‘Stop looking at your phones and do something’. Art gallery, Feb 2013

Thinking about the imminent charges at the soon to be reopened art gallery has reminded me of the last time I was in there. Just before the art gallery closed for its major refurbishment, in February 2013, it opened its doors for people to make their own art and comment on its walls. At the time I included a page on the yarn bombing outside, but I also took these photos inside, not included then. Seems a good time to share them now.

‘The open day was all about the public taking ownership of the gallery as we handed it over to them for the day’, the Press reported, back then.

And outside, the yarn bombing event, which I did a page about at the time. And said that for me the work in the public space outside — Exhibition Square — was the highlight. A reminder that the crafty and arty creativity isn’t always behind the doors of our cultural institutions.

The post ‘Taking ownership’ of the art gallery: 2013 appeared first on York Stories.

Some days ago we were waiting for clarification on proposed entrance charges at the art gallery, as discussed on this site. The clarification came yesterday and was reported in the Press.

Source: Report (PDF) prepared for next week’s City of York Council meeting

The press release

Rather than relying on press reports it’s often enlightening to look at the original press release on the City of York Council website. In this case perhaps more irritating than enlightening, as it was a stunning example of putting a positive spin on something that doesn’t feel very positive at all. I’d got used to this kind of thing under the previous administration, and hoped the tone of these things might change. But no. I read it several times, and didn’t know whether to laugh or cry, as they say.

It starts with the heading ‘proposals for greater commercial freedom’ — doesn’t that sound lovely and positive. Freedom, what could be wrong with freedom. YMT has ‘robust and exciting plans’, ooh, doesn’t that sound good. And of course it wouldn’t be complete without the word ‘innovate’ and the phrase ‘cultural offer’.

But what it’s actually about is an imminent decision to introduce admission charges which would mean that the city’s ‘cultural offer’ — or at least parts of it managed by YMT — will be inaccessible to many residents who have been able to visit previously for free (or, in the case of the museums, for the cost of a York Card).

There’s a larger debate to be had on art being ‘free’, and one kicked off on Twitter at the weekend. These things all need paying for by someone at some point.

The specific issue here is whether York residents should be expected to pay to enter the art gallery and the Castle Museum, and whether those charges are fair, and what the impact of them would be.

In other places: how Brighton does it

A while back I Googled to see how other galleries were doing in the current economic climate, and found that Brighton Museum and Galleries proposed charging entry fees for non-residents back in early 2014, despite the recognition that it was ‘a move that could see visitor numbers drop by 50%’. This was perhaps handled better than it has been here in York, as clear information on the situation was provided, and it introduced charges but still maintained free entry for residents. What has been happening in other cities with their museums and galleries? I don’t know, but it might be interesting to look or perhaps if you have experience from elsewhere you can add a comment.

The York Card

These things weren’t all completely free before. We bought a York Card to access the museums and other attractions. It was only a few pounds but it wasn’t free.

And also striking is the fact that many people think the York Card currently costs £2 or £3. It doesn’t. It now costs £5. Presumably the increase was brought in for the new financial year.

Perhaps many of us have York Cards but haven’t used them much? So perhaps we won’t really miss our ‘privilege’ of free access as much as we think?

But is it more the principle of the thing? That feeling that ‘our’ art gallery and ‘our city’s museums’ have been moved into a Trust, out of council ownership/management, and access to them is now being sold back to us?

The art gallery refurbishment funding

There are also different ideas around about how the recent renovation and refurbishment was paid for, and whether ‘we’ (residents) paid for it. The information is on this page on the YMT website:

The project will bring an investment of £8 million into York. We are very grateful to all our funders who have made this project possible:

National Lottery through Arts Council England – £3.5 million
Private Legacy – £2 million
City of York Council – £500,000
Anthony Shaw Trust – £400,000
Garfield Weston Foundation – £250,000
The Foyle Foundation – £150,000
Sir Siegmund Warburg’s Voluntary Settlement – £100,000
The Feoffees of St Michael’s of Spurriergate – £50,000
Shepherd Group – £50,000 over three years.

We are continuing to raise funds for the remaining £1 million costs.

I think this was written some time ago, so perhaps the remaining million has been found from somewhere. But there is, in there, a contribution from City of York Council. From where? Council tax? Some people think so. Which means residents have already paid a lot into this impressive-looking building full of new and exciting exhibits.

