We Should Restore “Twain’s” Original Lighting Scheme (1982 Video)
After my recent post on the ‘Twain’ sculpture by Richard Serra, friend and reader Matt Bauer said he was there the day of the dedication on May 1, 1982. He was just a kid then but his dad, Merrill Bauer, had a video camera. As luck would have it, Merrill Bauer already had those home movies digitized. Using Dropbox Matt was able to give me access to the 16 minute 450mb file to edit and post.  I got it down to 4:08.
Then U.S. Senator Thomas F. Eagleton (September 4, 1929 – March 4, 2007) was on hand that day. In the video you will see the original lighting that flooded the exterior of the piece as well as each opening on the interior.
I’d long wondered about lighting the piece, but wasn’t sure if the artist would approve. Thanks to this footage, that question is now answered. You will also notice the absence of current buildings to the north of the site and the presence of buildings to the east — all since razed.
Here are some still images taken from the video:
My guess is the lighting became difficult to maintain and was removed. I think by the time I arrived 8 years later the lighting was gone. Imagine Citygarden without lighting.
Thirty years later, modern lighting technology would allow us to wash ‘Twain’ with light. Thanks to Matt & Merrill Bauer for getting me their video to post!
– Steve Patterson
Why did the city remove the lighting in the first place….must have had a reason?  Perhaps it was a good one?  That said I agree that effective night lighting would improve it but not to the point that I’d like it to stay.
My preference would be to extend City Garden onto this lot.  City Garden has been successful and is attracting people, why not continue this across the street?Â
Why did the city remove the lighting in the first place….must have had a reason? Perhaps it was a good one? That said I agree that effective night lighting would improve it but not to the point that I’d like it to stay.
My preference would be to extend City Garden onto this lot. City Garden has been successful and is attracting people, why not continue this across the street?
Light what? I’m sorry but I can’t stand that piece of… art. I like abstract art as much as the next non-art college grad but that is a waste of public space. It must be worth a pretty penny as scrap metal. Use the money to extend Citygarden or something. How about some grass, trees and a few places to sit? Nearly anything (short of parking) is better than Twain.
Light what? I’m sorry but I can’t stand that piece of… art. I like abstract art as much as the next non-art college grad but that is a waste of public space. It must be worth a pretty penny as scrap metal. Use the money to extend Citygarden or something. How about some grass, trees and a few places to sit? Nearly anything (short of parking) is better than Twain.
By extending the hallway, lighting Twain and other improvements like some seating the appearance will be that of extending Citygarden. Gateway Mall is 15 blocks long with two done 11 to go (two have buildings). Twain needs to stay put but that block does need serious attention to bring it up ro par with Citygarden to the east.
I agree and thanks for the video. I love the old video of DTSTL. Just love it.
By extending the hallway, lighting Twain and other improvements like some seating the appearance will be that of extending Citygarden. Gateway Mall is 15 blocks long with two done 11 to go (two have buildings). Twain needs to stay put but that block does need serious attention to bring it up ro par with Citygarden to the east.
I agree and thanks for the video. I love the old video of DTSTL. Just love it.Â
Darn that brass band…now I can’t hear what people were saying about it. But I can guess…
“Well, I’ve walked in it, I’ve looked out of it. That’s about all of that.” Old couple at 2:50 — “Henry, let’s come back here in a couple hours when no one is here and fool around.” “So…we didn’t pay for this, right?” “I just don’t think the Cardinals have enough hitting power to make a long playoff run this year.”
Father to daughter at 4:01: “Remember this day, Jeanie. In thirty years, when you’ve grown up big and strong with a mind and a voice of your own, there’ll be an outlet for you to voice your displeasure with this piece. And hopefully there’ll be an advisory board then who will listen to your sentiments and the majority pleas of your fellow St. Louisans to get rid of it once and for all, rather than stubbornly clinging to its unwarranted cultural and artistic value.” “I hope so too, daddy.”
Darn that brass band…now I can’t hear what people were saying about it. But I can guess…
“Well, I’ve walked in it, I’ve looked out of it. That’s about all of that.” Old couple at 2:50 — “Henry, let’s come back here in a couple hours when no one is here and fool around.” “So…we didn’t pay for this, right?” “I just don’t think the Cardinals have enough hitting power to make a long playoff run this year.”
Father to daughter at 4:01: “Remember this day, Jeanie. In thirty years, when you’ve grown up big and strong with a mind and a voice of your own, there’ll be an outlet for you to voice your displeasure with this piece. And hopefully there’ll be an advisory board then who will listen to your sentiments and the majority pleas of your fellow St. Louisans to get rid of it once and for all, rather than stubbornly clinging to its unwarranted cultural and artistic value.” “I hope so too, daddy.”
