Hasta La Ideas

The fun parts of big civic architectural projects are getting to see the finalists’ renderings, then learning who won the commission and getting to take a look at what they have planned, and then actually getting to go inside the finished building or walk around the park or whatever the project happens to be. The painful part is where the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial has just found itself in: talking about how much it’s going to cost and what it’s going to take to construct it. The project, you might recall, involves a major overhaul of the area surrounding St. Louis’ iconic Gateway Arch, with landscape architect Michael Van Valkenburgh landing the job to make it a more inviting environment. This past week, a public meeting was held to discuss the project, at that time announcing that it wasn’t going to cost the previously estimated $300 million, but would likely wind up costing closer to $600 million. While the nearly doubled expense before ground has even been broken doesn’t seem to have terribly rattled anyone — it hasn’t been released as to how much is coming from private funds, local government, the National Park Service, etc., so that probably helps. And who wants to think about expense when the most exciting news of the meeting was that gondolas are planned to ferry visitors across the Mississippi River to both sides of the planned park. Gondolas! More specifics about the project, released at last week’s meeting, can be found here.

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

If you thought the controversy over the National Portrait Gallery‘s decision to pull artist David Wojnarowicz‘s piece A Fire in My Belly back in November had petered out, you’ll find that you’re sorely mistaken. Though the fires had died down a bit around the holiday season, they were fully stoked again over the weekend and on into yesterday, when the Smithsonian‘s board of regents held a meeting for the first time since the controversy began. First, in a surprising move, the board of trustees from one of the organization’s own institutions, the Hirshhorn Museum, issued a statement against the decision to pull Wojnarowicz’s piece. While praising the work of the head of the Smithsonian, Wayne Clough, the statement is largely filled with some very strong and harsh words about the situation Clough himself played a central role in creating. Meanwhile, the calls have continued for Clough’s ouster. Yesterday, the LA Times printed this op-ed piece by Tyler Green calling for his resignation, saying, “As long as Clough leads the Smithsonian, the institution’s curators cannot produce history and conduct research without wondering if their work will become politically expendable. To restore integrity to the Smithsonian’s work, Clough must go.” That sentiment was echoed on the other side of the country as well, with the same group who had staged protests in mid-December in New York, ART+, arriving outside of Smithsonian Castle yesterday to once again voice their opinions on the matter. With all this rush of new attention, it’s sure to be fascinating to see if Clough continues to weather the storm in relative hiding or if the Smithsonian will wind up caving to pressure for the second time in this controversy’s life.

Update: News of yesterday’s meeting has been released and the Smithsonian’s board is standing behind both the decision and Clough, neither of which is sure to appease those with differing opinions on the matter.

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.