ELINA HÄRKÖNEN
107
of the Village of the Water Bird project. The goal was set to strengthen the community through artistic practice and with the methods of art education. Mirja Hiltunen, PhD in art edu-cation, states that in community art education it is pursued to uphold the locality but also to support its transition. Dialogue, participation and the acceptance of differences are essential goals. (Hiltunen 2009, 47-48.) The strong desire for the pro-ject was to support the village association by introducing new optional ways for landscaping and increase the interest of the villagers together to improve their own living environment. The basic idea was to enable people to participate within their own strength and matters of interest – even just passing by and chat-ting for a moment (Kontusalmi 2007, 99-101).
Knowing the community’s negative conceptions about wil-low, it was in order to bring in also perspectives of it as a usable material. According to the Danish willow sculptor Vibe Gro the versatile use of willow challenges people to value the raw mate-rials of nature. She points out that just by getting hands on it the various possibilities of willow are soon realized. (Gro 2004, 5.) In the hands of a sculptor the troublemaker transforms to grace the scenery instead of ruining it. Willow has both stiff branches and pliable vines that make the building and weaving easy. As a material, willow suits well for art making and landscaping thanks to its strong, yet pliable structure and bright coloured leaves. (Koskinen & Savolainen 2003, 10.)
FROM A WATER BIRD TO A NORTHERN PIKE
When the framework for the workshop was set, a planning meeting was arranged. The aim was to make the final decisions about the sculpture and its location together with the village community. 16 people arrived at the meeting and the atmos-phere was expectant. After the introduction a lively chatter filled the room. The participants were divided into three groups to discuss their ideas and make sketches. According to Helena Sederholm it is essential that in community-based art every step in the process is taken in cooperation with the participat-ing community (Sederholm 2007, 56). The aim is to brparticipat-ing the
locals together to discuss their visions, community and the significance for their living environment. The history and the features of the place can thus be better valued and considered in the planning process. By joint decision-making it is ensured that the artwork will represent the principles of place-specific art. (Baca 1995, 138.)
In the discussion about the theme and the place a conflict between the initiative plans and the desires of the locals be-came evident. Since Meltosjärvi was known from its water bird population, it would have seemed natural to build the work-shop also on the bird theme. It turned out that the villagers had no interest in the theme or the locations first suggested. Water birds were thought as a commonplace and the suggested ideas varied from different wild animal figures to several challenging locations. The participants were very determined and willing to have an input in choosing the theme.
According to Lucy R. Lippard a place-specific public art must take its participants and the place into consideration.
Therefore it challenges, involves and consults its audience re-specting the community and its environment. (Lippard 1997, 264.) Reaching a satisfactory common understanding about
Weaving the tail and the fin of the pike. Photo: Elina Härkönen
108
the theme started to look challenging. Suggestions about the place seemed to lead nowhere and the atmosphere started to turn frustrated.
Luckily no forced compromises had to be made. By allowing room for the moment of uncertainty the community had the opportunity to discuss and decide what is meaningful in their circle of life and living environment. Suddenly in the middle of the debate one villager brought up an idea of a fish – the north-ern pike. He explained that the village had a history of rich fish waters and the fishermen coming from a far to trick pikes. With this historical perspective the theme was well justified and ful-filled the ultimate goal of the community-based art where the community defines the meaning of the process (Sederholm 2006, 56).
The location for the sculpture was agreed to be on the field next to the road taking to Meltosjärvi. The same field was also to be the next landscaping location. Most of the willows for the sculpture could be cleared from the same field. The difficult part of making joint decisions had now reached satisfactory conclusion and everyone seemed relieved.
THE CONCEPTIONS OF ART
A surprise waited in the first workshop morning. In addition to the project team, only one villager showed up to the gathering.
The former problems with passivity in the village were known but now it seemed controversy to the enthusiasm villagers had shown in the planning meeting. The concern was that the pas-sivity in the village could not be conquered with these methods.
Fortunately the situation changed gradually. More people arrived one by one bringing their own tools with them. The vil-lagers had made a great effort in clearing the willow material for the workshop. With chainsaws, hammers and even a tractor the sculpting had good settings for the start.
On the job the debate of contemporary art arose. The men in particular argued with benevolent nature whether the hammer-ing of the willow branches was art or merely a trivial twiddle.
