Monument Intervention; A Monumental Move

After some internet searches, pointers to links and debate, Dan I chose to visit, research and intervene on The Pioneer Monument at Civic Center in San Francisco. Neither of us knew much about the monument to begin with, but from initial readings we gathered some information about it and began kicking around some ideas. One of these ideas had to do with popular reference to the monument as being the James Lick monument. James Lick was the wealthiest man in California at the time of his death, in 1876, leaving a trust of $100,000 to San Francisco, to build a sculpture commemorating the people and events that contributed to the settlement of California. The other ideas revolved around the monument itself, its relocation in 1993 and the controversy around its depiction of Native Americans.

After some research into the monument, I found that it had a monumental history! Old things have history, but this monument has been through a lot. From it’s inception as a civic monument, to it’s perception as a wealthy man’s legacy, to a beacon of resilience during the 1906 earthquake, to a callus depiction of the early settlers treatment of California’s Natives, the Pioneer Monument seemed soaked with some heavy ideas. And I began to wonder what I had gotten myself into. Still, I found interest in the fact that it had been moved to make way for the current library. This seemed funny and practical in a way, that the “pioneer” monument, which is somewhat synonymous with explorer to me, would make way for a library, which is synonymous with history. The idea that explorers make history and that the moving of the monument can make history as well, got me thinking that the moving of the monument, whatever it turned out to represent, could be a symbolic thing and may be a place to start for our intervention, regardless of how absurd it sounded.

I focused on the most recent events, to try and get an idea of what the current perception might be. In the last 20 years it has been the topic of controversy because of its depiction of Native Americans. The statuette at the eastern end depicts a Native American passively lying/sitting before a cowboy and a monk. One seems to be preaching and the other…I’m not sure. Perhaps, needless to say, Native Americans take great offence to this statuette. During the monuments move in 1993, many people protested it, with some throwing red paint onto it. It’s not the least bit surprising that a monument with a statue such as this would be offensive, since it commemorates a time when many California Natives died, or were forced to assimilate into another culture. A compromise was made by the city, one that revolved around the placing of three plaques at the base of the monument to give some light on the treatment of Native Americans, but hasn’t been carried out to this day. Meanwhile Dan was researching James Lick the person and his legacy at Lick-Wilmerding High School. He had the idea that James Lick the person could be a role model for the kids at the school. While I designed a plaque that would cover the existing plaque at the monument, Dan put together a controversial t-shirt design. We decided to tie our ideas together with a joint plea to the city to move the monument to our proposed locations.

About the Pioneer monument: It was dedicated to San Francisco in 1894, several years after it’s benefactor, Lick, had passed away. It consists of five pieces, all bronze statues on marble bases. From observation, the monument seems to be laid out similar to a compass, or cardinal directions, with the center being the zenith and the four points representing north, south, east, and west. The centerpiece is a sculpture of a woman, Eureka, holding a spear and shield representing California. A band of four bronze reliefs depicting events in California history lie just below, with the busts and names of prominent people from California’s early history: Sutter, Lick, Fremont, Drake and Serra. As it’s currently situated, to the north is a statue of a woman with a horn filled with food, representing agriculture and plenty; to the south, a statue of a woman with a breast bared and a paddle, representing commerce; to the west, a statue of three minors and the title “in 49”, representing the discovery of gold; and to the east, a statue of a Native American, a missionary, and a cowboy with the title “Early Days”, representing the establishment of the missions.

My idea is to reconnect the monument to the spirit of the pioneer by making it a symbol for reconciliation. Not to say that this could be done by any one gesture, rather the idea behind the intervention is as a symbol to continually seek and to share common ground between people. By acknowledging the past and incorporating a gesture that attempts to include Native American values, this old monument can carry with it an idea of civic responsibility to be inclusive to multiple views of its history. Part of me feels this has been somewhat accomplished by it’s location between the UN plaza, an organization dedicated to the promotion of human rights, and the civic center. Still I liked the idea of playing with these symbols and the attention that moving a monument can create. My idea was to move the statuettes, to different cardinal positions according to Native American symbols, leaving the centerpiece in place. From the first time I saw the monument, I read into the statuette of commerce as being the archetype that represents “the pioneer”, or qualities I would associate with someone who braves the unknown, seeking new possibilities, and the struggle that comes with starting from scratch. This is partially because I can see a double meaning to the exposed breast and paddle of the woman in the commerce statue. The paddle as a literal device can symbolize a larger concept, the tool by which ships are moved (well boats maybe), and ships being the vessels for journeys and explorations, tying back to the pioneer. According to the Penguin Dictionary, a bared beast can signify protection as well as motherhood, security and plenty. I found a website which outlines the symbols of the cardinal points. It is known as The Medicine Wheel in Native American spirituality with North representing defeat/trouble; South, peace/happiness; East, success/triumph; and West, death. But I have no idea, as to what tribes believe this or if it’s even relevant to California. Nevertheless, the gesture is one that offers protection and innovation through the troubled waters of history mucked with genocide and forced assimilation to begin with. Further, commerce, in an old definition found in my Webster’s dictionary, means “social dealings between people”. My part of the intervention involved rewording the existing plaque to talk about the monuments history and future. It was written onto a piece of cardboard and placed over the existing plaque.

This is the inscription as it reads now.

PIONEER MONUMENT
Sculptor, Frank Happersberger (1859-1932)
Dedicated to the City of San Francisco on Nov 29, 1894, the Pioneer Monument was a gift of philanthropist James Lick. Lick, who died in 1876, left $100,000 to the City for the creation of "statuary emblematic of the significant epochs in California history" dating back to the missions' early settlements. The monument stood in Marshall Square facing Market Street in front of the Old City Hall that was completed in 1897 but destroyed in the 1906 earthquake. When the City was rebuilt after the earthquake, Grove and Hyde Streets were extended to meet Market Street, creating a new intersection. The Pioneer Monument stood at this intersection until it was moved to its present location in 1993.