The role of the Gateway Mall Advisory Board is to advise the Parks Dept. on how well proposals fit into the Master Plan adopted in 2009. On Twain it says: “Between these blocks is the sculpture “Twain” by Richard Sera. One of his earlier works, the City is fortunate to have this often “misunderstood” sculpture. Once the improvements to the two eastern blocks of the garden have been made, the space surrounding Twain should be revisited to see how it could better integrate into the redesigned blocks to the east and west.”
“This often ‘misunderstood’ sculpture” is only allowed to stay because of the artist’s subsequent noteriety and our city’s pathological inability to accept that some past decisions may simply have been wrong. Putting lipstick on this pig won’t make it any more understandable or appreciated. We need to follow the lead of other, more-enlightened cities (like New York and Paris) and admit that this particular piece is just not all that good, especially in comparison to many of his later, more-sensuous pieces: http://www.google.com/search?q=serra+sculpture&hl=en&rlz=1W1ADRA_en&biw=1024&bih=463&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=3PF3TtavLsWqsQK5msDsDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDcQsAQ (Or, to put it another way, just because you bought a Gremlin or a Yugo or a minivan doesn’t mean you should invest money in “restoring” it!)
“Well, I’ve walked in it, I’ve looked out of it. That’s about all of that.”
That’s two things you can’t do with the Mona Lisa.
The role of the Gateway Mall Advisory Board is to advise the Parks Dept. on how well proposals fit into the Master Plan adopted in 2009. On Twain it says: “Between these blocks is the sculpture “Twain†by Richard Sera. One of his earlier works, the City is fortunate to have this often “misunderstood†sculpture. Once the improvements to the two eastern blocks of the garden have been made, the space surrounding Twain should be revisited to see how it could better integrate into the redesigned blocks to the east and west.”
“Well, I’ve walked in it, I’ve looked out of it. That’s about all of that.”
That’s two things you can’t do with the Mona Lisa.
“This often ‘misunderstood’ sculpture” is only allowed to stay because of the artist’s subsequent noteriety and our city’s pathological inability to accept that some past decisions may simply have been wrong. Putting lipstick on this pig won’t make it any more understandable or appreciated. We need to follow the lead of other, more-enlightened cities (like New York and Paris) and admit that this particular piece is just not all that good, especially in comparison to many of his later, more-sensuous pieces: http://www.google.com/search?q=serra+sculpture&hl=en&rlz=1W1ADRA_en&biw=1024&bih=463&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=3PF3TtavLsWqsQK5msDsDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDcQsAQ  (Or, to put it another way, just because you bought a Gremlin or a Yugo or a minivan doesn’t mean you should invest money in “restoring” it!)
One, I agree, better lighting would help / couldn’t hurt. Two, I agree, some modern art is very hard to “understand” or to appreciate. Three, I agree, the mall is a large area and needs help on many blocks, so until something better is in the pipeline, it makes little sense to remove this piece. That said, there is precedence elsewhere for deascessioning pieces of art. The one I’m most familiar with was a statue of Dr. Martin Luther King in Denver. It was purposely created out of proportion, was not well liked, and removed after 20 years and replaced with a much more “traditional” statue: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_12312553 (The original piece is now in Pueblo, Colorado: http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=6409dce5-4523-4ed0-a0b8-1f4d7d84fa33 )
One, I agree, better lighting would help / couldn’t hurt. Two, I agree, some modern art is very hard to “understand” or to appreciate. Three, I agree, the mall is a large area and needs help on many blocks, so until something better is in the pipeline, it makes little sense to remove this piece. That said, there is precedence elsewhere for deascessioning pieces of art. The one I’m most familiar with was a statue of Dr. Martin Luther King in Denver. It was purposely created out of proportion, was not well liked, and removed after 20 years and replaced with a much more “traditional” statue: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_12312553 (The original piece is now in Pueblo, Colorado: http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=6409dce5-4523-4ed0-a0b8-1f4d7d84fa33 )
I like Twain, it is a brilliant piece, It is monumental: a basic triangular shape with an additional small angle, the shape of the piece mimics the arch in geometry. It respects the arch and does not try to compete with it. The scale of the piece speaks to both auto and pedestrian. I forgot about the lights until this post. I do remember they enhanced the night.
As the city changes (shown in the film), the relation to Twain will evolve. People often need representational or busy pieces to satisfy their view of art. Twain has nothing to do with the notoriety of the sculptor, Richard Serra, but rather the silence of the massive geometries that are the silence of the mind guided by the Arch: it is another interpretation of that same silence and geometry.
