With a lifelong affection for Desolation Row, I contemplate the abandoned Fun Forest at Seattle Center with pleasure. Cracks in the asphalt and gaping holes where the rides used to be are not an amenity to be taken lightly. For that reason I’m sympathetic to those who are outraged that a Dale Chihuly glass house and green shed with garden might supplant an excellent place to shoot an end of the world movie. They say they want grass, but tearing up the concrete and seeding it with what Walt Whitman called the lovely hair of graves will cost millions. Millions the city does not have.
Yoko Ott would prefer a botanical garden. Alas, we have one already and
can’t afford to take care of it. (If ifs and buts were candies and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we’d all have.)
To wit:
The City of Seattle is scrambling to cover a multimillion dollar budget deficit. Now, people close to the situation say Parks and Recreation will take the biggest hit, with first cuts planned as soon as July, according to the Associated Recreation Council, an independent non-profit that partners with the city department.
“Community members need to share their personal stories with the Mayor and City Council members if they expect the doors to stay open and the parks maintained,” said Christina Arcidy, Project Coordinator for ARC, in an e-mail sent to CHS. “There are no public meetings or formal requests for public comment, so individuals must reach out to their elected officials and start a dialogue if they want to have an impact.”
Cuts could include lawn and mowing maintenance for all Seattle parks. Pools and public facilities in all parks, including Volunteer, Cal Anderson and Miller Parks, will not be open to the public any longer, or may have shorter operation hours.
While none of the major planned cuts have been confirmed by Parks or the city, CHS received confirmation from a City employee with knowledge of the situation who asked to remain anonymous about the severity – and certainty – of the cuts being planned. (more)
Surely better times await, and then we’ll be stuck with a Chihuly center, right? Well, wrong. The privately funded venture would have a 5-year-lease. If Chihuly fails to dazzle the public (and bring in from $300,000 to $500,000 annually to city coffers), his glass plug can be pulled, leaving the building that’s already there and a garden. (Even if he’s a raging success, the lease will terminate at 20 years.)
For these reasons and so many more, anti-Chihuly forces, please continue to fight the good fight. Save cracked asphalt for the kids. They’ll thank you when they grow up to be disaffected hipsters. I for one admire your moxie and your effectiveness. The mayor sounds as if he’s leaning toward siding with you, as well he should. You helped elect him.
In the meantime, Bobby D. has the closer:
Here comes the blind commissioner
They’ve got him in a trance
One hand is tied to the tight-rope walker
The other is in his pants
And the riot squad they’re restless
They need somewhere to go
As Lady and I look out tonight
From Desolation Row
What bothers me is with the end of the FUN FOREST all the grit seems gone from Seattle. Something about the gaudy glittery rides and sketchy people appealed to me. I think Chihuly does a lot of good in the art community but does everything civic project have to cater to tourism? I have no solutions just a wistful desire for the FUN FOREST to have survived “progress” in Seattle.
I’d be with you, Miss Marple, entirely, if I hadn’t been forced into the Fun Forest by decades of nephews and nieces. It was expensive. Gaudy needs to be cheap to be fun. They wanted to go repeatedly and desperately but left grumpy and dissatisfied whenever I managed to find my spine and pull the plug. The good time was always just around the corner. Spend another 10 or 20 bucks and if might be theirs, the joyous future, always receding before them. And I don’t think a Chihuly center is aimed exclusively at tourists. I, for instance, live here.
I hope this project goes through. The most recent outcry at the Stranger is absurd. Paid supporters at the hearings? 50k to a couple of Republican races? (Nevermind the millions of dollars spent on artworks and museum donations in the last fifty years.) Chihuly’s work is NOT that interesting, to be sure. Then again we have been living with it for so long, it’s hard to see. He is still important though, and I don’t think a TEMPORARY exhibition hall would be so terrible, at least it’s temporary. The Kinkade comparisons just need to stop. And as far as international artist celebrities go, Chihuly is perfect for Seattle. Glass doesn’t get in the way of other visual art mediums. Can you imagine if someone like Damien Hirst lived here? All our little Northwest Art Buddy Groups would look completely ridiculous.