Most of them did not want to be seen as artists but merely
pro-viders or helpers on the work with their hammers. Sederholm (2007) emphasizes that compared to the traditional art; con-temporary art is more of a course of action through which peo-ple can separate out their world of experience (2007, 147-149).
Regardless of their talk the diligent dedication to the work re-vealed that everyone truly enjoyed taking part in the making of the willow art. One of the men concluded the debate by saying:
“The times have changed. 20 years ago willow sculpting project would have sounded absurd. We would have just laughed at it.”
The pike got its form in two days. All together 16 villagers joined the sculpting. When building the stronger structures more men were involved. Moving to weaving with the vines more women joined the workshop. During those two days many villagers stopped by to chat and give encouraging feed-back about the sculpture.
CONCLUSION
The workshop was finished with the bonfire evening near the lake. With good food and happy faces it was rewarding to end the yearlong journey together. A beautiful sunset did justice to the colours of the willow in the sculpture and the landscape around it. Everyone seemed to be proud of the effort made to improve the village scenery with the former troublemaker, the willow.
The attitudes to the willow changed a little. It was still mainly considered as a problem but the experiences in the workshop had definitely encouraged new perspectives. It had brought the community together to see the condition of their living envi-ronment. The planning and building of the willow sculpture unified people and enable them to take part in changing the conditions. The pike represented the willingness of the com-munity to keep their village alive. The participants thought the artwork would refresh the old and fading image of Meltosjärvi.
When asking about the meaning and the experience of the art workshop, one villager summarised it like this:
“I wouldn’t have been standing here for two days if I didn’t think it was worth it.”
APPLIED VISUAL ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES
109
ELINA HÄRKÖNEN
works as a planner/coordinator in the Applied Visual Arts Master’s programme in the Faculty of Arts and Design of the University of Lapland. She holds Mas-ters degree in Arts and in Education (M.Ed.Intercultural teacher education University of Oulu, Finland 2005).For the art education studies, she wrote her master’s thesis on the Meltosjärvi project researching the motives of participa-tion in community-based art educaparticipa-tion. Before joining University of Lapland she has been working as an Elementary School teacher and art educator for six years.
REFERENCES
Baca, J. F. 1995. Whose Monuments were? Public Art in a many-cultured so-ciety. In S. Lacy (Ed.) Mapping the Terrain. New Genre Public Art. Seattle: Bay Press, pp. 131-138.
Gro, V. 2004. Elävät pajutyöt. Jyväskylä: Gummerus.
Hiltunen, M. 2009. Community-based Art Education. Through performativity in Northern Sociocultural Environments. Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 160.
Lapland University Press.
Kontusalmi, H. 2007. Elämäntarinat taipuvat taiteeksi. In M. Bardy, R.
Haapalainen, M. Isotalo & P. Korhonen (Eds.) Taide keskellä elämää. Kiasma:
LIKE, pp. 127-129.
Koskinen, M. & Savolainen, A. 2003. Suomalainen pajutyökirja – pajua kotiin ja puutarhaan. Helsinki: WSOY.
Lippard, L. R. 1997. The Lure of the Local – Senses of Place in a Multicentered Society. New York: The New Press.
Pääkkö, H. 2011. Kyläkävelyraportti – Meltosjärvi. Ylitornio 24.8.2011. Lapin ELY-keskuksen Maisemat Ruotuun hanke.
Sederholm, H. 2006. Lopputuloksesta prosessiin. In K. Kettunen, M. Hil-tunen, S. Laitinen & M. Rastas (Eds.) Kuvien keskellä – Kuvataideopettajienliitto 100 vuotta. Keuruu: LIKE, pp. 50-59.
Sederholm, H. 2007. Taidekasvatus – samassa rytmissä elämän kanssa. In M.
Bardy, R. Haapalainen, M. Isotalo & P. Korhonen (Eds.) Taide keskellä elämää.
Keuruu: LIKE, pp. 143-149.
At 3 metres in height and 6 metres long willow pike became a new eye-catcher along the main road. Photo: Elina Härkönen
ELINA HÄRKÖNEN
co ol
o
co ol
Edited by Timo Jokela, Glen Coutts, Maria Huhmarniemi & Elina Härkönen