Acclaimed Artist Mary Miss’ Renowned Land Art Installation "Greenwood Pond: Double Site" to be Torn Down by Des Moines Art Center
On December 1, 2023, the Des Moines Art Center (DMAC) Director Kelly Baum notified Mary Miss, an internationally acclaimed leader of the land art movement, that the DMAC plans to tear down one of the artist’s most significant commissions, Greenwood Pond: Double Site (1989-1996). The DMAC’s decision raises numerous legal and ethical issues and questions about the art center’s stewardship of the artwork and commitment to the artist. And it appears to violate the DMAC’s 1994 contract with the artist in which it pledged to “reasonably protect and maintain” the work, which was commissioned for its permanent collection and opened in 1996. In a statement to , Miss said Greenwood Pond: Double Site is “the only large-scale sited work of mine that is owned by a museum to date.”
Most of Greenwood Pond: Double Site surrounds a 1.6-acre lagoon within a 6.5-acre section of the city-owned Greenwood Park, and is comprised of treated wood, metal mesh, concrete, and other readily available materials. In an October 20, 2023, Facebook post and an October 24 the DMAC announced that “public access” to the work has been “temporarily suspended” while it undergoes a “complete structural review,” and that a “timeline for reopening public access has not yet been established.” Shortly thereafter, and without meaningful consultation with the artist, Baum notified Miss of the planned demolition. Miss said she is “shocked that this [demolition] decision has been reached so quickly on the future of Greenwood Pond: Double Site.”
Greenwood Pond: Double Site was included in ’s 2014 Landslide report and digital exhibition Art and the Landscape, which focused on eleven examples of land-based art threatened with demolition, neglect, poor maintenance, vandalism, and lack of funding. The 2014 designation helped the installation gain national media attention and attract more than $800,000 toward a $1.3 million of the artwork and Greenwood Park, which led to its re-designation from “at-risk” to “saved.” However, given the DMAC’s recently stated intention to tear down the work, it has again been designated as at “at-risk.”
In its contract with Miss, the DMAC pledged to “reasonably protect and maintain the Project against the ravages of time, vandalism and the elements.” A Des Moines Register article on October 19, 1996, the day the work officially opened, noted: “As in many of her other outdoor projects, Miss has used the most basic of materials – treated lumber, metal mesh, steel, stone, and concrete, all easily repaired or replaced.”
The DMAC's decision is particularly disconcerting because women artists and especially women land artists from the 1960s onward have long been overshadowed by men such as Robert Smithson, and others. As Miss told Baum in a December 3 email:
“Women’s lives and stories have endlessly been allowed to vanish so easily. This situation with the Art Center project makes me very uncomfortable to say the least. Would a man’s work—one of my colleagues’ who might so easily be considered a ‘master’—be allowed to disappear without a trace?
“Somehow I doubt it.
“It has taken a very long time for recognition of the accomplishments of women to surface. It would be so unfortunate to take a step backwards at this point in time.”
Given the intention to tear down the installation has many questions about the DMAC’s stewardship:
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; What are the DMAC’s policies for deaccessioning (the process for removing artwork for a museum's permanent collection)?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; What alternatives to deaccessioning were considered and why was the artist not involved in that decision-making?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; As is standard in the field, why wasn’t Miss included as part of the “comprehensive team including the City of Des Moines, a structural engineer, and professional contractors among others [the ] to consider future plans” for the work?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Was a “professional conservator” consulted, as required by the contract with the artist?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; What are the DMAC’s maintenance conservation protocols concerning permanent works in its collection and how were they applied to this artwork?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; How and why did the DMAC permit Greenwood Pond: Double Site to deteriorate to the point where demolition was thought to be the only option?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Baum claims “rebuilding” the installation would cost $2.65 million; how was this estimate calculated?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Has the DMAC looked into any funding sources?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Does the tear down plan violate the DMAC’s contractual obligation to “reasonably protect and maintain” the work?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Has the DMAC consulted with the Des Moines Founders Garden Club, which has been involved in the work since its inception and features the site on its ?
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Has the DMAC consulted other prior funders committed to the project?
Critical context for Greenwood Pond: Double Site:
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; Greenwood Pond: Double Site is Miss’ “most ambitious and complex work of the early 1990s – and perhaps the richest of her career to date,” according to , professor of European and American architecture at Boston University, in the essay Mary Miss and the Art of Engagement in the monograph (Princeton Architectural Press, 2004). He stated: it “represents the most complete expression of Miss’ collaborative, community-based approach to art.”
•&Բ;&Բ;&Բ; “Greenwood Pond: Double Site is the first u