So what now?

The proposals regarding entrance charges will be decided upon at a council meeting next week. The report for that meeting (PDF) is on this link and worth reading for more clarification on the details of the various options discussed.

The Press reports that residents may still be able to get access free on a day or two a year, on the residents’ festival, for example. It seems rather begrudging, doesn’t it. I don’t think I’ll bother.

The press release yesterday emphasised that the support of local residents is needed for YMT to move its plans forward. Some residents will support it, and do already. There’s clearly a lot of enthusiasm and excitement about the art gallery’s reopening.

See the beautiful new displays at the @YorkArtGallery with a glass of prosecco in hand – http://t.co/bBIX0sZ5Lj — York Art Gallery (@YorkArtGallery) July 12, 2015

Perhaps an appropriate and creative response would be for angry residents to assemble in a sit-down protest outside, holding empty champagne glasses.

Or perhaps instead we shrug our shoulders, recognise that the city’s ‘cultural offer’ is mainly about providing a ‘visitor offer’, and that there’s plenty of art and culture and heritage elsewhere, outside the YMT museums and galleries, and support that instead, and make more of it.

Anyway, here’s a reminder, in pictures, of a day two years ago when the public briefly ‘took ownership’ of the gallery before it closed.

Support this site?

You can read more here. Thank you.

Footnote

Thanks to Cllr Nigel Ayre for clarifying, via Twitter, that the ‘papers refer to lease of York Art Gallery and Castle Museum only’. I’ve corrected this in the text.

The post Gallery and museums: entrance fees for residents appeared first on York Stories.

Of course, if you want to make your mark on a wall in a public place there are more environmentally friendly ways of doing it, though they’re less colourful, and more brown. On the side of some outbuildings under trees behind King’s Manor I noticed these interesting patches, messages imprinted and scratched into what appears to be mud.

I mentioned them to a friend, who looked more closely than I did and suggested that this might be wattle and daub rather than mere mud. Or rather, this would be just the ‘daub’ part, as the ‘wattle’ refers to the sticks forming the structure the mixture is applied to, and this daub/mud has been applied to the brick walls of an existing building.

The markings in the mud include years, names, and handprints.

If anyone has any further info, please feel free to add a comment. If it remains a mystery, that’s fine too. Just one of the many charming details I’ve noticed while wandering about.

The post Muddy markings, King’s Manor appeared first on York Stories.

On a recent walk (3 June) through York I noticed, as I often do, quite a lot of graffiti on various walls and other surfaces. Above, by the Foss, a striking patch of exuberant colour behind one of the Piccadilly properties.

Black Horse Passage, between Straker’s Passage and Stonebow:

Walking round the corner, from a once picturesque and somewhat ramshackle Straker’s Passage, now being smartened and modernised/gentrified, I had been feeling slightly sad. Seeing this graffiti art, with its colour and curves, I have to be honest and say I felt momentarily cheered up by its colourful exuberance.

Black Horse Passage is now overlooked by a 1950s telephone exchange and the garden area for that building is alongside, meaning the alley is more opened up than it used to be. But it still has that sense of history that many of the alleys and passages have. This one used to lead to ‘houses of ill-repute’ in the Hungate area. So it has a history of being associated with illicit/illegal goings on, and perhaps the graffiti is just part of that tradition.

The alley was also covered with a lot of random tagging with no particular artistic merit, but I had no desire to complain or contact the council to get it cleaned up/painted over.

Some graffiti appears to be officially sanctioned, and even funded. The York Curiouser project is placing poems on the walls of some of these alleys. This isn’t seen as vandalism, because it’s serious art and poetry. Or perhaps because they clean it off afterwards? (Do they?)

Later the same day I cycled down the Foss Islands cycle track and noticed this on the underside of one of the bridges:

Which, again, is presumably either officially sanctioned or at least probably unlikely to be seen as graffiti and painted over, because it’s part of the Edible York project, which works with the council.

So, bit of a grey area then, isn’t it. There are grey areas all over … and some of them are occasionally made more attractive and uplifting with the application of colour. Apparently some people are allowed to do this, and if other people do it it’s vandalism. Confusing, isn’t it.

