Oct 152013
 

Following on from Timothy Neat’s Edinburgh Festival appearance at Summerhall, profiling his collaborations with John Berger, Peacock Visual Arts are proud to be hosting a major Retrospective of Neat’s life’s work, STANDS SCOTLAND WHERE SHE DID? from 27 September – 9 November 2013.

Martha Mackenzie, Scots Traveller, Fortinghall, November 1976 © Timothy Neat sq

Martha Mackenzie, Scots Traveller, Fortinghall, November 1976 © Timothy Neat

A stunning collection of photographs capturing experiences and relationships over a long life will be on show. Neat is a champion of the marginalized – Scottish Travelling People, Gaelic bards, salmon-netters, crofters, bee-keepers, horse breeders, Andalucian villagers, poets and artists.

Neat has worked closely with many leading Scottish figures – MacDiarmid, Sorley MacLean, Hamish Henderson, Ian Hamilton Finlay, Margaret Gardiner (Pier Arts Centre, Orkney) and the Fife singer Jean Redpath.

Also, Robert Burns and Charles Rennie Mackintosh!

Six of Neat’s films will be screened at The Belmont Picturehouse including:

Play me Something (1988), winner of the Europa Prize, Barcelona 1989. This 35mm feature film shot on the Isle of Barra and Venice, features John Berger, Tilda Swinton, Hamish Henderson and Liz Lochhead;

Journey to a Kingdom – Hamish Henderson returns to the North East of Scotland’ (1992).

(Hamish Henderson [1919-2002] was with the 51st Highland Division in North Africa and Italy and became a legendary figure amongst the Gordon Highlanders. This film originally made for Grampian Television documents Henderson’s work as a folklorist in the North East. Neat’s highly prasied two-volume biography of Henderson will be available after the film screening).

STAND SCOTLAND WHERE SHE DID? will be a major exhibition, featuring a new suite of screen-prints by Neat, published by Peacock Visual Arts, and original works by many of the major artists with whom he has collaborated over 50 years; years during which Scottish culture and politics have changed dramatically.

Guests attending the opening and closing events will have the opportunity to enjoy performances by some of Scotland’s best traditional musicians.

Alison McMorland and Geordie McIntyre will sing Hamish Henderson ballads and political songs at the opening on 27 September. On 9 November Elizabeth Stewart will sing some of the great ballads of the north east and Alastair Roberts, rising star of the modern folk scene in Scotland, will sing some of Neat’s own songs.

Peacock Visual Arts is proud to be able to present this Retrospective in Aberdeen, before various parts of the exhibition embark on an international tour, which may prove seminal during the year of the Scottish National Referendum.

To coincide with this Retrospective, Polygon (Edinburgh) has published a major book, ‘These Faces; photographs and drawings by Timothy Neat’, with an important introduction by John Berger.

FULL LIST OF EVENTS

Exhibition:

28 September – 9 November 2013

Exhibition Opening:

Friday 27 September, 6 – 8pm
With performances by Alison McMorland and Geordie McIntyre.

Film Screenings:

Sunday 29 September, from 6pm:

‘Journey to a Kingdom’ (52mins)
‘The Tree of Liberty’ (73mins)

Sunday 13 October, from 6pm:

‘Time is a Country’ (52mins)
‘Hallaig’ (64mins)

Sunday 27 October, from 6pm:

‘Rathad nan Ceard’ (30mins)
‘Play me Something’ (72mins)

Exhibition Closing Gig:

Friday 8 November, 7pm
Performances by Elizabeth Stewart and Alastair Roberts.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Aug 012013
 

With thanks to Kirsty Young.

Artists in Print: 21 Years of Collaboration celebrates the wealth of prints made, in collaboration with numerous acclaimed artists over the last 21 years, by Peacock’s own master printmaker, Michael Waight.
Over 30 prints by prolific artists such as John Bellany, John Byrne, Ian McCulloch, Toby Paterson, Barbara Rae, Peter Randall-Page, Ralph Steadman, Frances Walker, Sylvia Wishart, Donald Urquhart, plus many more, will be shown together for the first time in this exciting exhibition.

Michael Waight has curated this show to give printmaking enthusiasts, fans of Peacock Visual Arts and the communities of Aberdeen a chance to see how he has spent the last twenty-one years in the Peacock workshop and in whose company.

The impressive list of artists included is by no means exhaustive – Mike having worked with over fifty artists on over three hundred editions and proofing projects.

To accompany the exhibition, Peacock Visual Arts will host a gallery tour and printmaking workshop, dates and details of which to be confirmed.

A gallery walk-around and informal talk with Michael will also be held at the gallery, to coincide with Impact 8 Conference (Dundee) and the Scottish Print Festival.

Michael Waight, Printmaker comments:

‘Putting this show together allows me and Peacock Visual Arts very publicly to acknowledge our thanks to every artist who has, and continues to, come our way. The artists are the brave and tolerant partners in these collaborations, entrusting ideas to us with faith and understanding that we can do justice to their vision.’

FEATURED ARTISTS 

John Bellany

John Bellany has inspired a new pride in Scottish artists; a fact duly recognised when he received the CBE.

His paintings are in the collections of major museums and art galleries throughout the world, including the National Galleries of Scotland, The Tate Gallery, The Museum of Modern Art, New York and the Metropolitan Museum, New York.

 

Adam Bridgland

Adam Bridgland (b. 1979) lives and works in London. He graduated with a Masters in Fine Art at the Royal College of Art in 2006 and has since exhibited widely in the UK, Europe, Asia and America. The BritishMuseum, the V&A, UBS, Boeing Asia and Debbie Harry are just some of the collectors of Adam’s work.  Described as ‘your favourite leisure time artist’, Adam embraces the everyday object finding inspiration from the colouring book image, travel guidebooks, and scout camping paraphernalia. Kitsch and humorous, yet equally poignant, Adam’s work rejoices in the mundane and is an investigation of the notion that holiday-making is just another ordinary everyday activity and that the holiday is essentially a fantasy that rarely lives up to our expectations.

 

James Furneaux (1935 – 2013)

James Furneaux was born in Aberdeen on 7th June 1935. In 1965 he became a lecturer at AberdeenCollege, where he taught art and design for 23 years, before taking early retirement in 1988 to concentrate on his own art.Furneaux was most noted for painting Aberdeen’s lesser known buildings and landmarks from unusual perspectives, and this early training in architecture was often apparent in his depiction of the city’s buildings.

 

Ralph Steadman

Ralph Steadman was born on 15 May 1936 in Wallasey, Liverpool.

