Assessment Task 3 Communication Artefacts from a Design

Perspective

 

Harry Hughes

Artefact: Le Louvre on Collins Street 

Le Louvre is a retail outlet widely considered

as part of the upper class “Paris end” of

Collins Street. It is a place prominent in

Melbourne’s history because it is seen by

many as the last remaining link between

Melbourne and European haute couture.

According to the Lonely Planet guide to

Melbourne, many Melbournians are “too

scared to step inside the Parisian outlet” due

to the associations that come with shopping at

Le Louvre.

Since the 1930s, when the term “Paris end” came into wide usage (and was in

fact coined by founder and original owner Lillian Wightman), the store has been

respected as an outlet of fine fashion and an aspect of the city’s upper class. This

is primarily due to the part it played in introducing European designers to

Melbourne at a time when elitist fashion started to become important to

Melbournians. It is thus clear that this retail store was, and still is, able to link

Melbourne and the white Australians who founded it to another place – Europe.

Le Louvre helps to communicate that Melbourne is not a stand-alone city; it has

cultural links to many other places. These cultural links are not confined to

Europe; they extend to Greek, Aboriginal, Chinese and several other cultures.

(Greek cafes, Aboriginal art, Chinatown and British-originated signs are just a

few examples of these cultures).

The building was originally a townhouse built in 1855. In 1927, the owner of the

time had its

façade stripped

and altered, and

from then

onwards, the

appearance of

the building has

barely changed. The “enigmatic” façade now boasts a distinct Parisian style and

design – large glass windows showing off the gold-lit interior, wooden

framework, and several floors above the ground level, similar to certain

luxurious stores on Paris’ Champs Elysees. Indeed, just walking past any of the

“high end treasures” on Collins Street (such as Chanel and Gucci) transports you

to another place and time; truly a far cry from the dingy and dark laneways that

fester all over the central business district.

In Pamie Fung’s article “The seduction of the laneways: making Melbourne a

‘world city’”, she writes about Melbourne’s laneways and analyses their appeal;

how they give Melbourne the air that it has. Fung mentions that structures in

Melbourne’s central business district “compress different European places, styles

and times” and that “modernity and sophistication are located in the ‘classy’

Euro-look of the city centres”. It is clear that European style was strived for by

Australians (if only because Australia is viewed, even by Australians as a

“primitive backwater”) and the Parisian style structure of the Le Louvre building

no doubt plays a part in giving Melbourne the “Euro-look”.  

William H. Jordy’s architectural study “The Symbolic Essence of Modern

European Architecture of the Twenties and its Continuing Influence” speaks of

the influence of European architecture on the rest of the world during the 1920s.

A perfect example of this is, in fact, Le Louvre, the design of which includes the

trademark “extravagantly open interiors” that were present all over Europe.

REFERENCES: 

1. (Anon), “Fashion & Fun”, Total Travel, 22 May 2010,

http://www.totaltravel.com.au/promotions/australia/victoria/melbourn

e-winter/fashion-fun.asp

2. (Anon), “Le Louvre”, Lonely Planet, 21 May 2010,

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/australia/melbourne/shopping/366247

3. Jordy WH, 1963, “The Symbolic Essence of Modern European Architecture

of the Twenties and its Continuing Influence”

4. Fung, P 2006 “The seduction of the laneways: making Melbourne a ‘world

city’”, Crossings 11(2): 1-12,

http://www.inasa.org/crossings/11_2/index.php?apply=fung. Accessed

09 Feb 2009, viewed April 15 2010, RMIT University Library

 

Chan Lai Wah

Artefact: Koori Artwork on the corner of Bourke and Swanston Streets 

Whenever the topic of Melbourne’s culture crops up, the discussion of several

other cultures is involved. It is widely

agreed upon that Melbourne culture is a

fusion of several different cultures, forming

a unique and exquisite tradition of its own.

However, Koori tradition and culture is

often overlooked in this circumstance. Along

with Parisian, British, Chinese and

Vietnamese cultures, Koori ethnicity is also

an integral part of Melbourne culture. Most

Melbournians are not aware of the significance of Koori culture in this city – in

fact, most would not recognise depictions of Koori artwork. On the corner of

Bourke and Swanston Streets, artist Lisa Kennedy has painted an electrical

supply box with elegant and poignant delineations of Koori culture and way of

life. If not for the inscriptions painted on the artefact (..the Timeless Beauty and

Spirit of Koori People and Culture), nobody, save a handful of culturally astute

citizens, would know the origins of the symbols illustrated.

