In 1991, this writer and Norman Richards completed an artwork entitled "Spadina Line" which celebrated the history of Toronto between Davenport Road and Dupont Street from the glacial age to the present time. The artwork was commissioned through the City of Toronto's public art programme through a national competition.

In 1997, the project was a awarded a City of Toronto Urban Design Award of Excellence. It was praised by one jury member as "a thoughtful and understated civic contribution to the street".

Earlier this summer, under the approval of the local counsellor, a group called ArtStart, undertook the painting of a mural. The mural was painted over a large portion of the award-winning artwork showing total disregard.

Over the next few days, this writer will describe this act of vandalism parading as civic beautification as a means of initiating dialogue on the nature of public artwork, the politics and public perception of same.

1. Typical. When the City of Toronto was amalgamated and staffing cut back a great chunk of the city’s living, operational memory disappeared. There are probably only a few people at the City who can recall the public competition. The true cost of the City’s reorganization has yet to be fully paid and this is only one small example.

   Posted by Stan  on  09/10  at  12:41 PM

2. Stan, I totally agree.

   As much as two levels of government (the City of Toronto and former Metro Toronto) seemed to many people as redundant and therefore inefficient, it allowed for projects with a bit more vision than the bottom-line driven myopia we seem to see today.

   Posted by Brad Golden / Lynne Eichenberg  on  09/10  at  04:15 PM

3. I walk by there a lot. I think they co-exist perfectly well. I see your train thing, with the TIME that is CONTSTANTLY WRONG. Who sets that clock???

   Relax and stop being so precious about your public art. If you are this uptight, do some gallery show or make paintings and sell them in a kiosk at the mall. Don’t do public art if you’re not into the, like, public, taking a little bit of ownership of it.

   Did you think you owned the city?

   Posted by  on  09/15  at  03:03 AM

4. You know “Toronto Fan”, your comments might have a little more credibility if you didn’t hide behind a fake email address.

   The “train thing” as you refer to it, is one component of an award-winning artwork which is admired by the local community and the general public. The other components of this artwork are a series of pedestrian lights and a solar recorder, all designed as part of a narrative about the development of OUR City and the site in particular.

   If I were to be uptight and precious , I would have enforced my moral rights as an artist, had the artwork restored and sued the City.

   Instead, in a gesture of public-spiritedness, I choose to air the issue in a public forum such as this without resorting to uncivil actions or comments such as yours.

   What you don’t recognize is that yes, I do own the City as do you and other fellow citizens.

   As an owner of the City, I am concerned about the singular power of an elected official to erase a portion of an artwork which is admired and which forms a part of the City’s history. OUR history. PUBLIC history.

   The vandalism is not about the public taking a little bit of ownership. It was brought to my attention by several members of the public who were outraged at the defacement.

   I am defending the public’s interests as well as anyone concerned about the willfull destruction of public monuments, a practice you seem to condone while demeaning artists who choose to show their work in galleries.

   Posted by Brad Golden / Lynne Eichenberg  on  09/15  at  08:44 AM

5. J. I suppose when mindless criminals looted Baghdad’s national gallery destroying thousands of years of historical artifacts you thought it was a worthy expression of the public “taking a little ownership.”

   Posted by Heather  on  09/15  at  09:03 AM

6. Heather, I think you have Toronto fan and myself mixed up here. But to answer your question about baghdad’s national gallery question: IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD!!! Anarchy and the downfall of an idiot dictator’s national gallery don’t qualify as a rebuttal to a discussion on street art and painting over a mural. We’re talking street art here, not war.

   Posted by J  on  09/15  at  12:14 PM

7. geez, stop SHOUTING. Sorry I mixed up the sources but the premise is the same. You have something of recognized cultural value that gets destroyed through acts of mindlessness. What’s not to understand?

   Posted by Heather  on  09/15  at  02:31 PM

<< Back to main