He is renowned for his political and social caricatures and cartoons
and for illustrating a number of picture books, for which he received several
awards.

His work is sought after all over the world.

 

Exhibition Runs: 3 August – 14 September 2013
Opening Hours: Tuesday – Saturday 9:30 – 5:30pm
Entry: Free to exhibition. Charges will apply to events and workshops.

Mar 142013
 

Peacock Visual Arts are proud to welcome renowned paper maker Jacki Parry to exhibit in the main gallery.

Resonance (Paper As Memory) will include a selection of handmade paper sculptures and prints, both large and small scale, free standing and wall mounted.
Works will include the large scale installation Ocean, which cascades from the ceiling like a large ‘ocean wave,’ alerting us to both the natural and textile-like qualities of paper.

The Boolakeel Series of handmade digital prints, which play with paper’s association with mass communications; while their subtitle, The Wind Among the Rushes, leads us to the scene in Boolakeel, rural Ireland, which inspired their creation.

Small sculptural pieces such as Yellow Venus, which almost seem to burst with air and showcase Jacki’s skills at sewing, folding, and weaving paper, alongside making it.

A number of these works featured in Jacki’s exhibition ‘Resonance’ at Glasgow Print Studio in 2012. This exhibition at Peacock Visual Arts will also showcase some exciting new work currently in progress, plus an interview with Jacki, filmed earlier this year in her Glasgow studio.

About the Artist

Jacki Parry was born in Wonthaggi, Australia, and graduated as a teacher of secondary art and craft from Melbourne Teachers College. Jacki moved to the UK in 1965, and Scotland in 1970 where she has lived since. In 1972 while a student at Glasgow School of Art Jacki became one of the founding members of the Glasgow Print Studio, and had her first solo exhibition there in February 2012 to open their 40th anniversary celebrations.

In 1985 Jacki founded Gallowgate Studios, Glasgow with partner and painter John Taylor, where her studio, The Paper Workshop, was established.

In 1991 Jacki was appointed Senior Lecturer, Head of Printmaking at Glasgow School of Art, where she continued to teach until her retirement in 2006.

For the past 30 years Jacki has continually explored the material and perceptual possibilities of paper and print, studying with the master American papermaker Laurence Barker in Barcelona, and Tadao Endo in Shiroishi, Japan.

Jacki now works full time in her Glasgow studio, and was elected to the Royal Scottish Academy in 2009. She has also lectured and exhibited in the UK and internationally.

Kirsty Young, Communications Manager at Peacock Visual Arts says, “We are all very excited that Jacki is bringing this exhibition to Aberdeen. Not only will we see work included in her first solo show from 2012, Resonance, but also a selection of brand new work. This is a fantastic opportunity to get up close to, and be inspired by, some very delicate and beautiful pieces of paper sculpture’.

  • Exhibition Runs 23 March – 4 May 2013
  • Opening Friday 22 March, 6 – 8pm
Feb 142013
 

With thanks to Kirsty Young – Communications Manager, Peacock Visual Arts.

Peacock Visual Arts’ inaugural In Motion Animation Festival presents an exciting programme of short and feature films, curated from around the world and screened at The Belmont Picturehouse.

It will also feature an intriguing exhibition of drawings and paintings by award-winning artist/animator Thomas Hicks and workshops for all ages, taking place at venues across the City of Aberdeen.

The festival is co-curated by Susie Wilson and Thomas Hicks.

http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/events/403/in-motion-animation-festival-2013

In Motion Animation Festival 2013 – Programme Live!
22 February – 9 March
Opening 21 February, 6 – 8pm at Peacock Visual Arts, all welcome!

Peacock Visual Arts, 21 Castle Street, Aberdeen, AB11 5BQ

Tel: 01224 639539
Mob: 07525 123425
email: kirsty@peacockvisualarts.co.uk

Open Tue – Sat 9.30 – 5.30pm admission free
www.peacockvisualarts.com

Online Shop

Oct 182012
 

With thanks to Kirsty Young.

Drag queen turned draughtsman, Donald Urquhart presents Big Jessie, a selection of bold, new hand printed works printed at Peacock Visual Arts.

Born in 1963, self confessed ‘big Jessie’ Donald Urquhart first gained public attention as the man behind the 90s high camp cabaret night The Beautiful Bend, but is now better known for his distinctive cartoon-like black ink drawings.

“Despite being black and white, Donald Urquhart’s bittersweet, droll, cartoon-like drawings are souvenirs of a colourful past. Comforting and disconcerting in equal measure, their elegant line and graphic finesse makes them immediately appealing, even though they sometimes dish out hardcore one-liners like seasoned cabaret artistes or twisted greetings cards.” Frieze Magazine

In Big Jessie Urquhart continues this style of work with pieces including The Scottish Alphabet, a screenprint portraying Urquharts homeland in twenty-six alphabetically ordered images counting Lulu, the Krankies and Molly Weir as important Scottish icons.
http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/archive/356/coming-soon-donald-urquhart
Exhibition runs until 27 October 2012

OilScapes // Various Artists

Curated by Dr Janet Stewart and Zeigam Azizov.

Zeigam Azizov, Peter Fend, Melik Ohanian, Aga Ousseinov and Owen Logan explore connections between oil, geopolitics and visual culture with particular emphasis on connections between the environment and mobility. Featuring an audio collage with voices from the University of Aberdeen’s Lives in the Oil Industry oral history archive.

OilScapes also features a number of events including Artist’s Talk a Workshop and OilScapes/Film screenings.

For the full programme: http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/events/379/oilscapes

Grotto // The Winter Exhibition

Submit your work in A4 format within the theme of “Grotto”, for your chance to be part of the annual PVA Christmas Exhibition, 2012 edition!  – Click here to Find out more
DEADLINE 31 OCTOBER 

Screenprinting Weekend Workshop // beginners

Explore the creative possibilities of this colourful, graphic and immediate approach to making repeat prints. No experience required – just a few images and a bit of creativity.  – Click here to Find out more
Sat 27 & Sun 28 October | 10 – 4.30pm | £130/95 conc.

Etching   Weekend Workshop // beginners

Sign up for the opportunity to learn the techniques and processes that are involved in the traditional art of etching. No experience required. – Click here to Find out more  
Sat 27 & Sun 28 October | 10 – 4.30pm | £130/95 conc.

Thursday Print Club is back again!

