Design Melbourne- Assesment #3
-
Upload
brian-morris -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Design Melbourne- Assesment #3
Assessment Task 3 Communication Artefacts from a Design
Perspective
Harry Hughes
Artefact: Le Louvre on Collins Street
Le Louvre is a retail outlet widely considered
as part of the upper class “Paris end” of
Collins Street. It is a place prominent in
Melbourne’s history because it is seen by
many as the last remaining link between
Melbourne and European haute couture.
According to the Lonely Planet guide to
Melbourne, many Melbournians are “too
scared to step inside the Parisian outlet” due
to the associations that come with shopping at
Le Louvre.
Since the 1930s, when the term “Paris end” came into wide usage (and was in
fact coined by founder and original owner Lillian Wightman), the store has been
respected as an outlet of fine fashion and an aspect of the city’s upper class. This
is primarily due to the part it played in introducing European designers to
Melbourne at a time when elitist fashion started to become important to
Melbournians. It is thus clear that this retail store was, and still is, able to link
Melbourne and the white Australians who founded it to another place – Europe.
Le Louvre helps to communicate that Melbourne is not a stand-alone city; it has
cultural links to many other places. These cultural links are not confined to
Europe; they extend to Greek, Aboriginal, Chinese and several other cultures.
(Greek cafes, Aboriginal art, Chinatown and British-originated signs are just a
few examples of these cultures).
The building was originally a townhouse built in 1855. In 1927, the owner of the
time had its
façade stripped
and altered, and
from then
onwards, the
appearance of
the building has
barely changed. The “enigmatic” façade now boasts a distinct Parisian style and
design – large glass windows showing off the gold-lit interior, wooden
framework, and several floors above the ground level, similar to certain
luxurious stores on Paris’ Champs Elysees. Indeed, just walking past any of the
“high end treasures” on Collins Street (such as Chanel and Gucci) transports you
to another place and time; truly a far cry from the dingy and dark laneways that
fester all over the central business district.
In Pamie Fung’s article “The seduction of the laneways: making Melbourne a
‘world city’”, she writes about Melbourne’s laneways and analyses their appeal;
how they give Melbourne the air that it has. Fung mentions that structures in
Melbourne’s central business district “compress different European places, styles
and times” and that “modernity and sophistication are located in the ‘classy’
Euro-look of the city centres”. It is clear that European style was strived for by
Australians (if only because Australia is viewed, even by Australians as a
“primitive backwater”) and the Parisian style structure of the Le Louvre building
no doubt plays a part in giving Melbourne the “Euro-look”.
William H. Jordy’s architectural study “The Symbolic Essence of Modern
European Architecture of the Twenties and its Continuing Influence” speaks of
the influence of European architecture on the rest of the world during the 1920s.
A perfect example of this is, in fact, Le Louvre, the design of which includes the
trademark “extravagantly open interiors” that were present all over Europe.
REFERENCES:
1. (Anon), “Fashion & Fun”, Total Travel, 22 May 2010,
http://www.totaltravel.com.au/promotions/australia/victoria/melbourn
e-winter/fashion-fun.asp
2. (Anon), “Le Louvre”, Lonely Planet, 21 May 2010,
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/australia/melbourne/shopping/366247
3. Jordy WH, 1963, “The Symbolic Essence of Modern European Architecture
of the Twenties and its Continuing Influence”
4. Fung, P 2006 “The seduction of the laneways: making Melbourne a ‘world
city’”, Crossings 11(2): 1-12,
http://www.inasa.org/crossings/11_2/index.php?apply=fung. Accessed
09 Feb 2009, viewed April 15 2010, RMIT University Library
Chan Lai Wah
Artefact: Koori Artwork on the corner of Bourke and Swanston Streets
Whenever the topic of Melbourne’s culture crops up, the discussion of several
other cultures is involved. It is widely
agreed upon that Melbourne culture is a
fusion of several different cultures, forming
a unique and exquisite tradition of its own.
However, Koori tradition and culture is
often overlooked in this circumstance. Along
with Parisian, British, Chinese and
Vietnamese cultures, Koori ethnicity is also
an integral part of Melbourne culture. Most
Melbournians are not aware of the significance of Koori culture in this city – in
fact, most would not recognise depictions of Koori artwork. On the corner of
Bourke and Swanston Streets, artist Lisa Kennedy has painted an electrical
supply box with elegant and poignant delineations of Koori culture and way of
life. If not for the inscriptions painted on the artefact (..the Timeless Beauty and
Spirit of Koori People and Culture), nobody, save a handful of culturally astute
citizens, would know the origins of the symbols illustrated.
