thinks this project is “art”, and should continue; what would your impression be if all of your neighbors shines spotlights in your windows all night long, every night? Still think light pollution is art?
Let there be no doubt that this flooded skylight will indeed have an impact on birds, etc.
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer’s projects with interactive lights have been safely and successfully staged in cities all over the world, including Dublin, Hong Kong, Lisbon, Liverpool, Lyon, Montreal, Rotterdam, Toronto, and Vitoria- Gasteiz Spain.
The lateral light pollution of the beams is smaller than any street light, advertisement or corporate logo found on Philadelphia’s buildings, and the lights are tightly focused and are never pointed towards nearby buildings, flight paths or sensitive ecological areas. The installation is temporary, and the lights run nightly for 3 hours from 8:00-11:00pm, so the dark sky is unaffected for most of the evening.
You claim that Lozano-Hemmer’s projects have been “safely” staged. Would you care to provide genuine scientific data demonstrating that no harm was done by Lozano-Hemmer’s light projects?
Your comment indicates that the Association lacks an understanding of the light pollution problem and seems to convey the attitude that a little more light pollution won’t hurt. This is an example of the tragedy of the commons.
They mean safe for humans.
How can you assert that the international staging of similar exhibits have been “safely” installed before. How do you know what impact has occurred? Was there a study done to assess the impact? That’s a lot of places all over the world that might have, actually, suffered unknown harm that is not being recognized. Just stating it was safe does not make it true. The same potential harm may be true for Philadelphia and is harming its citizens, even now, given the current growing knowledge about light pollution. Kind of like when tobacco was thought Okay. Not so!
I believe Benjamin Franklin would oppose this project. As a scientist and student of nature, he would learn the truth about the impact of light pollution and surely support measures to stop it. Since Ben is cherished figure in Philadelphia and his politics are well realized, I think he would be a lead member of the International Dark-Skies Association and an ardent supporter of all science that protects nature and wildlife. The carbon footprint grows and who knows what that means. He would ask questions about it just as he pondered the gulf stream when others had no idea about it. Wildlife suffers and biodiversity dwindles. He would oppose things that are needless and harm nature.
September is a critical time for the movement south of tens of millions of migrating songbirds and Philadelphia is directly in the path of the Atlantic Flyway. It is hard to imagine a more disorienting specter for migrating birds than this light show.
If you are truly after a visually rich experience, consider dousing all the surrounding lights and directing your attention to emphasizing a natural light show, the Milky Way and its attending 200 billion stars, which just so happens to be directly overhead and free for all to see.
Must we wash out even more of the sky? Sadly, we are now so enamored with our own creations that we must overwhelm and make invisible some of natures finest. Some of my fondest memories are explaining the stars to city kids up in Maine. The natural light show blew them away more then any man made creation could.
This ideas is a poorly thought out as this website (please reconsider your font/background contrast if you expect people to actually read your site). Creating light pollution for the sake of “art” is irresponsible.
Totally irresponsible. The person responsible has absolutely no concept of the harm this is doing to the environment. The environmental damage caused by light pollution is now well established so I won’t elaborate further. A simple Google search will be sufficient. In addition he has offended thousands of people internationally with this creation. It is more about ego, less about art. The art community and municipalities should wake up to the fact that abuse of the night sky by so-called artists is totally unacceptable.
I am a great lover of the night sky. I spend my summers at the edge of a dark island with a 10″ Cassegrain telescope. The majesty of the universe fills me with awe. Living in Philadelphia, however, even with a south facing 31st floor balcony, I’ve learned that there are never more that a handful of visible stars. I applaud every effort to protect what nature exists in the city. But really! Cities are fundamentally about people–culture, civilization, creativity. Rafael Lozano-Hemmer’s piece will be wonderful. I am so looking forward to it!
You are very fortunate to spend your summers at a dark sky site. Are you aware that many people haven’t the means or opportunity to travel to such a place, and that such places are becoming ever more rare?
You justify Lozano-Hemmer’s light polluting project with the statement, “cities are fundamentally about people–culture, civilization, creativity.” This is a non sequitur. That cities are centers of creativity does not mean that any artistic project, no matter how wasteful, foolish, or destructive, should be pursued, especially when it involves open space that is shared with all manner of living things.
You say you favor efforts, “to protect what nature exists in the city.” However, the status quo you seek to preserve is demonstrably harmful. There is evidence that light pollution is not only damaging to birds and insects, but presents a public health risk to human beings. We should be seeking to reduce light pollution not developing excuses or an attitude of tolerance for it.
What a waste of energy and money. Destroying the night sky for everyone who might like to look up on occasion. Also, your damaing the health of birds, insects and humans. Irresponsible. What’s next? Let’s burn drums of oil and use fans to make pretty patterns…
For those of us slightly less dramatic about a 3 hour show that is up for a few weeks, here are the details of all the steps taken to ensure that the environmental impact of the project is mitigated: http://openairphilly.net/environment
Looking forward to it!
–Jacinta
The “steps taken to ensure that the environmental impact of the project is mitigated” do nothing of the sort. The sections pertaining to light pollution and bird migration are thoroughly disingenuous and deliberately misleading.
You think critics are overreacting because the show will only last a few weeks for 3 hours per night. In fact, it will run 32 consecutive nights for a total of 96 hours and is expected to be visible from 10 miles away. Lozano-Hemmer has done several similar light polluting projects in the past and will probably do more in the future. The problem is not only that these projects contribute to light pollution, but they also convey the message that light pollution is inconsequential, and that a little more light pollution for art’s sake is justifiable.
I am a public health researcher. I’ve heard the same arguments in defense of other bad practices. I can only urge people to familiarize themselves with the health risks that light pollution poses for human beings, the harm it does to wildlife, and consider that relatively small individual actions, which by themselves do not seem very harmful, can accumulate into problems of epic proportion.
That’s 26 days Barasits, so 78 hours in total. Don’t you think it would be more productive to target instead the permanent pollution coming from the large illuminated advertisements in the city, for example?
At http://www.openairphilly.net it says that the show will run, “every night from September 20 to October 14″. That’s 32 days. I haven’t been able to find any mention of 4 nights off.
Light pollution opponents are working to reduce light pollution from all sources.
Sorry Barasits, your math is wrong, as was mine…it is actually 25 nights.
You’re right Jacinta: 25 nights. Oddly enough, this doesn’t remove my objections to the project. If the show were to run for only one or two nights, I don’t think it would have sparked much outcry. But why must it run for 25 nights? I’m guessing that the funding determined the length of the show. If more money were available, why not have the show run longer? Why not three months? Why not all year long? I’m asking you how much is too much, and what reasoning guides your assessment?
I’d think people so worried about light pollution would spend more time focused on street lamps and other lights then a very temporary art exhibit. But I guess it’s easy to plan an internet angry letter attack from a telescope forum.
As for the birds, you want facts. So is there any proof this will actually harm them any more then the airport lights a few miles away? The airport next to a thriving MIGRATORY BIRD SANCTUARY?
I used to live near Philly, but I moved. The sun just set where I am, and the Milky Way is starting to glow. Philly is so light polluted that nobody there will ever see it unless they drive to West Virginia, so I guess the best they can do is another jolt of light pollution so they can see SOMETHING when they look at the sky.
I miss the cheese steaks though…..
I’ve seen this art project for a few nights while in Philly for actual cultural events. I can’t believe that someone is allowed to pollute the common night sky for such a trite conceit.