Get familiar with the workshops, practice techniques and gain confidence and benefit from regular supervision from Peacock Staff.  – Click here to Find out more
Every Thursday evening 8 November – 13 December | £60

Animation Class

Ever wondered how Wallace and Gromit move? Or what makes Pingu go? Well here at Peacock we’re planning an abundance of animation workshops to show you just that! – Click here to Find out more
Thursday 18 & Thursday 25 October

Mono Printing Workshop // beginners

Join Michael Waight for this one day workshop, where he will show you how to master the art of the single impression print.   – Click here to Find out more
Saturday 24 November | 10 – 4:30pm | £75/£65 conc.

Japanese Stab Binding Workshop// beginners 

This one day workshop with Mike Waight will show you wonderful ways to make handmade books. Ideal for personal Christmas presents!  – Click here to Find out more
Saturday 1 December | 10 – 4:30pm | £75/£65 conc.

Aug 172012
 

Old Susannah takes a look recent events in the ‘Deen, and tackles tricky terms with a locally topical taste. By Suzanne Kelly.

Tally Ho!  Once again future of our Union Terrace Gardens with its green field, 250-year-old elms, other trees, and wildlife is in the spotlight. The vote of the full council next week on 22 August will be significant to our getting our £140,000,000 granite web, which will fit in situ so naturally that we’ll think the Victorians built it in time.

Sadly, some anti-progress, anti-referendum, nimby tree-huggers are suggesting that the more suitable place for a public square is the St Nicholas site, and our only city centre park should be left as, well, a park. Three independent councillors will suggest an alternative to the web at the 22/8 meeting.

However, Sir Ian has much more money than they do, and will take his ball home if anyone suggests not doing the plan he wants.

We know he’ll give up as he’s said as much four or five times already (but failed to do so).  Sir Ian and Valerie Watts say without a web, we cannot be the City of Culture in 2017!  Well, that’s the argument for the web settled then.  What good are clean air, a healthy environment, heritage, common good land and existing culture when we can try to win an award?

Not surprisingly this issue of Aberdeen Voice will be filled with articles concerning our city’s future, and reasons to keep our common good land out of the hands of the usual suspects (Smith, Crosby, Milne, Wood of course, and the rest of the ACSEF acolytes).  Old Susannah is keen to redress the balance, and ensure that the selfless, apolitical philanthropists behind the £140,000,000 project get the consideration they deserve.

To that end, here are some relevant definitions.

Intellectual property: (modern English phrase) principle that the ownership of an original idea rests with the idea’s creators, and should be protected by law.

Peacock Visual Arts had come up with the original idea of building a new arts centre inside UTG; they were helped by Scottish Enterprise and ACSEF with their original scheme.  This help was kind of like the help that the Fox gave to Jemima Puddleduck.

Magically, the Peacock idea was hijacked (with Scottish Enterprise help) and transformed into the transformational 8th wonder of the world, The Granite Web.  After all their expense and groundwork, Peacock was left out in the cold, irrespective of their moral right to their intellectual property of putting a cultural venue in UTG.

Just as well this wasn’t going on in America; it would still be being fought in the courts now.

Thankfully, such hijackings of intellectual property concerning UTG are very rare, except for the most recent one.  Common Good Aberdeen, a group of people who simply want the gardens enhanced and protected from developers, recently came up with an original idea which they pitched to the City.

They proposed serving drinks and snacks from a temporary structure inside one of the disused central arches in UTG for a year. ALL profits, if the scheme survives a vote to be held today (17/08), are to be diverted to improving UTG.

Thus volunteers will take an unused space, encourage people to use the gardens, and generate money for the gardens’ improvement.  Obviously, we can’t have this kind of thing going on.

While some of the City’s administration and councillors are supporting this fresh, original scheme, other powers that be (one Mr Gordon McIntosh) has written a report saying that the Council must ensure that it gets ‘Value for Money’ for the disused arch if it is put to use.  Good man!  Mind the pennies, and the hundreds of millions of pounds will take care of themselves.

It is almost as if MacIntosh didn’t want the gardens used for social purposes

Gordon wants to take Common Good’s idea, clearly their intellectual property, and turn it into a commercial bidding exercise (which of course will cost the City money to put out to tender and evaluate incoming bids), and presumably charge whomever would want to rent the empty arch out.

If an organisation has to pay rent on the empty space, it is not that likely that they will plough 100% of their profits into fixing the gardens, which is what Common Good Aberdeen proposed.

It is almost as if MacIntosh didn’t want the gardens used for social purposes or for means to be found to generate UTG improvement funds at no cost to the City.  We have an empty space that is making no money, which volunteers want to use as a means of raising money to fix the gardens, while adding a social amenity to the area at no cost to the city.  If I were as clever as he, it would make sense I’m sure.

Much better that the City spend time and money on a bidding exercise to see if anyone wants to steal CGA’s idea for profit rather than any genuine philanthropy happening.  So, if after we spend taxpayer money on a bid to run a small café, some private company comes along to do so, then it’s profit to them and not the gardens.  Result!

That’s the kind of thinking that got us the city administration we’ve been enjoying these past several years.  If any of the councillors who have a chance to vote on the CGA proposal today are reading this column, I am sure they will do the right thing.

Let’s look at this principle Gordon wants to nobly uphold of ensuring Aberdeen City gets ‘Value for Money’.  Since we’ve seen that we can’t let people use a tiny arch for one year to sell snacks for generating improvement funds for the gardens without proper scrutiny, no doubt this important principle would have to apply to any and all schemes, great and small….

Value for Money:  (mod. English phrase) phrase used in public administration to describe the principle of ensuring that any services or products being sourced by government are obtained by the best qualified suppliers at the lowest possible prices.  European Law also dictates that any public services or goods contracts of substantial value be awarded by fair, open tender processes. 

They might even be expected to give the city a performance bond or guarantee

Let’s imagine just for one moment that a big city, somewhere has a park filled with trees, wildlife, and open spaces for people to enjoy.

Such a space might even be owned by the people outright.

Let’s imagine one step further that after years of mismanagement this hypothetical city wants to make a quick buck or two, and decides to develop this park, despite environmental concerns and public outcry.

The city in question would be expected tofirst write up a tender document, describing what it would want a management company to deliver in the gardens in question.  The tender document would describe in detail exactly what structures were to be created, what activities would take place, what everything would cost, and exactly what the management company’s role would be.

Advertisements asking for bidders with sufficient experience would be placed around the world, and the companies with sufficient experience of project management and venue operations would compete in a tender exercise.  If any would-be management companies had existing personal and business ties with any of the city’s officials or entities (maybe like ACSEF), these would have to be declared and scrutinised:  no one with power over the decision-making process would be permitted to be involved in evaluating tenders or giving work out.

Each bid would be evaluated by the city – without the name of the individual bidders being known – based on the company’s experience, financial health, submitted detailed operation and building budgets and so on.  A shortlist of the best companies would then be evaluated, and the best ‘Value for Money’ bidder would be awarded a contract.