These beautifully illustrated symbols of Koori life exemplify the fact that
Melbourne is a cultural city. Melbourne culture is an intricate blending of various
different cultures, global cultures as well as local cultures. The European-esque
laneways, Parisian shops on Collins Street, quaint signs borrowed from British
history, Aboriginal art, vibrant Chinatown and delightful Greek cafes all illustrate
the mixture of cultures that make up a captivating and unique one. Not to forget,
Melbourne’s own founders and origins, whose culture is spread out throughout
the city in the form of statues (The Three Business Men Who Brought Their
Lunch, Larry LaTrobe). Thus, Aboriginal art reinforces the importance of
indigenous culture in the formation of Melbourne’s own culture. (Whitelaw, A
2006)
This said, it can be concluded that Melbourne would not be Melbourne without
all those different traditions and ways of life. Melbourne is not just about the
original white Australian founders (although, they too, are no doubt a prominent
part in this culture). The beauty of Melbournian culture is the curious blend of so
many different cultures, as well as the respect that exists for each of these
cultures. “Koories adhere to their Aboriginal identities, kin and culture as most
Melbournians now respect these Koori cultural expressions”. This quote from an
article by the University of Melbourne (2008) advocates the hypothesis
regarding the cultural harmony that exists due to the respect shown for every
single culture, including Koori culture.
There is no doubt that Melbourne being a cultural city
is due to the interesting blend of cultures as well as
the respect for each other’s cultures that exist as
mediums. However, is culture in modern day
Melbourne becoming farcical? As time goes by and
histories are forgotten, is it a superficial culture that
exists in Melbourne? Aboriginal design motifs are
used as sources for a revitalised, highly decorative and supposedly ‘authentic’
form of Australian clothing. (Maynard, M) Koori art is more than just decorative
and beautiful. Koori artwork is crafted with depth and meanings hidden within
the symbolism. Koori motifs used as clothing patterns signifies a decline in
cultural recognition. What will become of Melbourne culture when this decline
strikes the other cultures that help define this city?
REFERENCES
1. Whitelaw, Anne 2006, ‘Placing Aboriginal Art at the National Gallery of
Canada’, Canadian Journal of Communication, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 197 – 214,
viewed 17 April 2010, <http://web.ebscohost.com>
2. School of Historical Studies, Department of History, The University of
Melbourne 2008, Aboriginal Melbourne, eMelbourne, the City Past and
Present, viewed 17 April 2010,
<http://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM00001b.htm>
3. Maynard, Margaret 1999, ‘Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body and
Culture’, The Red Center: The Quest for “Authenticity” in Australian Dress,
vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 175 – 195, viewed 23 May 2010, <
www.ingentaconnect.com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au>
Minh Huy Le
Artefact: Larry LaTrobe Statue on the corner of Collins and Swanston
Streets
Located on the corner of Collins and
Swanston Streets, Larry La Trobe is a
life-sized statue of a dingo type dog. This
statue was made by an artist, Pamela
Irving, in 1992 as part of the Percent for
Art Program and Swanston Street Redevelopment. Larry, a gift to the City of
Melbourne, keeps an observant eye on the ongoings of the street and city Square.
After being stolen in 1995, the statue was restored (with slight changes to its
detail) on the 16th of September, 1996. The statue’s restoration was funded by
the owner of the foundry where Larry was cast.
The name Melbourne was given to the European settlement founded by Batman
and Fawkner in 1835. Aboriginal people lived in the areas tens of thousands of
years before the arrival of Europeans and from them, originated a complex
culture and art. Melbourne was a young city that was created by private plan,
and as a result, most of the artworks in Melbourne is made by private, rather
than public planning. Consequently, there are several parts of our constructed
environment that illustrate exquisite and artistically pleasing craft. Despite the
beauty of these crafts, these are not necessarily labelled as “art”. On the other
hand, there are many other objects that
show little craft or depth in thinking that
are labelled as “art”.
Based on the surge in public art in
Melbourne, we have to determine the definition and role of two different
concepts – “artwork in public places” and “artwork by / with the public”. Shin
(1999) argues that most of the things we perceive to be “public art” are, in fact,
not “public art” at all. These arts, often misconstrued as public art, are arts in
public places. Art in public places refers to works of art placed in view of the
public, while public art is a hybrid work involving much more than simply the
creative products of an individual artist. Larry Latrobe, as an accessible artwork
that is increasing the value of the city, considered as a small landmark and built
under the plan of the city council, is therefore “public art”. The role of public art
is constantly changing, as seen throughout history, from Aboriginal art to
European-esque art.