These beautifully illustrated symbols of Koori life exemplify the fact that

Melbourne is a cultural city. Melbourne culture is an intricate blending of various

different cultures, global cultures as well as local cultures. The European-esque

laneways, Parisian shops on Collins Street, quaint signs borrowed from British

history, Aboriginal art, vibrant Chinatown and delightful Greek cafes all illustrate

the mixture of cultures that make up a captivating and unique one. Not to forget,

Melbourne’s own founders and origins, whose culture is spread out throughout

the city in the form of statues (The Three Business Men Who Brought Their

Lunch, Larry LaTrobe). Thus, Aboriginal art reinforces the importance of

indigenous culture in the formation of Melbourne’s own culture. (Whitelaw, A

2006)

This said, it can be concluded that Melbourne would not be Melbourne without

all those different traditions and ways of life. Melbourne is not just about the

original white Australian founders (although, they too, are no doubt a prominent

part in this culture). The beauty of Melbournian culture is the curious blend of so

many different cultures, as well as the respect that exists for each of these

cultures. “Koories adhere to their Aboriginal identities, kin and culture as most

Melbournians now respect these Koori cultural expressions”. This quote from an

article by the University of Melbourne (2008) advocates the hypothesis

regarding the cultural harmony that exists due to the respect shown for every

single culture, including Koori culture.

There is no doubt that Melbourne being a cultural city

is due to the interesting blend of cultures as well as

the respect for each other’s cultures that exist as

mediums. However, is culture in modern day

Melbourne becoming farcical? As time goes by and

histories are forgotten, is it a superficial culture that

exists in Melbourne? Aboriginal design motifs are

used as sources for a revitalised, highly decorative and supposedly ‘authentic’

form of Australian clothing. (Maynard, M) Koori art is more than just decorative

and beautiful. Koori artwork is crafted with depth and meanings hidden within

the symbolism. Koori motifs used as clothing patterns signifies a decline in

cultural recognition. What will become of Melbourne culture when this decline

strikes the other cultures that help define this city? 

REFERENCES

1. Whitelaw, Anne 2006, ‘Placing Aboriginal Art at the National Gallery of

Canada’, Canadian Journal of Communication, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 197 – 214,

viewed 17 April 2010, <http://web.ebscohost.com>

2. School of Historical Studies, Department of History, The University of

Melbourne 2008, Aboriginal Melbourne, eMelbourne, the City Past and

Present, viewed 17 April 2010,

<http://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM00001b.htm> 

3. Maynard, Margaret 1999, ‘Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body and

Culture’, The Red Center: The Quest for “Authenticity” in Australian Dress,

vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 175 – 195, viewed 23 May 2010,  <

www.ingentaconnect.com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au> 

 

 

 

Minh Huy Le

Artefact: Larry LaTrobe Statue on the corner of Collins and Swanston

Streets 

Located on the corner of Collins and

Swanston Streets, Larry La Trobe is a

life-sized statue of a dingo type dog. This

statue was made by an artist, Pamela

Irving, in 1992 as part of the Percent for

Art Program and Swanston Street Redevelopment. Larry, a gift to the City of

Melbourne, keeps an observant eye on the ongoings of the street and city Square.

After being stolen in 1995, the statue was restored (with slight changes to its

detail) on the 16th of September, 1996. The statue’s restoration was funded by

the owner of the foundry where Larry was cast.

The name Melbourne was given to the European settlement founded by Batman

and Fawkner in 1835. Aboriginal people lived in the areas tens of thousands of

years before the arrival of Europeans and from them, originated a complex

culture and art. Melbourne was a young city that was created by private plan,

and as a result, most of the artworks in Melbourne is made by private, rather

than public planning. Consequently, there are several parts of our constructed

environment that illustrate exquisite and artistically pleasing craft. Despite the

beauty of these crafts, these are not necessarily labelled as “art”. On the other

hand, there are many other objects that

show little craft or depth in thinking that

are labelled as “art”.

Based on the surge in public art in

Melbourne, we have to determine the definition and role of two different

concepts – “artwork in public places” and “artwork by / with the public”. Shin

(1999) argues that most of the things we perceive to be “public art” are, in fact,

not “public art” at all. These arts, often misconstrued as public art, are arts in

public places. Art in public places refers to works of art placed in view of the

public, while public art is a hybrid work involving much more than simply the

creative products of an individual artist. Larry Latrobe, as an accessible artwork

that is increasing the value of the city, considered as a small landmark and built

under the plan of the city council, is therefore “public art”. The role of public art

is constantly changing, as seen throughout history, from Aboriginal art to

European-esque art.