They successful bidder might even be expected to give the city a performance bond or guarantee, and a parent company guarantee to ensure they would not simply disappear or sell the contract on to a third party.

Strict performance benchmarks would be drawn up, and the winning bidder would only be paid for each phase of the detailed project as they successfully delivered it.

Crucially, the entire process would be available for public scrutiny after the sensitive pricing and tendering exercise was completed – before any final contracts were signed.

OR, if the city was Aberdeen….

Members of various interlinked public and/or private entities such as ACSEF would talk to their pals, find out how to make money out of the public’s common good land, ‘transform’ an idea from an arts group into a money-spinner for friends in the construction and development sectors, and use their public and private muscle to get the city leaders to bend to their will.

Some of their number would set up a small private, limited ‘charity’ company, perhaps calling it Aberdeen City Gardens Trust.  This company would automatically be appointed by the city to run the multimillion pound construction scheme without any ‘value for money’ tendering exercise, scrutiny or competition.

Audit Scotland might wonder which companies were paid to carry out the expensive PR / advertising jobs

The newly formed Trust would actively influence decisions such as whether to build theatres next to theatres (Brilliant!),  chop down ancient trees and remove habit for protected EU species which live in said park and promise to plant fir trees (which can’t thrive in a city centre – even more brilliant!).

In the process taxpayer money would be spent to convince the city that building an unspecific project based on a few illogical, unworkable architectural flights of fancy was worth the taxpayer borrowing £90,000,000.

The project would be pushed ahead with this Trust at the head of delivering services, without a project scope defined, without a time frame for construction, and crucially without a budget open to public scrutiny.

It is a very good thing that the EU will never want to look into the manner in which the Granite Web is being foisted on the population or what procurement rules may be being ever so slightly bent.

Similarly, Audit Scotland would never decide to look at precisely how ACSEF and Scottish Enterprise ordered tens of thousands of pounds worth of PR, advertising, and ’stakeholder’ events’, then had the Chamber of Commerce submit invoices to the City Council to pay with public funds.

Audit Scotland will not wonder which companies were paid to carry out the expensive PR / advertising jobs – and why these companies did not get named on the Chamber of Commerce invoices, which cover several years. If that happened, then the elected councillors might start to question whether the entire proceedings were valid, examine the role of ACSEF and its members, and whether the EU, UK or Scottish regulatory agencies would come around asking questions.

Other firms with relevant project delivery experience might get slightly cross at the absence of a tender exercise for such a aluable public project; some of these companies might even know as much about multimillion pound schemes and public amenities as Tom Smith does.   It could all get just a little awkward, sticky, embarrassing and litigious.

I’d best keep these potential problems to myself.  I would hate it if any councillor having doubts about the project were to worry unduly about supporting the web on my account.

Final: (Eng adjective) The last of something; the end of something.

Old Susannah is so old that she went to The Who’s ‘farewell’ concert at Shea Stadium, NY, with the Clash as opening act (was it 1981?  Wish I could see The Clash again especially). The Who played, said it was their final tour, and that was that.  Since then, The Who have had about 57 other final tours.

ACGT were given custody of the ballot papers, even though the taxpayer had paid for the vote.

Sir Ian seems to be a fan of finality as well.  Those of us with memories longer than a goldfish’s will remember the first ‘consultation’ – you know, the one in which the voters rejected the garden scheme.  Sir Ian was going to go walk away then if the concept failed to win the public’s hearts and minds.

Well, we did say ‘no’ but as is often the case, ‘no’ must have really meant ‘yes’.  The official line was that those who were against the scheme simply didn’t understand it.  Fair enough.  So Ian didn’t say ‘farewell’ after all, and resurrected the scheme.

The public were going to be given a chance to vote against developing the gardens when the shortlisted 6 were on view.  This option was what councillors on some of the ‘City Garden Project’ committees had asked for.  However, in the end Gerry Brough is quoted in meeting minutes as saying this was not after all ‘appropriate’ during the design show after all.

People most definitely used the exhibition to write on the ballot papers they wanted no part of destroying UTG, which was very naughty of them indeed.

Thankfully, to avoid any embarrassment for Sir Ian, Tom Smith and Colin Crosby of ACGT were given custody of the ballot papers, even though the taxpayer had paid for the vote.

Campaign groups demanded sight of the papers; but brave ACGT held fast.  We will never know for certain what the real public vote was during the shortlist as to scrapping the scheme or not.  We do know however that the giant glass worm, the public’s choice, was turned down by Wood.

When things started looking bad for the scheme yet again, Wood churned out press releases saying he would draw a final line under the project, and walk away and give his £50,000,000 to the third world instead.

When the three independent councillors said they were working on an alternative idea, Wood said he would not compromise.  And that is his final word.  Well, for this week anyway.

Word arrives that early next week Sir Ian will AGAIN meet with individual councillors to make his ‘final’ plea.  Old Susannah is starting to get deja vu.  I do wonder though why Sir Ian gets to make continued visits to the councillors, sit in the ‘press’ box when he attends council meetings and so on.  Anyone would think he were rich or something.  Thankfully this is a democracy.  Word also reaches me that these continuous pleas from Sir Ian are beginning to grate on more than a few councillors’ patience.

What Woody will do if the vote goes against the scheme will be, of course, to make a final farewell, take his money and spend it in Africa….

And if you believe that….

Next week:  a look at who voted how, what’s next, and if common sense and Common Good Aberdeen prevail, lots of Champagne and lots of BrewDog.

  •  Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
May 112012
 

Bobby Niven presents ISLAND, an exhibition using film, sculpture and found objects to explore the history and architecture of Inchgarvie, an uninhabited island located under the Forth Rail Bridge. With thanks to Peacock marketing manager Kylie Roux.

ISLAND is based around the strange architectural history of Inchgarvie whose now uninhabited ruins tell of past lives as a castle, a prison, a quarantine and a foundry and accommodation for workers who built the Forth Rail Bridge under whose shadow it sits. Like the Inchgarvie ruins themselves ISLAND comprises distinct but related parts: the film, the grey room of concrete sculptures and the orange room of objects and artefacts.

Shot on location the film evolves around a room full of sculpted birds and a lone inhabitant. There is a seemingly playful and humorous visual language to Niven’s film as the character prances and cavorts across his island but this quirky abandon is misleading.