This isn’t just some guy sticking some iron plates in the ground.
It is a testament on how hard it is for people to abandon their prejudices and slow down enough in an urban environment to appreciate Twain and the continuity of the city. It is great art, it listens to the Arch and what the Arch is saying. It is the base of the Arch, where the Arch meets the ground, rethought.
It would be interesting to put the lights back.
I like Twain, it is a brilliant piece, It is monumental: a basic triangular shape with an additional small angle, the shape of the piece mimics the arch in geometry. It respects the arch and does not try to compete with it. The scale of the piece speaks to both auto and pedestrian. I forgot about the lights until this post. I do remember they enhanced the night.
As the city changes (shown in the film), the relation to Twain will evolve. People often need representational or busy pieces to satisfy their view of art. Twain has nothing to do with the notoriety of the sculptor, Richard Serra, but rather the silence of the massive geometries that are the silence of the mind guided by the Arch: it is another interpretation of that same silence and geometry.
This isn’t just some guy sticking some iron plates in the ground.
It is a testament on how hard it is for people to abandon their prejudices and slow down enough in an urban environment to appreciate Twain and the continuity of the city. It is great art, it listens to the Arch and what the Arch is saying. It is the base of the Arch, where the Arch meets the ground, rethought.
It would be interesting to put the lights back.
STL isn’t an overly sophisticated town. Don’t get me wrong, I love that about STL. It’s down to earth nature and small town feel is one of it’s best assets. That said, if you need a BSc. in art appreciation to “get” an art installation downtown then we have the wrong piece installed in the mall. Some of the pieces in city garden have deeper artsy meanings but at least on the surface they are whimsical and engaging….providing interest to all.
So do you want a statue of Barney to meet your whimsical and engaging criteria, making the sculpture understandable to the biggest dumb ass in St. Louis?. St. Louis already does that, building Walgreens on every corner. Great strategy, find the dumbest people in St. Louis and build what they understand.
I find it amazing you know what over 2 million people people in the region think about art, how does that work?
Geometry is accessible to everyone. But the Twain sculpture is more sophisticated yet. It is an urban design concept that relates directly to the Arch. Its footprint as an interpretation of the Arch, its massing, its scale and much more brings the idea of the Arch and the Gateway Mall directly into the center of the Mall. It cannot exist at another site without having this meaning lost.
In contrast, City Garden along with its sculptures, while a nice project, could be located anywhere downtown without affecting its artistic value. In fact I would argue it would probably do better in a more pedestrian friendly location than the 9 to 5 office building location it is currently in, built without storefronts and with a massive Market Street adjacent.
Your response is typical from lazy, arrogant, self absorbed types who demean Twain but do not take the time to understand it. In turn they decide no one should have the opportunity to appreciate Twain because they want it down.
It is the only project in the Gateway Mall that recognizes the prominence of the Arch and pays homage to it, in turn it helps in making the Gateway Mall a viable concept. Without Twain, the Gateway Mall is merely an amusement park, catering to the lowest common denominator.
Without Twain the value of the Arch is diminished.
It is ironic that a sculptor, Richard Serra, does a better job of connecting diverse parts of the city than architects and city planners. Any analysis of St. Louis will show that to be true.
One, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. By now, I’m sure that Serra could care less what most people think, good or bad. Plus, as Steve points out, there are no plans to do much with the block anytime soon. Two, your response to Ryley is way out of line – “lazy, arrogant, self absorbed types” could easily apply to you, or me, as well. We’re here to discuss and argue ideas, not hurl personal insults. And three, just how does Richard Serra do “a better job of connecting diverse parts of the city”? One inscrutable piece on one block downtown does nothing to connect, say, O’Fallon Park to Tower Grove Park.
Fuck Serra, as far as lazy, arrogant,, self absorbed types (since Twain was first installed). You are advocating for its removal, (you mean I should play nice and not criticize your bullshit). I have given plenty of reasonable arguments, willfully ignored by you and your team of friends, (unless you can’t read). Yeah you set such high standards for hurling personal insults, defined by you of course.
You want to talk about it, you are advocating the removal of Twain, I will debate you here or anywhere, lets hear the ideas instead of the same crap we have been hearing for decades. You are saying nothing but platitudes and gross generalizations about Twain.
You clearly have no idea of the philosophy behind Twain, but wait I forgot, the people of St. Louis are dumb and can’t think, you must be included.
