There is no reason that the abandoned Fun Forest site at Seattle Center should become a static display of glass, a one-man exhibit, or a gift shop. A team of local leaders has already come up with something better—better because it combines the best of all possibilities: It’s an evolving park, a place where art happens rather than is packaged and presented, and it relies on collaboration. It’s called Open Platform, and you should support it at the only public meeting that’s being held during the selection process this summer. The meeting is July 7.
The background: Earlier this year, Seattle Center all but signed away 1.4 acres of the grounds and the Arcade Pavilion when it endorsed the Space Needle corporation’s plan for a 20-year exhibit of Dale Chihuly’s glass art. The installation would cost $12 to $15 to enter and would be walled-in. Public outcry forced Seattle Center to invite proposals for alternatives, and nine were officially submitted last month. Friends of the Green called for a basic park. A group led by Salish artist Roger Fernandes proposed a place for Northwest-native culture, art, and history. Popular nonprofit radio station KEXP—which delivers free concerts and supports Seattle music at no cost to listeners—offered to move in. Those are the most exciting individual ideas (others include a Seattle Museum of the Mysteries and the preservation of the Fun Forest; you can learn about them online).
But Open Platform excels by combining all three of the best ideas.
It would be a parklike green area with a sequence of discrete outdoor “rooms” (cradled by curving benches instead of walls) that could be used for performances, gatherings, and changing displays—of art, of gardening, of experiments in green technology. Open Platform would be governed loosely by a nonprofit organization that would invite performances from nearby Seattle Center organizations as well as non-Center artists and designers.
Like the Olympic Sculpture Park downtown, admission would be free and anyone could use the space. And Open Platform doesn’t want to tear down the pavilion—it wants to put KEXP in there, which is another logical collaboration. KEXP could produce live in-studio performances and continuous broadcasting, providing more benefit to locals than a tourist novelty.
Less than 25 percent of Seattle Center’s 4.6 million annual visitors are from Seattle, according to an economic survey conducted by the Center in 2006. Seattle Center doesn’t need another tourist attraction; it needs something free for the people who live here.
Big, fun brains are behind Open Platform. It’s a team effort, not a rich man’s project (however well-intentioned). The team is made up of people who are already making art happen around the city—just not all in one place: Lane Czaplinski, who runs beloved performance venue On the Boards; Eric Fredericksen, who runs contemporary art space Western Bridge; Anne Focke, the powerhouse arts organizer (she directed the first Bumbershoot, in 1971); and Lorna Jordan, a Seattle artist who’s made stunning and active works locally and in other cities. (One of Jordan’s works is an eight-acre park/sculpture in Renton that filters up to two million gallons per day of storm-water runoff from nearby concrete surfaces.)
Open Platform doesn’t have money yet. “Hopefully, the city could kick in something, and then there’s always fundraising,” says Jordan. She cites potential funding from money still available in the city’s 2008 parks levy and the sort of philanthropic grants behind other projects the group has worked on.
Meanwhile, money is what the Space Needle/Chihuly museum has over every other proposal. Paradoxically, it’s also the only project that would cost more than a few dollars to get into. Funding has to happen somehow. At the Chihuly museum, it would happen at the gate.
Given that Seattle Center has already aligned itself with the Space Needle’s project, and that other proposals haven’t had time to organize, the selection committee may show a bias toward the Chihuly museum. The museum promises to pay Seattle Center an annual rental payment of $350,000 for the first five years, then $500,000 for the remaining 15 years. “Our project brings money into the city,” said Ron Sevart, CEO of the Space Needle, in a meeting in June. “Look at the number of visitors we’ll attract to the Seattle Center. This project will make Seattle a world-class destination.” But favoring a project for tourism dollars would be a shortsighted, unimaginative, fiscally driven decision.
“We’re missing something in terms of a flexible organization that can work in a variety of spaces in this city,” says Jordan. “That’s the gap our proposal seeks to fill.”
Seattle Center’s master plan, completed with input from thousands of local residents in 2008, calls for the creation of “the nation’s best gathering place,” not a quick fix for a budgetary problem. Open Platform’s proposal notes that “performances and events inside Seattle Center buildings are often hidden from view.” In contrast, Open Platform would create a gathering place for the public, not another pay-to-play attraction.