Despite the humour a dark undercurrent runs through. Framed shots of sinister sculpted birds, contaminating deposits of guano, the lapping water, flotsam and jetsam and a manic trumpeted soundtrack all contribute to a feeling of suspense and isolation. (The suggestion that our island fellow is perhaps quarantined, the result of a modern day pandemic, alludes to the island’s history as a place of seclusion for syphilis and plague victims.)

The colonies of sea birds that occupy the island and their vast deposits of guano were the inspiration for the sculpted birds perched inside the concrete dingy rooms of the ruins that feature in the film. Niven further references and repeats these motifs by creating large-scale concrete abstract forms that take over the gallery in all their monochromatic splendour, paying tribute to the island’s concrete structures.

Continuing the narrative and landscape of the film found objects and artefacts that relate to the island, the structural forms of the bridge and the activity of the fictitious character are displayed with museum reverence inside an orange fluorescent box in the reception gallery.

About the artist:

Bobby Niven was born in Fife in 1981 and is currently based in Glasgow. He holds a 1st class honours degree in Fine Art from Glasgow School of Art and a masters degree from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Niven has exhibited both in the UK and internationally. Exhibitions include: Sierra Metro, Edinburgh; Lowsalt Gallery, Glasgow and CSA Space, Vancouver; The Royal Standard, Liverpool; Glasgow International Festival of Visual Art (2010); TBC Gallery Melbourne; and Peterfabers Gallery, Copenhagen.

  • Preview night Friday 25 May, 6 – 8pm, all welcome!
    Exhibition runs 26 May – 7 July 2012
Other Exhibitions And Events

BIG JESSIE // Donald Urquhart
The Brunswick Hotel, Merchant City, Glasgow
http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/events/373/big-jessie-donald-urquhart
exhibition runs until 27 May 2012

CLASSES & WORKSHOPS
At PVA throughout 2012
http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/get-creative/courses-classes
call 01224 639539 for more info & to book

http://www.peacockvisualarts.com/

Feb 292012
 

Shakhaf Barak wrote to a friend highlighting the history behind the current referendum that is dividing the city. He has kindly allowed Voice to use it, almost verbatim as the deadline approaches for voting.

Dear Friend,
Here in Aberdeen there is a bitter referendum taking place, and it could go either way. Over 70,000 people have voted thus far, in a city of barely 212,000 souls, and both sides have reported each other to the police. Central to this story is a 250-year old city centre park, Union Terrace Gardens, and the billionaire oil tycoon seeking to redevelop it.

Union Terrace Gardens are similar to Edinburgh’s Princes Street Gardens, lying in the natural amphitheatre of the Denburn valley, the Denburn being a stream which flows right through the city, underground where it borders the Gardens. Much of Aberdeen’s best architecture was clearly envisaged to overlook this area.

The Gardens are home to a cluster of 260-year old elms trees that once formed part of the Corbie Haugh, a historic wood which ran through the valley. This is among the largest concentration of healthy mature elm trees in Europe, and they are reputed to have escaped Dutch Elm Disease, not only due to their isolation, but also because the pollution of the city has afforded some sort of protection from it.

Both the park and its beautiful Victorian toilets are Grade A-listed, and all of the trees are under preservation orders. Up until as late as 2003, the Gardens formed the centrepiece of Aberdeen’s Britain In Bloom entry, and they were truly stunning, but since then expenditure has all but ceased, and the toilets have been closed for several years.

In 2008 a local arts organisation, Peacock Visual Arts (PVA) was granted planning permission for an award-winning and sympathetically-designed arts centre to be built into the hillside of the Gardens. This would have meant felling a small number of trees but none of the elms. The design was universally acclaimed and it was hoped that this scheme would help regenerate interest in the Gardens.

Enter Sir Ian Wood, one of Scotland’s richest men, and chief of Wood Group PSN. Sir Ian decided that he’d like to redevelop the Gardens by building a five-storey bunker in their place, whilst covering over the adjoining railway line and urban dual carriageway, with the entire roof of this construction forming a flat civic square at street level. It was not entirely clear what would be installed in the bunker, although speculation was rife to say the least.

He offered the council £50m towards the cost of this project, which was mooted to cost £140m. This was possibly an optimistic figure since Union Square, a similarly sized shopping mall with none of the technical difficulties or prior excavation work, cost £250m to build. The council felt this offer was too good to refuse, but the some members of the public were up in arms.

Sir Ian decided to put the proposal out to public consultation and promised to walk away should the public reject it.

The ‘consultation’ was commissioned by Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (ACSEF), a publicly-funded unelected QUANGO, and conducted by The BiG Partnership, Scotland’s largest PR company.

It many ways it resembled a marketing exercise. The bulk of participation was via a website, which asked several questions with a somewhat loaded feel to them. For technical reasons, the question on whether or not to proceed with the plan defaulted to a YES vote.

If, during completion of the questionnaire, any previously-given responses were subsequently amended, this again defaulted back to a YES vote. When the results were released, it became apparent from the comments sections that may people who had intended voting NO had instead been recorded as YES voters.

Over 10,000 people participated in the consultation, and In spite of it’s technical oversights, the public voted against the Civic Square proposal by 54%-46%, a healthy and significant majority. However the PR machine kicked in and somehow spun that the 202,000 people who had not participated possibly represented a silent majority in favour of this scheme.

  Critics described it as a cross between Tellytubby Land and a skate park

Sir Ian decided not to walk away, and the project went to a council vote. The council voted in favour of taking the plan forward at the expense of PVA who by that time had 80% of their £20m funding in place. It has subsequently been alleged that some of the PVA funding was diverted into the new project.

The BiG Partnership now re-launched the plans under a new name, The City Garden Project (CGP). It was claimed that the outcome of the public consultation was that the public were broadly in favour of a garden as opposed to a civic square. Any implication that they were actually in favour of preserving the existing gardens was ignored.

The interested parties now felt that the best option was to redevelop the Gardens by building a five-storey bunker in their place whilst covering over the adjoining railway line and urban dual carriageway, with the entire roof of this construction forming a new garden at street level.

The whole thing had an air of déjà vu.

This time it was decided to hold an international design contest, paid for with public money. Six designs were shortlisted from hundreds of entrants. One, The Granite Web, bore a striking resemblance to Civic Square concept, albeit with less concrete and more greenery. Critics described it as a cross between Tellytubby Land and a skate park.

The local press heavily promoted the Granite Web design from the outset of the contest, leading with it on their front page and providing it with more photo coverage than the other designs. It was almost as though it had been ordained.

The public voted, and spoiled ballots aside, all indications were that The Winter Garden design proved the most popular. An independent poll confirmed this and put The Monolith in second place.

Tellingly both of these designs retained much of the topology of the existing Gardens. Word on the street was that The Granite Web was not a popular choice, but we’ll never know for sure, because a decision was taken not to release the results of the so-called public vote to the public.