Yes, I’m no fan of this piece. Yes, I think it should be removed. Yes, we disagree. But that doesn’t mean that I’m going to classify you as an f’ing idiot, are dumb and can’t think, are the biggest dumbass, spewing the same crap, etc, etc. I HAVE leraned a lot about this piece, from your comments, from Steve’s, from those of Stljmatin1, Dennis N and others, on both this and on previous posts, but I still think Twain both doesn’t work well and is far from being this artist’s best work. Debating is more than just hurling insults and denegrating everyone who doesn’t agree with you. Debating is about making good arguments and supporting your perspective. And while it can be extremely frustrating when people “don’t get it”, the first or the fiftieth time you (try to) explain it, you really only have two choices – you can keep trying, keep repeating or you can walk away, “accepting defeat”, realizing that some people will never understand, no matter how hard you try.
If your average city resident needs to look up an art installation on the Internet to figure out why it’s there and how it’s supposed to relate to it’s surroundings I think it’s failed to do what it’s supposed to do. Just because something is said to be sophisticated doesn’t necessarily mean it’s automatically better. I think public art installations should try to appeal to the largest audience possible….art lovers like you and me as well as your average blue collar guy who knows nothing about it. On that front I think this peace falls flat.
Instead of Insulting those who don’t get your geometry homage diatribe lets pick something we can all enjoy.
STL isn’t an overly sophisticated town.  Don’t get me wrong, I love that about STL.  It’s down to earth nature and small town feel is one of it’s best assets.  That said, if you need a BSc. in art appreciation to “get” an art installation downtown then we have the wrong piece installed in the mall.  Some of the pieces in city garden have deeper artsy meanings but at least on the surface they are whimsical and engaging….providing interest to all.
I like the lights around the perimeter, but those lights at the entrances look like a major trip hazard.
I like the lights around the perimeter, but those lights at the entrances look like a major trip hazard.
My assumption is those shields on the original lights were metal and got damaged quickly, which eventually prompted the city to remove the lights. Fixtures today wouldn’t need those shields to direct light to an adjacent wall. Lighting the piece and the hallway/sidewalks would help to visually connect ‘Twain’ with Citygarden.
My assumption is those shields on the original lights were metal and got damaged quickly, which eventually prompted the city to remove the lights. Fixtures today wouldn’t need those shields to direct light to an adjacent wall. Lighting the piece and the hallway/sidewalks would help to visually connect ‘Twain’ with Citygarden.
I fall into the category of those who like ‘Twain’. I find the contrast to the Arch to be intriguing. While the Arch’s gleaming stainless and soaring smooth lines are mathematically rigid and visually pleasing, Twain has a grungy, industrial angular look with earthy color and texture. And while of course much smaller than the Arch, the location and orientation of Twain makes the scale almost equally impressive. They compliment each other wonderfully and I would hope that Twain has as long a life in the city as the Arch. Art that does not create controversy is doomed to be quickly forgotten. I think the restoration of lighting would enhance it’s appeal, but it should probably not be a high priority on the city budget at this time.
I fall into the category of those who like ‘Twain’. I find the contrast to the Arch to be intriguing. While the Arch’s gleaming stainless and soaring smooth lines are mathematically rigid and visually pleasing, Twain has a grungy, industrial angular look with earthy color and texture. And while of course much smaller than the Arch, the location and orientation of Twain makes the scale almost equally impressive. They compliment each other wonderfully and I would hope that Twain has as long a life in the city as the Arch. Art that does not create controversy is doomed to be quickly forgotten. I think the restoration of lighting would enhance it’s appeal, but it should probably not be a high priority on the city budget at this time.
Like Citygarden & the future Kiener Plaza, anything done on the Twain block would be from private money — the city doesn’t have the funds to do anything on Gateway Mall.
Like Citygarden & the future Kiener Plaza, anything done on the Twain block would be from private money — the city doesn’t have the funds to do anything on Gateway Mall.
I’m sure the cost for the electric bill had something to do with why the lights were removed…and their maintenance. With the advent of LED lighting, both issues of maintenace and utility costs would be sharply reduced and LED lights also have the added advantage of being able to be programmed (color, intensity, timing)….this would help bring the piece into the 21st century though I would prefer those variables be approved with the artist’s direct input.
I do think the most brilliant and memorable take on this piece was when Washington University students made the pieces appear as buried dominos…that was really something special.
Having appreciated the piece dozens of times, it is regretable that is oftentimes used as a urinal or place for litter of personal items (use your imagination). Lighting would likely help reduce these problems and make the piece a part of the City Garden night time experience.
As a downtown resident, I welcome the lighting to further enhance what is already a world class urban sculpture park experience that engages people.
I’m sure the cost for the electric bill had something to do with why the lights were removed…and their maintenance. With the advent of LED lighting, both issues of maintenace and utility costs would be sharply reduced and LED lights also have the added advantage of being able to be programmed (color, intensity, timing)….this would help bring the piece into the 21st century though I would prefer those variables be approved with the artist’s direct input.