In order to tap into the vision set forward by the Space Needle’s bold mentality at the 1962 World’s Fair, the Space Needle LLC needs to step aside today. 
I’d love to see something similar to New York’s HIGH LINE go in– http://www.thehighline.org/
Now there’s an innovative use of space, frequented by visitors and locals alike.
Are these folks accepting donations? I’d be glad to contribute to this public friendly use of the seattle center space.
“Hopefully the city could kick in something”..?
You’d think the people making proposals wouldn’t have missed the part about how the city has no money. Hence the first attempt at making an agreement with a group who brought lots of cash to the table.
I like this idea the best but, if they don’t figure out how to fund it without help from the City, it won’t get chosen.
I’d suggest going ahead with the Chihuly exhibit and moving these additional plans over to the area west of the EMP. That space has been empty for ages and ground breaking could start immediately.
“With what should we replace the Fun Forest?” (I’m sorry. I can’t help it!)
I believe that the Chihuly exhibit will put money in the pockets of Seattle artists. I have been thinking a lot about this project. I think that more arts patrons coming to Seattle to see a Chihuly Pavilion means more art patrons visiting other worthy arts organizations like the Lawrimore Project, the Henry and other lesser known galleries downtown. My biggest interest is in more attention for the emerging artists who often have to move away from Seattle to find an audience. This would bring big art collectors to Seattle from all around the world. I have seen it before…
Timmeche… explain where you have seen it before? I suspect a Chihuly exhibit will cast a shadow on local artists. And it might not be much of a shadow since the center would still have the same “tourist attraction” feel and patrons of the Chihuly exhibit will be just that… tourists and not necessarily patrons of the arts. Nope… I can’t buy that unless you can back it up with the example you have seen.
Not trying to be combative butt to post and say that it will benefit local artists without an example sounds a bit shill.
The ‘sculpture park’ for the sculpture in question is actually Edmonds Community College which has some sculpture. Give credit!
the high line took years and years of begging. they have this great parks program in nyc where one a year you can visit places that are normally not open to the public (lighthouses, water works). the high line was always the most popular, and everyone begged for it to be made a park full time.
Sorry for the delay Bean. I am actually trying to run a small arts org and I’m not checking back with this great Blog as often as I would like. I have worked in Museums for “too many” years. I guess the easiest example of when this sort of thing works is when you bring in a big exhibit like Chihuly glass and the visitors also get to experience the Rebecca Horn show in the next gallery and the Marita Dingus piece in the lobby.
When several Chihuly exhibits have opened in arboretums, the attendance has gone from 40,000 visitors a year to 400,000 in three months. A good example is the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. “Real” arts patrons come to these exhibits and they stay for days and they visit other arts organizations and purchase local art.
Honestly, the last thing we need is ANOTHER Chihuly exhibit. Can Seattle have something new please? How about a combination mix? Why not incorporate local artists AND Chihuly art as well. Why not make it an art HOUSE in a park setting, with interactive outdoor art for people to touch, play with and enjoy for FREE. As a Seattlite, I’m all for less touristy crap, and more local empowerment. Tourist season ends, but my mailing address stays the same.
Yo Stranger friends: some questions to ask the fine folk at Open Platform:
a) Why leave up the Arcade Pavilion building, given that it’s one of Seattle’s ugliest and blocks the entrance to the Center House from Broad Street?
b) How cool of a sculptural park can it be if it’s limited to the approx 1.2 acres that’s left over?
c) Do we really believe that non-profit arts organizations will want to pay to use these mini-stages? If they don’t or can’t, what’s the back-up plan?
The drawings are great, the concepts are cool — just too bad it doesn’t go far enough toward making a great, active park space at Seattle Center.
Hardly anyone cared about the Fun Forest and the space it exists upon, yet now everyone seems to have a “critical” opinion about how it should be used other than a Chihuly exhibit. I actually think it’s a good idea and will definitely draw tourists and funding. There is plenty of room at the Center for other ideas — as long as it doesn’t include another freakin’ dog park!
Tacoma already has a glass museum… why duplicate that?
(grumpy-voiced) Still pulling for my musuem of natural history.