It was then announced that the winner of the private-public vote would be put forward to the selection panel, along with another design. The self-appointed selection panel consisted of Sir Ian, some other influential people from the oil industry, an architectural consultant on the project payroll, and a councillor who backed the project.

The two designs discussed were the acknowledged public favourite, The Winter Garden, and you’ve guessed it, the joker in the pack, The Granite Web. When the panel announced the result, it should have come as no surprise to anyone that they had chosen The Granite Web, yet there was a shocked silence, and even those had come out in favour of the redevelopment initially appeared bemused if not downright confused.

The original Civic Square was mooted to cost £140m, with £50m coming from Sir Ian, £20m from the private sector, and the rest to be borrowed through a Tax Incremental Funding (TIF) scheme. Any over-run would be covered by the council (read local taxpayer) .

Only £5m of the private sector contribution has materialised thus far, but there has been an announcement that The Granite Web would be significantly less expensive to build than the previously-envisaged, but somewhat less complex, civic square. Sir Ian has offered to personally fund up to £35M of any cost over runs, should they occur.

The TIF proposal cheerfully bends all the guidelines of TIF funding. TIF is intended to be used to redevelop brownfield sites, with the loan being repaid over a 25 year period through increased rates recouped from any businesses setting up in the redeveloped area. The city council had already approved planning permission for two new industrial estates on the outskirts of town, under the business case for the TIF funding, these new estates become part of the TIF zone, so in The Granite Web’s case, sections of the TIF zone are located several miles away from the actual redeveloped area.

The predictions are for 6,500 jobs and £122m annual revenue to the local economy, all based on the new industrial estates, which have no obvious linkage to The Granite Web, operating at full capacity. Even if one were to accept that any new jobs could be somehow attributed to The Granite Web, the figure of 6,500 seems unlikely given that the London Olympics is only projected to create 3,500 jobs.

Either way, the setup feels a bit shaky; the truth is that these jobs and their associated revenue will accrue with or without The Granite Web.

By this time, councillors seemed to be getting edgy and unwilling to green-light the project, so they decided to hold a public referendum. Any group wishing to campaign was required to adhere to an £8,000 spending limit, and for this they were provided with 300 words of text in the voting pack.

The packs went out, but unfortunately some of the Retain lobby’s statements were mangled due to a ‘computer error’. The voting packs were closely followed by a big money public relations mail bombing campaign by The BiG Partnership promoting The Granite Web. Publicity materials went through every letter box, pro Granite Web articles dominated the press, and adverts were played around the clock on the local radio stations.

Apparently this expenditure was permitted by virtue of being funded by an ‘unregistered’, and as yet anonymous, campaign group – whatever that means! I guess it’s a bit like not having to pay tax because your parents never applied for a birth certificate, who knows? By this point, things were becoming surreal to say the least.

The referendum closes on 1 March and it’s a bitter fight that has divided the city. For example, an oil company boss has made a complaint to the police alleging mail hacking and cyber bullying. The police claim they are taking this allegation seriously. There have also been two arrests possibly related to claims of vote-rigging, but ultimately no one was charged.

The town has gone berserk and it’s civil war all over Facebook. It’s as if we’re all experiencing a really, really bad shared dream. I just dread to think what we’ll all be waking up to on Saturday morning.

Feb 282012
 

A person might think that a chamber of commerce exists to promote local businesses.  Here in Aberdeen this is true as well.  But as Aberdeen Voice’s Suzanne Kelly learns – the taxpayer is funding at least some of the PR work  for the City Gardens  Project – and the Chamber of Commerce and ACSEF seem to be leading the City Council by the nose.

The proposed City Gardens Project/Granite Web is a contentious idea which would see a mix of public and private interests building huge, granite ramps over Union Terrace Gardens.
While this idea may not even get off the ground, it has been a gold mine for some fortunate businesses via the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce – at the taxpayer’s expense.

This article will primarily deal with money that the City Council was invoiced by the Chamber of Commerce for PR-related work.  Before doing so, a little recap of other financial facts will add perspective.

PriceWaterhouse Coopers have come up with some grandiose projections including the creation of some 6,500 permanent jobs and £122 million flowing into Aberdeen every year until c. 2023:  all because of the granite web.  PriceWaterhouse Coopers were first paid £41,000 and change for TIF-related work in March 2010.  Other invoices followed, and so far I have been shown by Scottish Enterprise £71,000 worth of PwC invoices.

These invoices are made out to Scottish Enterprise, and Scottish Enterprise is funded by the taxpayer.  Unfortunately, these projections have been seized upon  by the press and turned into ‘facts’  (The Press & Journal published these and other items in a box entitled ‘facts and figures’ on 19 January next to an article about the PwC projections and the garden’s many projected benefits).

The unelected and free-spending and secretive ‘Vote for the City Gardens Project Group’ have likewise promoted these figures in their literature as being reliable facts as well.  They are projections, and arguably very optimistic ones at that.  Whether or not these glowing projections (that we will have more permanent jobs from our web than London expects from its 2012 Olympics) are based on the fact that PwC is being paid by the side that wants to build the web is something the referendum voters may wish to ponder.

A Freedom of Information request I lodged with Scottish Enterprise some time ago revealed (details of which I have previously published) included:-

Item Description Date Amount
1 Technical Feasibility Study to undertake an engineering, cost and design appraisal of the development options for UTG, each incorporating an arts centre. Jun 2009 £162k
2 Architect, Design & Project management fees for a Contemporary Arts Centre project Feb 09/May 10 £226k
3 Consultation Report – City Square Project.. Mar 2010 £113,915
4 Union Terrace Gardens (TIF)-Tax Increment Financing Mar 10
Oct 10
Nov 10
£71,959.65
5 Scottish Enterprise holds 22 copies of invoices relating to ACSEF approved spend for activities relating to stakeholder engagement, events management, and communcations. [sic] 2009-10
2010-11
£51,766.60
£22,712.72

(source – Scottish Enterprise email exchange with Suzanne Kelly May 2011)

While this £648,000 was being spent, Aberdeen City Council was battling with potential job and service cuts in order to balance its books.  It seems that these costs have largely been paid by the taxpayer via Scottish Enterprise and other vehicles, and I can find nothing to show that the Wood Family Trust, which has offered £50,000,000 to further the project, has paid towards any of these costs.  The PR and promotional invoices referred to at Item 5 have been paid by the Aberdeen City taxpayer.

Before moving on to Item 5, which is the subject of this article, some of these other items are worth a further glance.