As it will read…

PIONEER MONUMENT
Sculptor, Frank Happersberger (1859-1932)
Dedicated to the City of San Francisco on Nov 29, 1894, the Pioneer Monument was a gift of philanthropist James Lick. Lick, who died in 1876, left $100,000 to the City for the creation of "statuary emblematic of the significant epochs in California history" dating back to the missions' early settlements. Since it’s dedication the monument has come to represent; a commemoration of the people and events that contributed to the settling of California; the rebuilding of San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake; and the perseverance towards a heritage that is meaningful for all Californians. Given the symbolic nature of these old sculptures it has been proposed that the pedestals, laid out as if representing the cardinal points, be repositioned according to Native American Spirituality, so that the archetype of commerce be facing north, symbolizing a tribute to the spirit of the Pioneer to take the road less traveled. This tribute could act as a reminder for all people to face the unknown, and blaze reconciliation in our present from the events of the past.

Dan’s part of the intervention involved designing a t-shirt that kids at Lick-Wilmerding could wear as well as a newspaper article talking about the proposed moves. His ideas are written out in his blog.

Logo Jamming

This is my culture jamming project in two parts. The first is a logo from the media giant Comcast that I changed to read .com costs. For me it was a given, changing it in this way. Having lived in the Bay Area in the late ninties, early 2000 and hearing and reading about the new internet businesses that were making millions overnight and then failing horribly. It wasn't a stretch to associate an internet provider with a boom and bust business model that is now referred to as the .com bubble in an obvious way, they provide access to the internet. At the time, I thought .com businesses were largely a huge scam, hearing about new internet companies that make their stock public and are worth millions, literally, overnight. Although I didn't understand how the market worked, and it seemed possible that millions of people were buying something from a location on the web and that somewhere there was an office with a server housing a website that sold light bulbs and somewhere else there was a warehouse shipping these light bulbs, etc. It seemed idiotic not to invest in these businesses since they were an extention of the technology that was already wildly successful. Not that I played the stock market, but even I could see that reading along in the papers and watching my parents fix up their house with the money they were borrowing against their stocks. Microsoft stocks kept doubling their value, it seemed every three months. People who had invested money in it, say their 401k retirement money, were suddenly "successful". Their was a steady feeling about things, nobody wanted to rock the boat, just let it keep doubling. It didn't seem that weird that people would carry this mentality into investing in an internet business. Like "oh, a computer business" let's watch these stocks double up.

Most of the early businesses survived on investor's money alone without ever being profitable, until they weren't reporting profits, people pulled their money out and the business went bankrupt. When the bubble burst, meaning the inflated idea of what a company was worth was replaced with the reality of what it was actually worth, the value of many of these companies dropped dramatically, all in the span of one weekend. Many businesses failed and many people were forced to put their fabulous lives on hold.

There are other "costs" that come to mind stemming from the .com boom. Namely the cost of living going up. Especially in the Bay Area. While these businesses were working hard to look good on paper and raking in dough, they were also hiring some pretty well groomed, highly paid associates. It's like suddenly some jerk was willing to pay double, triple the rent of an SF apartment and your landlord would either evict you or in some cases buy you out of the lease. Some of these lease buy out deals were for thousands of dollars. I would hear of people being paid 10 thousand to move out of their SF loft. Then move to Portland and buy a house! It was like a transfusion happening, driven by people needing to take advantage of these people with money to spend. At one point there was a 1% vacancy rate in SF. People couldn't find a place to live. Living in Oakland, I started to see the same trend. People getting evicted on "legal" grounds, like "my family is moving in". A friend of mine won a settlement when his landlord evicted him only to double the rent on the place. Trying to rent at that time meant showing up to some crappy apartment to compete with 25 other people and pay a "processing" fee in excess of $150! That was just to turn in your application and be rejected! Suckers!

Yeah, internet businesses failed leaving investors with an urge to somehow win their money back and we're still paying inflated rents if you ask me, but what does an internet provider have to do with it? Maybe nothing? Relating Comcast to the .com bubble is admittedly a pretty loose connection. But anyone who uses Comcast, with their inflated, ever increasing rates on packaged channels could get the reference as well. Plus .com is short for commerce, so there's always the literal reference.

Culture Jamming

My second project is a spoof on a poster for the movie Junior with Arnold Schwartzenegger. I replaced the other character's with the heads of Comcast's Ceo, as the doctor, and the chairman of the FCC, as the onlooker. The idea revolves around an interesting debate happening right now over an idea held by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), among others like Google, called "net neutrality". The idea seems to be to keep the internet open to everyone and free of discrimination. Businesses like Comcast, who provide internet access say they should have the right to regulate the internet how they see fit. Comcast was recently sued by the FCC for slowing down the rate in which people could download from certain sites, like sites where people download movies. In April 2010 the courts ruled in favor of Comcast because of some deregulation of broadband in 2005. It seems to me that in the past regulations have been put in place to protect consumers from businesses who owned the infrastructure which their competitors had to use as well. From the railroads, to electric and water, businesses and utilities seem to have needed some kind of regulation...not to mention today's banking industry. But the internet is like a child that no one really knows how to care for, and the debate of who the caretaker will be is going on right now. In light of all of the irresponsibility of big business in the last 10 years, Enron, banks, it seems like a bad movie leaving the internet in the care of a cable company. Of course there's DSL and wireless, but those businesses have the same rights based on this recent ruling, to regulate content with broadband, rights that people fear will create discrimination because all these providers have their own products to keep competitive as well. People against this also fear it will destroy the idea of the internet which makes it a great open source for all information.