User:Jlskiba/WSPA Reflections

The Wikipedia articles concerning the IUPUI Public Art Collection are, for the most part, quite impressive. Pulling an artwork out of near obscurity and presenting it to the world is no small feat; especially when that artwork's article could be posted, read and erased in a matter of seconds. I've heard the horror stories from some of my classmates about their experiences with Wikipedia-- but when I read through some of them, I realized two things: one, that their dogged determination was evident in how their articles turned out; and two, not all WSPA articles are created equal. Below, I've listed the twelve articles I read through for this assignment:


 * Anatomy Vessels (Saplings)· Antenna Man· Barrow· Broken Walrus I· DNA Tower· Entangled· Eve·  Give and Take· The Herron Arch 1·  Indiana Limestone·  Job·   Peirce Geodetic Monument

One thing that stands out immediately in the articles is the inconsistent formatting; some articles contain acquisition information, others contain artist statements, and others list other works by the featured artist or the location of the artwork. Of the twelve articles I perused, Broken Walrus I and Indiana Limestone (Doddoli) seemed to stick out as far as formatting is concerned. Indiana Limestone (Doddoli) included a sub-section on installation and placement, whereas Broken Walrus I included a section on the condition of the artwork. It is interesting to note that not all articles contain information on the condition of the artworks and their placement/installation. Broken Walrus I actually mentioned the material the sculpture is made from and how that material is subject to rapid corrosion in respect to its environmental conditions. This bit of information is key to understanding the purpose and mission of the WSPA Project; to create awareness about public works of art in hopes that these sculptures will be preserved. Indiana Limestone (Doddoli) 's article is interesting because it mentions the artist's role in how the sculpture was displayed to avoid future corrosion.

Another thing that stands out is the number of sources cited in the articles. I am assuming this is due to the initial lack of data available on the artworks. The paucity of proper documentation seems to reflect the level of public interest (or really bad record-keeping) in each artwork. This leads me to wonder why some public artworks are better documented than others. Would the lack of documentation be due to the fact that some artists were Herron students? Or were records/news articles/etc. lost over the years?

As I am researching my assigned artworks for this project, I'm troubled at the lack of documentation after combing through several card catalogs and clipping files for crumbs of information. My hope is that the WSPA project will encourage sites with public artworks to compile enough information to keep these works from slipping into obscurity.