Currently, art is considered as a social process, thus it has a potential role in

creating convivial cities. Miles (1997) believes that participatory art has a more

important role than formalist art in the living city context now and promotes

attentiveness to social healing, “cultural diversity, ecological healing”, the

reclamation of public space, and the “empowerment of urban dwellers”. Now, we

should view public art from different perspectives to determine the actual role of

public art in the future of urban development. While Melbourne is a city of art,

we should consider the theoretical context of how public art can contribute,

through practices which are decorative or activist, to a new urbanism based on

the values of those “who seek an ecologically responsible and communitarian

society”. (Miles p188) 

REFERENCES 

1. “The White Hat Guide to Public Art in Melbourne”, White Hat Website,

viewed 17th 2010, <

http://www.whitehat.com.au/Melbourne/Galleries/PublicArt.asp >

2. Dongsuk  Shin, November 1999, ‘Public Art in the City of Melbourne Its

Typology and Planning’, Master research project thesis, Faculty of

Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, p 1-15

3. Miles, M 1997, ‘Art as a social process ‘and ‘Convivial cities’, in Art , Space

and the City, 1st edition, Routledge, London, p 164-208 

 

Ruby Mountford

Artefact: painted street sign, corner of Celestial Lane off Little Burke Street

Throughout Melbourne, there is

evidence of the city’s multicultural

roots, spanning Europe, the British

isles, Asia and the original inhabitants

of Melbourne; the Koori people.

Located on Celestial Avenue, off Little

Burke Street, there is one of these remnants. A painted street sign of a bygone

era, its quaintly old fashioned message a stark contrast to the modern world just

outside of the avenue.

 

This communications artefact is a black and white sign painted directly onto a

bare brick wall around 2 meters off the ground. The words “Commit No

Nuisance” are painted in white on a black background with a white border. It is

the message of the sign that appears a curiosity, as today such a vague

instruction appears comical.

 

It was not always so. The design of the warning derives from similar signs in

London and India. The design was originally planned as a “discreet warning

against performing improper acts in public, most commonly urination” (Only

Science 2009) for such acts were in breach of the law and punishable by

imprisonment as of the 12th century.

 

The exact date the sign was painted is

unknown, as is the artist who stencilled it

onto the wall. One possibility is that it was

linked to a children’s school that opened in

1892, and was entered through Celestial

Avenue. When three teachers at the school contracted typhoid fever it was

thought to have been caused by a defective draining system of the alley, which in

turn would support the introduction of a sign warning against public urination

and defecation, both activities that pollute the water. (Bate 1994). However

there is no concrete evidence to support this theory.

 

The design of the sign itself is simple. The letters are of such a size that can be

seen and read easily as one walks by the alley, a suggestion still incorporated in

modern sign design, for as Theis (2001) argues, “if your sign will be seen from a

distance, you'll need a typestyle with strong, simple strokes”. The sign itself is

positioned close enough to the corner so as to be visible to passersby, placement

being another factor in a sign’s efficiency. The border around the sign suggests

the sign was designed to be read by the people walking by, as borders are

considered to allow the reader to focus on the message and read it quickly (Theis

2001).

 

The simplistic colour choices of black and white allow the sign to stand out from

the ochre of the brick. However, while this was suitable in 1890s, black and

white is now quickly overshadowed out by the loud and bright advertisements

and shops in Little Burke St. Attention is drawn to the “No” by the three small

leaves on either side of the word, again in white, to add further emphasis.

 

The many cultural roots of this city; the street art, architecture and other

remnants of Australia’s colonisation and international integration are often seen

as an enhancement to Melbourne; quirks that add to the city’s uniqueness and

identity. It is most likely this mentality has enabled this communications artefact,

a remnant of British colonisation, to survive if not completely free from

vandalism, then as an object that, while having outlived its usefulness, is still

regarded with fondness.

REFERENCES

1. Unnamed author, 2009, ‘“Commit no Nuisance” signs and shy bladder

syndrome’, blog, 13 December, Only Science!, viewed 10th April 2010,

< http://onlyscience.net/2009/12/13/commit-no-nuisance/>

2. Bate, Weston 1994, Essential but unplanned: The story of Melbourne's

lanes, 1st edn, State Library of Victoria and the City of Melbourne,

Melbourne,

3. Theis, Kate 2001 “Effective Sign Benefits”, 14th March, Sign Industry.com,

viewed 18th May 2010 <

http://www.signindustry.com/banners/articles/2001-03-14-

effectiveSignDesign.php3>