To clarify, Husky Quaker: That’s not Chihuly donating to Republicans, but the family behind the project. And as far as Chihuly not being that interesting, I’d say, compared to what? He’s the most important studio glass artist in the world.
Right, the 50k of rated R donations was from one of the funders, I got that. As far as interesting, I simply mean that there might be good arguments for other glass artists making more interesting glass art. That’s all. De Vinci is an important artist, and very important historically for helping establish the Cult of Genius in Western Culture, but his artwork may not be the MOST interesting work from the Renaissance. If you look at his artwork only, not all the inventions, etc. And before anybody’s head explodes, let me be clear that I am NOT comparing Chihuly to the Italian Maestro. It seems that most of the naysayers to this proposal are saying “we don’t want this, give us something else.” Public opinion noted. Except that this is the only real, funded proposal on the table. It’s Chihuly or Desolation Row, as you so aptly put it.
I’m with you, Husky Quaker. Well put.
Thanks for being the voice of reason in this. Seattle loves to hate the establishment, and Dale’s success is upsetting to some. I was lucky enough to get a tour of his old studio on lake union – I still think about that awesome swimming pool.
Great commentary, Regina! The unthinking negative responses to this proposal have been perplexing, to say the least. And I resent the angry mob’s assertion that anyone in favor of the project has a financial stake in it: I spoke at the March 30 public meeting and didn’t get a penny for doing so. I’ve just looked at the proposal, made myself familiar with the impacted area, and realized what a boon the Chihuly exhibit will be for Seattle Center.
And I daresay that exposing kids to some fantastic glass art will be far better for them than forking out cash for some crappy carny rides.
OY.
this is not about the fun forest versus Dale Chihuly.
The fun forest is dead, no matter what.
This is about Seattle’s repeated handing over of public space to a few wealthy families, for decades, to the financial benefit of those families, and the loss to the rest of us.
Again and again, spineless Seattle gives Paul Allen millions in tax dollars, real estate, and the right to profit at all our expense- the EMP, South Lake Union, and the Football Stadium, to name a few. Or the Wrights, both unrelated varieties of them, with examples like Harbor Steps- Why, its just like the Spanish Steps, except, well, its for profit…
Or Bill Gates, and his absconding with the skatepark.
All perfectly nice people- I went to high school with the whole lot of em- but any rational city would not give away its virtues to them and get so little in return.
As for Seattle being broke, and HAVING to do this- Hogwash, Mouthwash, and Baloney.
Our city budget last year was almost $4 Billion dollars. A measly half million in rent is not even a detectable rounding error, and will make exactly NO difference in the bottom line.
The city can decide to do a wide variety of things with this space, or nothing at all, and the argument is not do you like Chihuly, but, instead, how should decisions about public space be made?
And allowing this “musuem” to happen is just wrong, from so many viewpoints.
Chihuly himself is a very nice man, and he wears beautiful silk shirts in pretty colors. But he is much more comparable to a skilled self promoter and businessman like Ivar Haglund, than to an “important” artists.
Importance, of course, is a very subjective term- but in terms of museum shows, curatorial acceptance, and world wide influence, there are plenty of other glass artists competing for the title, and only history will sort em out.
There is, however, no shortage of places to see Chihuly work on display in Seattle, and we will not be in any way impoverished if this glorified gift shop had to be built on private land, rather than public.
Seattle suffers from terminal shortsightedness as to the use of its public spaces, and we continually let developers abscond with them. World class, civilized cities dont do this, and to insist that its all about the Benjamins, and we MUST allow this to happen because we are so broke is the true teabagger arguement.
Real socialist americans, like myself, believe we can all actually spend a bit more of the public money to create true public spaces and experiences that benefit us all.
A real City gallery space, for instance, would be a huge improvement over the fun forest. Most every other City worth the capital letter, worldwide, has one or more of them.
Buenos Aires, for example, with a per capita income about a tenth of ours, and a literally bankrupt economy, somehow manages to have a cultural center, with art gallery, performance space, and community functions, in almost every barrio.
But not us- we cant afford it.