Maybe they can put one in at the new waterfront park…
@Timmiche
Your examples of visitors being exposed to other artists when visiting a large museum is a good one, but I don’t think it applies here. In an institution such as the Tacoma Glass Museum it is totally true. However, the Chihuly Museum is not likely to bring in other glass artists, as it focuses on one man, one career, and not an artform/media.
Regarding whether it will inspire tourists to check out other local art I am *extremely* doubtful this will happen (though I’d dearly love it to!). I have seen with my own eyes how tourists will enter a gallery space showing both Chihuly’s work and the work of a wide variety of other very talented artists and make a beeline for the Chihuly reproductions. They are so busy swooning over assembly line Chihuly studio pieces (sold the world over, made thousands of times to be as identical as possible) that it is as if they have blinders on to the rest of what is in the gallery. No amount of explanation or enticement will sway them: they want to look at and buy Chihuly and only Chihuly, and will ignore far superior artists and pieces at far lower prices. Then they are off again, hurrying to the next place where they can see his chandeliers, and utterly uninterested in galleries or museums showing other local artists.
It is very troubling, very sad, and it isn’t something that can possibly be alleviated by building a shrine to his career.
/Chihuly rant.
Personally, I’m in favor of the Northwest Coast Native idea. I think it would fit in wonderfully with the other culture-specific museums in Seattle– the Wing Luke Asian, African American and Nordic museums. Now *that* would be a boon for tourists and locals alike, plus would be an amazing resource for contemporary native artists and historians. I love the idea of schools, senior centers and research institutions using it as an educational center. Plus, think of the amazing cultural events that could go on there: storytelling, dancing, arts classes such as carving or weaving, language classes in almost extinct dialects that are being revived and recorded.
/general rant. Sorry, didn’t mean to go on for that long. I get worked up about these things.
Who cares? There were hundreds of people at the South Park bridge wake today that were not mindful of the bridge closing pre-arranged schedule. Why does this silly small space even deserve so much space?
I say lets get one of them there Space Shuttles to go there!!!!
@18 Thank you. Screw the plug for KEXP’s shiny new studio – profile the South Park businesses that will be shut down due to Seattle’s failed priorities.
Chihuly is dated, passe, irrelevant. I would even say ugly. I am so over it (and you should be to!)
Honestly, why does Seattle Center have to suck?
Why does it have to be some sort of artsy thing, or even a museum of anything? Why are we so intent on reducing the amount of space available for things like Folk Life, Bite of , and Bumbershoot? Those events, when weather is good, are usually so crowded that every square inch is packed. These are the events that locals attend. Why make those events even more crowded? Why can’t we just have a large fucking park area in which to congregate? When it comes time to protest the next war, will there be anywhere left to have the rally?
Completely agree -why not some plain old open space, grass and the random bench?
this sounds so cool! i wish we had somthing like that in portland(OR) i really hope this happens
I agree with Timmiche… My experience with watching people in a gallery showing Dale Chihuly’s work is the opposite of -ink’s.
I worked for a gallery that is best known for glass art for over 5 years and for the majority of the time I was there, they didn’t represent Chihuly. Sure, people came in asking to see his work, but when we engaged them in conversation, they were generally very interested in learning about other artists as well… they often then made purchases and then asked what else they should see in Seattle.
I think this project provides an opportunity for the rest of the arts community to creatively engage visitors to Seattle. It is presumptuous to assume that tourists are not capable of being persuaded to take the next step and explore the city’s gallery scene after seeing the show. If I were still in the gallery business, I would certainly be supporting this project and thinking about how I might be able to ride on its coattails to sell some of my artists’ work!
And… The Open Platform may be a great idea, but the fact is the deadline for proposals has passed, as far I understand it. Unless that has changed, all this discussion may be somewhat pointless.
Seattle needs more Chihuly like Memphis needs more Elvis.
Let’s knock down the arcade pavilion, take up the asphalt, and create a 4.6-acre active urban green in that public space, plus the adjoining park already to the west. Moreover, Seattle Center’s own Master Plan, unanimously adopted by the City Council after a two-year planning effort, calls for green open space in this area.
Ok. So between attending good downtown exhibits like Majicality at Platform (irony not lost on me), G. Gibson Gallery, drinking a beer downtown with friends and putting my kids to bed (late), I have again been away too long from this great blog.