At Item 2 you will notice we are now talking about some kind of ‘Contemporary Arts Centre project’ – is Peacock already being edged out of the picture at this point?

Item 4 would seem to correspond to PriceWaterhouse Coopers invoices which I referred to.  How much more money has been spent on PWC since this May 2011 exchange is unknown.

From what I have been subsequently sent by Scottish Enterprise, the bulk of the invoices at Item 5 were from the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce to the City Council.  In the words of Scottish Enterprise:-

  • 9 invoices relate to financial year 2009/10 – these total £51,766.60
  • 16 invoices relate to financial year 2010/11 – these total £36,692.95. This total is higher than the original figure stated due to the invoices received after the date of that response
  • There has been no spend on the City Garden Project from the ACSEF budget during the current financial year  (SK notes – it is only February – there is time)

(source – Scottish Enterprise email to Suzanne Kelly February 2012)

Arguably a mere £88,459 is small change as Aberdeen City contemplates borrowing £92,000,000 (minimum) if the project goes ahead. However, this is money which the City paid from its own budgets – it is taxpayer money.  Should a financially-pressured city use pubic money for propaganda purposes – PR, events and photos designed to promote the City Garden Project?  Is the Wood Family Trust contributing any money towards these expenses yet?  I simply do not know.

A spreadsheet of the expenses comprising Item 5 can be found online at http://oldsusannahsjournal.yolasite.com/  I would recommend looking at these 50 or so items.

If you look at the wording in the table above, ACSEF is apparently approving this expenditure.  ACSEF is a public-private quango, and at the time of writing, Stewart Milne is on its board.  He owns the Triple Kirks land adjacent to Union Terrace Gardens, and he wants to turn this landmark into an office complex which will likely enrich him if it goes ahead in my opinion.

Despite several emails, no one in a position of power has the slightest qualm with Mr Milne potentially having a conflict of interest.    Why precisely ACSEF is allowed to commission and recommend for payment invoices to the City Council is a matter I personally find worrying.

Virtually none of the invoices from the Chamber to the City specify who / what company actually performed the services in question.  What company got all the PR work?  Who took the photos?  I do note that Zoe Corsi of the BIG Partnership is on the Chamber’s Board of Directors – as are other key players such as Tom Smith, one of the two directors of the private entity, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust.  This company seems to be in the thick of the decision-making processes; it is apparently the company which is holding onto the results of the design finalist public vote – which it refuses to release at present.

The taxpayer apparently paid for that exhibition and the public vote – and yet a private company seems to be withholding the results.  The argument has been put forth that it is no longer relevant.  Many people took the opportunity to write on the voting papers that they were against all the schemes and wanted the gardens retained and improved.

The public should have had this ‘no’ option at the final selection vote, but it seems councillors who asked for a ‘no’ option were outmoded by the Project Management Board (note – see the website listed previously for details of how all these companies and entities have interesting personnel overlaps).

It may be of interest to accountants that the party which actually performed the work not specified on these invoices, and with only a rare exception is VAT ever charged.  It would be interesting to know whether or not the Chamber of Commerce adds any fees or commission charges to the work it is invoicing the City for.

Highlights of the list of invoices include:-

  • £180 paid for a photograph showing ‘inaccessibility of Union Terrace Gardens’
  • over  £25,000 paid for ‘Stakeholder engagement’ events and so on since October 2009 to August 2010
  • £3500 paid to ‘Comedia’ for Charles Landry to attend event / speak
  • Redacted line items and handwritten notes adorn several of the invoices
  • One invoice – No. 42407 shows only one line relating to ‘coach hire’ – this is £246.  However, the total shown on this one page invoice is for £7444 – what has happened?
  • A January 2010 Advertising bill from Aberdeen Press & Journals for £ 2,820 ( See: http://fraserdenholm.blogspot)
  • £11,000 in February 2010 charged from the Chamber to the City for “Development of images, movie, powerpoint and exhibition material for City Square Project as per attached sheets”

As to the redacted text on the invoices, redacted text has started showing up in Project Monitoring  Board minutes and reports again, despite Councillor McCaig’s previous intervention to cease this practice.  One company which has had its name redacted from recent documentation is Brodies.

The value of three Brodies invoices which I received copies of is around £12,000.  One of these invoices from April 2011 is for:

“City Gardens Project – Development Constraints Report (Legal  [sic] To fee for professional services in connection with the preparation of a development constraints report relating to the title of Union Terrace Gardens, Aberdeen, and surrounding land.”

I suppose our City’s in-house legal department cannot be expected to know whether or not it has free title to Union Terrace Gardens.   Happily, experts have demonstrated the land is Common Good Land.  As such, whether any of these garden projects can or should be legitimately carried out will be a big question in the future.

Earlier we saw how ACSEF was allowed to recommend these expenditures; we have seen how the Chamber of Commerce invoices the City for ACSEF-approved costs.  If we were to put in some of the over-lapping names from ACSEF and the Chamber of Commerce into the equation, we would be able to see that:

ACSEF [including Stewart Milne, Jennifer Craw (of Wood Family Trust), Tom Smith (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Colin Crosby (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Callum McCaig (ACC) ]

approved invoices generated by the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce [Colin Crosby; Zoe Corsi (BIG Partnership) , former director Tom Smith]

for the City Council [Callum McCaig]

to approve to further the aims of the Garden Project (CGP entity members include John Michie, Colin Crosby, Jennifer Craw).

Given the above, I suggest that the time is right for an entire re-think of how this project has been allowed to develop, and a full investigation into the demise of the Peacock plan and an investigation into the genesis of the current state of affairs might not be a bad idea as well.

While this is going on, a local care home has announced it will no longer provide 24/7 on-site staff as there is not enough money.  Residents were told to drink less fluids at night time.

Jan 122012
 

Controversy has raged over the fate of Union Terrace Gardens for the last three years. A major subtext to this has been the role of culture in Aberdeen life, particularly in view of the way the proposed Peacock Visual Arts centre for contemporary arts was gazumped by Sir Ian Wood’s Civic Square proposal in 2008, writes Mike Shepherd.

The £13.5m building was to contain a gallery, TV studio, print studio, restaurant and offices for Peacock Staff and provide a base for Aberdeen City Council’s Arts Development and Arts Education teams as well as extra space for the City Moves dance agency.

It was to be called the Northern Lights Contemporary Arts Centre.