Currently, art is considered as a social process, thus it has a potential role in
creating convivial cities. Miles (1997) believes that participatory art has a more
important role than formalist art in the living city context now and promotes
attentiveness to social healing, “cultural diversity, ecological healing”, the
reclamation of public space, and the “empowerment of urban dwellers”. Now, we
should view public art from different perspectives to determine the actual role of
public art in the future of urban development. While Melbourne is a city of art,
we should consider the theoretical context of how public art can contribute,
through practices which are decorative or activist, to a new urbanism based on
the values of those “who seek an ecologically responsible and communitarian
society”. (Miles p188)
REFERENCES
1. “The White Hat Guide to Public Art in Melbourne”, White Hat Website,
viewed 17th 2010, <
http://www.whitehat.com.au/Melbourne/Galleries/PublicArt.asp >
2. Dongsuk Shin, November 1999, ‘Public Art in the City of Melbourne Its
Typology and Planning’, Master research project thesis, Faculty of
Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, p 1-15
3. Miles, M 1997, ‘Art as a social process ‘and ‘Convivial cities’, in Art , Space
and the City, 1st edition, Routledge, London, p 164-208
Ruby Mountford
Artefact: painted street sign, corner of Celestial Lane off Little Burke Street
Throughout Melbourne, there is
evidence of the city’s multicultural
roots, spanning Europe, the British
isles, Asia and the original inhabitants
of Melbourne; the Koori people.
Located on Celestial Avenue, off Little
Burke Street, there is one of these remnants. A painted street sign of a bygone
era, its quaintly old fashioned message a stark contrast to the modern world just
outside of the avenue.
This communications artefact is a black and white sign painted directly onto a
bare brick wall around 2 meters off the ground. The words “Commit No
Nuisance” are painted in white on a black background with a white border. It is
the message of the sign that appears a curiosity, as today such a vague
instruction appears comical.
It was not always so. The design of the warning derives from similar signs in
London and India. The design was originally planned as a “discreet warning
against performing improper acts in public, most commonly urination” (Only
Science 2009) for such acts were in breach of the law and punishable by
imprisonment as of the 12th century.
The exact date the sign was painted is
unknown, as is the artist who stencilled it
onto the wall. One possibility is that it was
linked to a children’s school that opened in
1892, and was entered through Celestial
Avenue. When three teachers at the school contracted typhoid fever it was
thought to have been caused by a defective draining system of the alley, which in
turn would support the introduction of a sign warning against public urination
and defecation, both activities that pollute the water. (Bate 1994). However
there is no concrete evidence to support this theory.
The design of the sign itself is simple. The letters are of such a size that can be
seen and read easily as one walks by the alley, a suggestion still incorporated in
modern sign design, for as Theis (2001) argues, “if your sign will be seen from a
distance, you'll need a typestyle with strong, simple strokes”. The sign itself is
positioned close enough to the corner so as to be visible to passersby, placement
being another factor in a sign’s efficiency. The border around the sign suggests
the sign was designed to be read by the people walking by, as borders are
considered to allow the reader to focus on the message and read it quickly (Theis
2001).
The simplistic colour choices of black and white allow the sign to stand out from
the ochre of the brick. However, while this was suitable in 1890s, black and
white is now quickly overshadowed out by the loud and bright advertisements
and shops in Little Burke St. Attention is drawn to the “No” by the three small
leaves on either side of the word, again in white, to add further emphasis.
The many cultural roots of this city; the street art, architecture and other
remnants of Australia’s colonisation and international integration are often seen
as an enhancement to Melbourne; quirks that add to the city’s uniqueness and
identity. It is most likely this mentality has enabled this communications artefact,
a remnant of British colonisation, to survive if not completely free from
vandalism, then as an object that, while having outlived its usefulness, is still
regarded with fondness.
REFERENCES
1. Unnamed author, 2009, ‘“Commit no Nuisance” signs and shy bladder
syndrome’, blog, 13 December, Only Science!, viewed 10th April 2010,
< http://onlyscience.net/2009/12/13/commit-no-nuisance/>
2. Bate, Weston 1994, Essential but unplanned: The story of Melbourne's
lanes, 1st edn, State Library of Victoria and the City of Melbourne,
Melbourne,
3. Theis, Kate 2001 “Effective Sign Benefits”, 14th March, Sign Industry.com,
viewed 18th May 2010 <
http://www.signindustry.com/banners/articles/2001-03-14-
effectiveSignDesign.php3>