Just to set the scene here, I grew up on the East Coast where, amazing to Seattle folks, Chihuly is not a household name. Now to be scenic again, my folks come from farming and heavy industry roots and are, what most writers here have been referring to here as, “tourists”. Not Arts Patrons, true, but regular folks. When they came to town and saw their first Chihuly – they liked it. They were amazed at it’s scale and interested in how it was made and generally were more interested than they had ever really been in most of the art experiences that we had ever shared together.
So, what I like about Chihuly’s installations, especially, are their accessibility to regular folks. Yes, rich people buy them to put them in their yachts and MCMansions, but “Real” art patrons also buy them for their thoughtful collections and regular folks can watch the videos on PBS. But here is what I can get behind – Accessibility.
So Yes, the “tourists” will come and go and I BELIEVE, the arts patrons and art fans will stay in town and visit other fantastic arts venues like Western Bridge and so I think the Chihuly Pavillion would be good for the arts in Seattle.
Leave it to the Seattle center brainpower to think up something just as dumb as the EMP. The glass museum would do only one thing these idiots want. Provide a check off of something that will surly fail as a business model, all while kissing ass to their current favorite Paul Allen rich bitch type. The glass museum will happen, as Seattle Center as a perversion for picking the thing most likely to fail throughout the years. The only difference between it and the struggling EMP is that they won’t be able to open a “Si-Fi tribute to glass” in an attempt to save their ass 3 years down the road when everyone goes and is so underwhelmed that they never come back.
My vote would either be for the open space proposal or something like the Boston Pavilion, which this summer is hosting more shows than White River or the Gorge. Just don’t sell it, or let it be maintained by Live Nation. We know that will require actual work, but to have a smaller 4000 seat outdoor amphitheater so that shows like Cirque don’t have to be in the middle of nowhere like Marymoor would create more jobs, excitement and interest in the center than a million glass sculptures. Could also be used as mixed space and free performance space when headliners are not playing, and could even be used by the Vera project for a big yearly fund drive/concert. Do you overpaid people at the Center actually not see that having REAL events and concerts in the center would attract visitors to your other endeavors?
Seattle will choose something that nobody likes or wants, but the upside is that since this is Seattle, it’ll be a decade before they begin breaking ground for it.
I live nearby and Seattle Center needs LIFE. I don’t understand why we can’t do several of these projects. Do Chihuly – it brings in both bucks and people and will add some interest to the middle of the Center. Do KEXP by Vera at the Northwest rooms – it brings life to that corner of the center and KEXP could use the Vera space for performances. Do green space by making the Memorial Stadium deal happen NOW. Do Open Platform in that other 3 acre parcel that is part of the Fun Forest. Everyone gets something, but, mostly the Center gets BETTER. Why can’t we think BIGGER and make all the good stuff happen? Seattle policy makers- and apparently you guys at the Stranger – always fight about stuff but never make good things happen….
@22 and 23: Seattle Center already has open, green space with grass and benches – Visit the area around the International Fountain some time other than the three weekends of Bumbershoot, Bite, and Folklife; There is lots of open space for children to play, people to sit and read, eat or dream.
@27: There is NO MONEY for the supposed “Master Plan.” It was meant to be a guide and a recommendation, but not something written in stone. If we wait for the City to have the money to implement the “Master Plan,” we’ll all be old and gray by the time that happens. As it is, the City is facing an impending multi-million $$ budget cut, so bucks for Seattle Center are probably not on the horizon.
@31: What a great idea! I agree whole-heartedly – The Northwest Rooms at Seattle Center are definitely under-utilized, and KEXP could easily move in there and collaborate with the Vera space next door. Why hasn’t anyone suggested this before?
And finally, @Stranger: Why do your writers consistently treat this relatively small parcel of land at Seattle Center as though it were El Dorado? There are SO many other areas of Seattle Center in need of scrutiny/innovation/improvement (like, oh, the other, bigger Fun Forest area that is not part of this proposal project). Get over your personal vendetta against Mr. Chihuly. Some people like his stuff, some don’t. That’s art. And that’s life.
We are going through a most difficult of times. Solutions to our many challenges will show up in many forms.
Some of these will be “false prophets,” this is when the Vultures truly come out.