When the Civic Square was first mooted, the emphasis was on the Square itself. Sir Ian Wood had described it as:

 “a cross between the Grand Italian Piazza and a mini Central Park”.
http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/935798?UserKey

An underground concourse was also proposed and at this stage, the main uses were identified in a Press & Journal report:

“The new square could have three underground levels, the first of them offering the potential for Peacock Visual Arts’ planned new centre, as well as restaurants, a heritage museum and visitor attractions linked to north-east attributes such as granite, paper, fishing, whisky and golf.”
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1259519

However, Peacock Visual Arts were understandably reluctant to be included within the Civic Square plans. In any case, an underground concourse would not be a suitable venue for an arts centre. A building receiving natural light would have been much more appropriate.

Sir Ian, perhaps frustrated at the reluctance of Peacock to get involved, told the Herald Scotland

“There is quite rightly a strong feeling about the arts in Aberdeen,” he says. “It is not for everyone but some people do feel intensely about it. I understand the emotional concern.

“What I find hard is that, frankly, this is about jobs and economic prosperity, for the wider interests of people in Aberdeen who don’t care about the arts. Eighty per cent of the people who spend time in the square will have no interest in the arts. You have to develop things for the good of everyone.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/art-student-versus-millionaire-in-a-battle-for-a-city-s-heart-1.929558

Peacock’s arts centre was effectively killed off by the Aberdeen Council vote in May 2010 to progress instead Sir Ian Wood’s Civic Square proposal. This was later rebranded the City Garden Project.

Following the demise of Peacock, ACSEF started to develop an increasing interest in local culture. ACSEF are the non-elected body charged by both Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire Councils with promoting the economic development of the region. They have been involved in promoting the City Square, describing it as one of their flagship projects.

The ACSEF minutes for the 4th October 2011 noted comments by Professor Paul Harris, the recently appointed head of Robert Gordon University‘s Gray’s School of Art in Aberdeen :

“Paul Harris advised that he is a member of the Scottish Enterprise Tayside Regional Advisory Board.   At a national level he had been closely involved in taking forward the V&A project which illustrates how a collective vision could be translated into strategy and raise a city’s profile in an international context.

“Creative industries have an important role not only in their own right but also in terms of being key drivers of an area’s wider economic success in part through creating vibrant and attractive communities in which to live, work and visit and in fostering innovation, a key driver of economic success.

“Professor Harris concluded that the vibrant and valuable creative industries sector in Aberdeen City and Shire requires greater cohesion and visibility and suggested that a creative industries strategy be devised to address this and realise the sector’s potential for future growth.  In addition projects such as the City Garden offer opportunities for the city to achieve an international cultural venue. He suggested that a collective approach amongst partners could be achieved at no cost while a strategic voice supports funding bids.”

Some in the city might feel alarmed about the business–dominated board of ACSEF defining a top-down strategy for the “creative industries” in the Aberdeen area.

The link to the City Garden Project is of note. Paul Harris is mentioned in the news section for the City Garden Website – “City Garden Project Can Make Aberdeen Cool, Contemporary and Cultural”.

“Professor Harris is leading a City Garden Project sub-group representing culture, the arts and the creative sector to consider the potential content for the scheme which has a new centre for culture and the arts at its heart.

He added: “The V&A in Dundee is a perfect example of culture being a catalyst for wider regeneration. There we had an idea and had to develop the infrastructure. In Aberdeen we have the potential infrastructure and a unique opportunity to fill it creatively.

The sub-group is proposing a new model to enhance the performance and reputation of the region’s arts and culture locally, nationally and internationally based around the new infrastructure the City Garden Project can deliver above and below ground.

The vision is to create an internationally known facility that is a focal point for exchanging and showcasing excellence in cultural activities between countries, regions and cities located around the North Sea.

The so-called “Northern Arc” would form partnerships with key cultural organisations to present displays and exhibitions, diverse performances and events covering, history, science & technology, visual arts, design, film, music, dance and literature.

“The Northern Arc” will include a number of flexible spaces, centred in the City Garden, with on-going programmes of events and activities with a variety of local, regional and international organisations”
http://thecitygardenproject.com/news_full.asp?id=95&curpage&search=clear&section=news

The use of the name “Northern Arc” is unfortunate given that the City Garden Project had killed off the Peacock Visual Arts plan to build the “Northern Light” contemporary arts centre. The sub-group mentioned is believed to include most of the city’s existing arts organisations, which are largely publicly funded.  If the underground concourse is built, could it be that existing facilities such as the Belmont Cinema and the Lemon Tree will be relocated to the building?

The Press and Journal reported last October that Aberdeen Council is interested in making a bid for Aberdeen to become the UK City of Culture in 2017.

Council bosses are applying for a £92 million loan from the Scottish Government to fund five regeneration schemes, including the controversial City Garden Project. Approval of the ambitious plans could trigger a campaign for the prestigious title, officials confirmed yesterday.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2488524

The bid to become city of culture could prove a hard sell to the people of Aberdeen. It was actively discussed with much scepticism on the Aberdeen Facebook page. Here are some of the comments:

–          Aberdeen has plenty of culture. What it doesn’t have is a council that knows what culture looks like. Culture is one of the indicators of true prosperity but you can’t make money off it directly. The council’s thinking process seems to be: Step 1 – culture, Step 2 – ???, Step 3 – Money!

–          I will say that there are signs of some joined up thinking re culture. A sign though… It’s not for the council to lead and make it happen though. It should come from the ground up to the point where the council starts listening to those that are doing and asking what is needed rather shoving another box ticking lecturing strategy in our faces. Far more people working across the arts know what is needed than there are people sitting at desks re writing old words. The city would need to give a decent amount of funding to Arts organisation and to arts within education instead of cutting funding almost to the point of extinction.

–          So much negativity in this thread, Aberdeen should be ambitious & go for this city of culture in 2017, Aberdeen despite is geography has lots of people doing innovative things in the arts. It did Liverpool no harm & only positives came out of it…

A group called AB+ is organising a cultural conference in the Arts Centre on 26 January.  Two of the speakers are Professor Paul Harris and Valerie Watts, Chief Executive of Aberdeen City Council.

Valerie will be describing her experiences in Northern Ireland with Londonderry’s bid to become European Capital of Culture and the impact this had on the arts there, whilst Paul will talk about bringing the V&A to Dundee.”
http://positiveaberdeen.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/conference-speakers-announced/

The conference is an opportunity to discuss cultural activities in Aberdeen and as such is to be welcomed. It is likely that some of the issues raised here will be touched upon by the speakers in the Arts Centre.

The City Garden Project will be launching its referendum campaign and will also soon be announcing the final chosen design. It is almost certain that the campaign for the City Garden Project will tie together local cultural activity, economics and Aberdeen City Council’s bid to become UK City of Culture for 2017.

It’s an explosive mix.