In many locations the council appears to be involved in an endless cycle of painting over graffiti, providing a fresh canvas for more graffiti, which inevitably reappears. Perhaps this is a waste of time and resources?

More information

Steve Galloway’s blog, on tagging in his local area

Interesting range of views on graffiti, from young people (PDF) – from a City of York Council workshop

The post Writing on the walls: graffiti, art, poetry appeared first on York Stories.

The nave, emptied of chairs, filled with art. Modern, urban art, by Black Rose urban art collective.

I recognised those words immediately: they’re on the astronomical clock in the nearby north transept. Made fresh and startling, by Neil Ennui.

Obviously the Minster moves with the times. I know, from calling in every so often for a wander around, that it’s not a fusty place where everyone whispers and acts in a reverential way, and that it does incorporate many more modern additions into its historic fabric. Still, this was surprising, this ‘Minster Nights’ event.

The south transept, busy with people, and with tables set up, and children drawing. On one of the tables were T-shirts for sale, apparently by the artists whose work was on show around the nave. It didn’t seem very ‘religious’, and I was momentarily shocked, then laughed at myself for being shocked, and was pleased really to have my preconceptions about ‘churchy’ things challenged. I’m just a wandering agnostic, so what do I know.

And while I was wandering, saw this, above. I think it was created specifically for the Illuminating York event, but I hope it’s still in place, as it’s lovely:

Paper lanterns decorated by children from four local schools. Part of the Minster’s ‘community engagement work’, the nearby sign told me, ‘bringing new audiences into the Minster’.
I don’t remember anything like this when I was at school. I don’t remember going in the Minster before the age of 16. Then it was only because someone else took me there, at a time of crisis, and we went to the Zouche Chapel. Which I’d love to write more about. And how this place isn’t just a tourist attraction but a welcoming place of sanctuary when you need it.

Maybe another time. For now, my favourite lantern, spotted among the great gathering of lanterns:

I’m not sure whether the paper on the tables was for drawings on a particular theme, if so I’m sorry, we didn’t read that bit, but my companion left in York Minster a drawing of our cat. She’s giving a cheery wave and saying thanks to everyone in the Minster and beyond who worked so hard on Illuminating York 2013.

The post York Minster transformed: Illuminating York 2013 appeared first on York Stories.

‘Graffiti’ does of course take many forms. We do have some accomplished graffiti/street art, as noted in an article this week at www.oneandother.com, discussing the artwork/graffiti alongside Clifton Bingo (former cinema). As the piece mentions, it has been repainted several times.

The artist, Keith Hopewell (aka Part 2, more recently Part2ism) is apparently a friend of the family who own the building. The work isn’t the kind of thing created in ten minutes by someone dashing in with a spray can under cover of darkness.

The previous work, included on this page from 2004, has of course been obliterated by the current painting. When I included it originally, most people didn’t have a broadband connection, so photos had to be kept to a small and manageable size. It deserves a second, bigger look. This image – just one of six panels – can be enlarged. Other images are in a set on flickr.com.

The text included is ‘Home is where the hatred is’ by Gil Scott-Heron.

Sharing nothing much with the above, apart from the fact that they’re both outdoors, is the random and irritating type of graffiti known as ‘tagging’. Some efforts to obliterate it seem rather pointless, and actually make things look worse.

I’m glad to have the opportunity to include this photo, taken some months ago, of the grubby concrete wall which runs alongside the river between Scarborough Bridge and the Leeman Road area.

I was on the other side of the river, and wouldn’t normally notice the wall, but my attention was drawn to these large blocks of paint – an attempt to cover up graffiti. Doesn’t really work, does it.

Of course, you can make your mark by scratching into a surface as well as applying something to it, and this too is a well-established and indeed ancient form of ‘graffiti’. A modern take on it – an inspired and inventive approach – is ‘grime writing’, discussed in Dr. Dirt: Street artist scrubs images into the urban landscape. Amusing to read about bemused authorities trying to work out if making patterns in urban dirt is a crime.

More information

Graffiti branded ‘an attack on York’s heritage’ – York Press, 13 April 2012. Depressing isn’t it.
More on ‘grime writing’ – – from dothegreenthing.com
And an even more inspiring idea – though you have to be patient: grow your own graffiti.

The post Graffiti, and art appeared first on York Stories.