I do think the most brilliant and memorable take on this piece was when Washington University students made the pieces appear as buried dominos…that was really something special.
Having appreciated the piece dozens of times, it is regretable that is oftentimes used as a urinal or place for litter of personal items (use your imagination). Lighting would likely help reduce these problems and make the piece a part of the City Garden night time experience.
As a downtown resident, I welcome the lighting to further enhance what is already a world class urban sculpture park experience that engages people.
So do you want a statue of Barney to meet your whimsical and engaging criteria, making the sculpture understandable to the biggest dumb ass in St. Louis?. St. Louis already does that, building Walgreens on every corner. Great strategy, find the dumbest people in St. Louis and build what they understand.
I find it amazing you know what over 2 million people people in the region think about art, how does that work?
Geometry is accessible to everyone. But the Twain sculpture is more sophisticated yet. It is an urban design concept that relates directly to the Arch. Its footprint as an interpretation of the Arch, its massing, its scale and much more brings the idea of the Arch and the Gateway Mall directly into the center of the Mall. It cannot exist at another site without having this meaning lost.
In contrast, City Garden along with its sculptures, while a nice project, could be located anywhere downtown without affecting its artistic value. In fact I would argue it would probably do better in a more pedestrian friendly location than the 9 to 5 office building location it is currently in, built without storefronts and with a massive Market Street adjacent.
Your response is typical from lazy, arrogant, self absorbed types who demean Twain but do not take the time to understand it. In turn they decide no one should have the opportunity to appreciate Twain because they want it down.
It is the only project in the Gateway Mall that recognizes the prominence of the Arch and pays homage to it, in turn it helps in making the Gateway Mall a viable concept. Without Twain, the Gateway Mall is merely an amusement park, catering to the lowest common denominator.
Without Twain the value of the Arch is diminished.
It is ironic that a sculptor, Richard Serra, does a better job of connecting diverse parts of the city than architects and city planners. Any analysis of St. Louis will show that to be true.
One, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. By now, I’m sure that Serra could care less what most people think, good or bad. Plus, as Steve points out, there are no plans to do much with the block anytime soon.  Two, your response to Ryley is way out of line – “lazy, arrogant, self absorbed types” could easily apply to you, or me, as well. We’re here to discuss and argue ideas, not hurl personal insults. And three, just how does Richard Serra do “a better job of connecting diverse parts of the city”? One inscrutable piece on one block downtown does nothing to connect, say, O’Fallon Park to Tower Grove Park.
Fuck Serra, as far as lazy, arrogant,, self absorbed types (since Twain was first installed). You are advocating for its removal, (you mean I should play nice and not criticize your bullshit). I have given plenty of reasonable arguments, willfully ignored by you and your team of friends, (unless you can’t read). Yeah you set such high standards for hurling personal insults, defined by you of course.
You want to talk about it, you are advocating the removal of Twain, I will debate you here or anywhere, lets hear the ideas instead of the same crap we have been hearing for decades. You are saying nothing but platitudes and gross generalizations about Twain.
You clearly have no idea of the philosophy behind Twain, but wait I forgot, the people of St. Louis are dumb and can’t think, you must be included.
Yes, I’m no fan of this piece. Yes, I think it should be removed. Yes, we disagree. But that doesn’t mean that I’m going to classify you as an f’ing idiot, are dumb and can’t think, are the biggest dumbass, spewing the same crap, etc, etc. I HAVE leraned a lot about this piece, from your comments, from Steve’s, from those of Stljmatin1, Dennis N and others, on both this and on previous posts, but I still think Twain both doesn’t work well and is far from being this artist’s best work. Debating is more than just hurling insults and denegrating everyone who doesn’t agree with you. Debating is about making good arguments and supporting your perspective. And while it can be extremely frustrating when people “don’t get it”, the first or the fiftieth time you (try to) explain it, you really only have two choices – you can keep trying, keep repeating or you can walk away, “accepting defeat”, realizing that some people will never understand, no matter how hard you try.Â
If your average city resident needs to look up an art installation on the Internet to figure out why it’s there and how it’s supposed to relate to it’s surroundings I think it’s failed to do what it’s supposed to do.  Just because something is said to be sophisticated doesn’t necessarily mean it’s automatically better.  I think public art installations should try to appeal to the largest audience possible….art lovers like you and me as well as your average blue collar guy who knows nothing about it.  On that front I think this peace falls flat.
Instead of Insulting those who don’t get your geometry homage diatribe lets pick something we can all enjoy.Â