However weary we become we must protect our planned nests,
open space-green space from the enticement of the safety that a new revenue stream that may occur by a new commercial development at the base of the Needle without being “BP’d,” into it.
Their numbers look bright.
And they do not take into account the impact of the loss of open space on the neighborhoods surrounding the Center or their existing bushiness.
They do not take into account the negative impact of the “NEW” Mercer Mess.
They do not take in account the visual impact of crowding the base of the Needle or the crowding out of an exciting new open entrance the the Centers entirety with the removal of the Fun Forest building.
The removal of the Fun Forest Building allows for very exciting development at the Center House and a huge welcoming to the entire campus adding visual open space allowing for the Needle to be better seen.
One’s eye needs to rest in-order to see the trees.
Great city parks recognize this fact.
When seeing the Eiffel Tower in Paris it is surrounded by greens.
Central Park in NYC comes to mind as does Millennium in Chicago.
These opportunities are often planned for in advance as was ours with the Century 21, 2008 approved Master Plan, which recognized the need for the base of the Needle to be a respite.
And NOT to be a commercial concession for a private developer.
Our Parks are not meant to be revenue streams for the wealthy.
Or, even to be a revenue stream for the park or us.
They are our parks and, therefore we should be protecting them and finding ways in which to keep their candles burning for eternity.
If you believe that to be true that private revenue stream is the only answer,
you are being “BP’d!”
Crowding the base of our Trademark Needle would corrupt it as it would the Eiffel Tower if they built a concessions/Museum there at its base.
One more thing I was thinking about this morning. Chihuly is not BP or an cigarette company or a chemical company that is going to build a factory in the Seattle Center. He is an artist. He has become very successful and he has sold art all over the world, but he is an artist. I wish all the artists in this town could be as successful. That’s why I think that the global popularity of this one artist can bring attention to this remarkable City that we live in. With that attention will come audiences and money for the many arts organizations of Seattle. Seattle has the most arts organizations per capita in the country, we need a bigger audience to support ALL of these great organizations and I believe that the Chihuly Pavilion would be a positive step in that direction.
Seattle is a provincial art town with a handful of really great galleries that exhibit really great work, the rest present schlocky work that is embarrassing to look at. As an artist, I did not move here for the ‘art scene’; for collectors, this is not the city to go to.
If you want to support arts and local artists, you should be going to some of the more innovative places in Pioneer Square and the surrounding areas. Bringing in a Chihuly Museum will not accomplish this- his work fits a particular demographic and a particular wallet size, and people buying this shit like to say how much they spent on it- rather than buying something because it resonates with them. He is irrelevant in the art community and is only ‘successful’ in getting big fuck-off projects that do a disservice to “Percent for the Arts.” How are we defining ‘successful’ and do we want artists to follow his pattern to create stagnant work that looks like a craft?
Furthermore, shoring up places like the Capitol Hill and Pioneer Square arts walks- where many spaces are struggling to pay rent- should be the first priority- because without those spaces, the local arts scene with be further degraded. ‘World Class collectors’ will not come to Seattle because there is a new Chihuly museum, influential curators (what the local artists REALLY need) will not come to Seattle because there is a Chihuly museum, local patrons will probably go once in their lifetime, and after about 10 years, the space will be obsolete, and Seattle Center will be looking for the next get-rich-quick scheme.
thaskinny,
I’ll just copy and paste my opening sentences from a few posts up…
“Ok. So between attending good downtown exhibits like Majicality at Platform (irony not lost on me), G. Gibson Gallery, drinking a beer downtown with friends and putting my kids to bed (late), I have again been away too long from this great blog.”
I may not know the same collectors that you do, but I really support local art. I actually buy it, promote it and live it as a non profit art geek for the past 15 years. So, having been out of town a few times to other cities I have noted that:
A. National arts patrons, who actually support artists, own a Chihuly piece just like they own pieces by Tauba Auerbach, Martin Puryear or Bruce Nauman.
B. They would happily travel to a place like Seattle to visit the Chihuly Pavilion and would certainly visit galleries like SOIL, Lawrimore Project, Western Bridge and the Henry.
I have been disappointed over and over as great ideas like Consolidated Works, Crawl Space and even Western Bridge struggle for an audience and pass away like good memories…
We need more of a National Arts draw like the Chihuly project to bring folks into the city from all over to participate in all the other positive projects that are happening here…
FYI – Nic Rossouw @ girafdesign did the engineering on this.
“This project will make Seattle a world-class destination.”
Ron Sevart is a top cunt.
I like these words…
“In contrast, Open Platform would create a gathering place for the public, not another pay-to-play attraction.
In order to tap into the vision set forward by the Space Needle’s bold mentality at the 1962 World’s Fair, the Space Needle LLC needs to step aside today.”
I also enjoy these words posted in a comment.
“Can Seattle have something new please? How about a combination mix? Why not incorporate local artists AND Chihuly art as well. Why not make it an art HOUSE in a park setting, with interactive outdoor art for people to touch, play with and enjoy for FREE.!!!!”
I feel confident that Paul Allen and Chihuly would be able to donate there resources for free. For The People.
P.s. I have never been to emp and I am madly in love with music.
Sending Love,
Ms.Killer B
This is a fantastic idea which maintains the whole premise of the Seattle Center which is a local venue for EVERYONE to enjoy at any time day or night. The Seattle Center has always been about free art and music, 24 hour enjoyment. I welcome this Open Platform. I only hope is that the Seattle Center listens to this public out cry againts another exclusive venue than only the few can enjoy… which are the rich and wealthy. Please Listen to the people that have spent years and their lives growing up going to the Seattle Center and fill the old fun forest with another art, music, and entertainment (meaning climbing sculptures, running through water fountains, and laying on the grass looking at the stars and clkouds) for EVERYONE!! Please don’t ruin the atmosphere of this very special place.
“The Seattle Center has always been about free art and music, 24 hour enjoyment.”
What was free? Certainly not the fun forest. Square dancing in the Center House food court? The city can not afford to create another open space park unless private donors pay for it.
yes. the seattle center. it has, always been. about face.soon, the rain will stipulate. stop.
the art, it was mentioned here, on this page. something about a face.on the look. there. it is, no need to answer or argue. what is is this, when it visits, the art work that is, there is only this.
the stranger has templeted McLintock far too long.
Just, where is that lesson that G.W. told Becky?
Right there… where the hill stole the beaver pelt and made the world think it was a blog.
get it?
nnnnnaw… i think you’ll probably just whine about the rate of return.
@42
Take your medication.
“Open Platform doesn’t have money yet. “Hopefully, the city could kick in something, and then there’s always fundraising,” says Jordan.”
I laughed after reading this.
You people are hilarious.
Three cheers for Dale Chihuly; easily the most successful con-artist and garbage monger on the face of the earth!!
greenspace…beanface – I can see the pavillion and amusement section right now as well as the greenspaces to the east and west of it. It is 75 degrees and freakin gorgeous and guess what? Nobody is using those greenspaces…OK not nobody i can see four people out in the grass and those people are taking their lunch breaks in the sun. It’s not a destination. What makes you think that this place will become an urban sanctuary by just adding more grass when the current greenspace isn’t being used now? I think people are idealistic, but the reality is that a hunk of grass isn’t a draw 98% of the year. Sure it’s great during bite, bumbershoot, etc, but day in and day out it’s worthless and unused. The Center needs something that will draw people in and i don’t know for sure what that is, but how about a hedgemaze, fountains and a garden? People eat that shit up.
I love walking through the Seattle Center and seeing/hearing all the kids having fun at the fountain. Let’s have more of that, open space and music to hear!
Take a look at this intriguing way to fill ‘problem’ real estate…
(I was there recently, and it’s fantastic.)
http://www.cornerstonegardens.com/garden…
Sooooooooo, everybody shot down the idea of a Gary Larson Far Side Museum?
No Chihuly please. There are enough examples of his “art” around town; God knows we don’t need a big building full of them – well, unless they confiscate all of these other pieces and toss ’em in, too.
I really like the Open Platform idea. Anything to engage and interract with the community. No more Chihuly, please!
None of these proposals are home runs. The city should not have to pick from these limited choices. Solution? Form a selection panel and have an open competition for proposals. I am sure the results would be better than a vanity project, a vague open space, etc. After picking the best project, funding could come from a variety of sources – percent for arts, other tax revenues (hotel, etc.), patrons, etc. But the great ideas have to come first. So far, I don’t see any.