Mattress Factory: Pittsburgh Community Outreach
Introduction
Imagine entering a space that causes you to lose track of your physical presence. You get lost in the fabricated reality, and you forget how long you have been standing in the room. Time seems to slow down, as you take in all the minute details and intricacies. Such an experience is not uncommon at the Mattress Factory (MF) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania’s North Side. The MF museum houses exhibitions of installation art, and artists live in residency as they create their work for display (“History Mattress Factory”).
Introduction
Imagine entering a space that causes you to lose track of your physical presence. You get lost in the fabricated reality, and you forget how long you have been standing in the room. Time seems to slow down, as you take in all the minute details and intricacies. Such an experience is not uncommon at the Mattress Factory (MF) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania’s North Side. The MF museum houses exhibitions of installation art, and artists live in residency as they create their work for display (“History Mattress Factory”).
Figure 1. A museum-goer engages with Winifred Lutz’s outside installation, Garden Installation, 1993. Figure 2. Mohammed Musallam’s installation work, The Great Illusion, 2016, fills one entire room of gallery space.
While MF creates sensory experiences for public viewing, it also partners with the community to increase the accessibility of art education. Through email correspondence, Karen Forney, the Education Programs Manager at MF, explained the extent of MF’s impact on Pittsburgh’s North Side. Many buildings of the MF complex were once, “…abandoned or considered ‘non-contributing’ buildings within the community” (K. Forney, personal communication, September 15, 2017). These rehabilitated structures are now spaces for exhibitions, artist studios, artist residences, office work, and teaching. MF’s community revitalization directly impacts Pittsburgh’s art education programming. These restored buildings serve a dual purpose. They offer hope to a disintegrating community and house educational programming for community growth. MF has become an integral part of culture, sustenance, and education in Pittsburgh’s North Side.
Overview
According to Forney, the museum’s education department hopes to introduce installation art to the public. She stated the mission of their programming to me, through email:
Just as our artists in residence program is like a laboratory for artists to experiment with materials or techniques they’ve never used before, we model our projects to be open-ended experiments with materials or ideas that a lay person may be exploring for the first time, and we aim to make this accessible to all, children and adults (K. Forney, personal communication, September 15, 2017).
Forney is one of three full-time employees in the education department, along with a Director of Education and an Outreach Coordinator. The team also consists of 12 part-time Museum Educators. This staff works to provide programming for community members of all ages. On the weekends, ArtLab and Mini-Factory programs are based on-site, at the museum. Children and adults participate in collaborative activities, centered on themes or concepts from current museum installations. After school on Wednesdays, MF invites children in grades 3-5 to a free after-school program. Similarly, the museum invites students in grades 9-12 to an after-school program every Thursday. In addition to these on-site activities, MF staff members travel to public events and schools to facilitate community outreach programs. They partner with Pittsburgh Public Schools to offer art sessions in the school setting. This partnership usually lasts for a few months, and a member of the MF staff will visit the school once a week. MF receives funding through grant money from national and local, Pittsburgh organizations.
Description and Discussion
I had the privilege of observing two weekend programs at MF. ArtLab took place on September 2, 2017, and Mini-Factory was the following Saturday, September 9. ArtLab facilitators, Mattie Cannon and Hannah Gaskill, had set up tables for art making in the center of the lobby space. The floor to ceiling windows and hardwood flooring created a warm space for gathering. As museum visitors travelled through the installation exhibitions, some stopped at the station to participate in the activity. On the day that I observed, Cannon and Gaskill prompted visitors to fold and decorate their own paper fortune tellers. Participants had access to an assortment of drawing and coloring materials, along with colored paper and scissors. Cannon explained to me the ideas behind the fortune telling theme of this ArtLab. One of the MF exhibition buildings is currently undergoing changes for MF’s upcoming 40th anniversary celebration (M. Cannon, personal communication, September 2, 2017). The fortune tellers were supposed to allude to the mystery surrounding what is happening in the gallery space. On average, the participating visitors were teens or adults, and they stayed at the station for about 10 minutes. The interactions between museum visitors and the Museum Educators were very informal. I was hoping that the facilitators would explain to participants why the ArtLab had a fortune teller theme. Unfortunately, there was no mention of how the activity tied in with the museum installations.
Overview
According to Forney, the museum’s education department hopes to introduce installation art to the public. She stated the mission of their programming to me, through email:
Just as our artists in residence program is like a laboratory for artists to experiment with materials or techniques they’ve never used before, we model our projects to be open-ended experiments with materials or ideas that a lay person may be exploring for the first time, and we aim to make this accessible to all, children and adults (K. Forney, personal communication, September 15, 2017).
Forney is one of three full-time employees in the education department, along with a Director of Education and an Outreach Coordinator. The team also consists of 12 part-time Museum Educators. This staff works to provide programming for community members of all ages. On the weekends, ArtLab and Mini-Factory programs are based on-site, at the museum. Children and adults participate in collaborative activities, centered on themes or concepts from current museum installations. After school on Wednesdays, MF invites children in grades 3-5 to a free after-school program. Similarly, the museum invites students in grades 9-12 to an after-school program every Thursday. In addition to these on-site activities, MF staff members travel to public events and schools to facilitate community outreach programs. They partner with Pittsburgh Public Schools to offer art sessions in the school setting. This partnership usually lasts for a few months, and a member of the MF staff will visit the school once a week. MF receives funding through grant money from national and local, Pittsburgh organizations.
Description and Discussion
I had the privilege of observing two weekend programs at MF. ArtLab took place on September 2, 2017, and Mini-Factory was the following Saturday, September 9. ArtLab facilitators, Mattie Cannon and Hannah Gaskill, had set up tables for art making in the center of the lobby space. The floor to ceiling windows and hardwood flooring created a warm space for gathering. As museum visitors travelled through the installation exhibitions, some stopped at the station to participate in the activity. On the day that I observed, Cannon and Gaskill prompted visitors to fold and decorate their own paper fortune tellers. Participants had access to an assortment of drawing and coloring materials, along with colored paper and scissors. Cannon explained to me the ideas behind the fortune telling theme of this ArtLab. One of the MF exhibition buildings is currently undergoing changes for MF’s upcoming 40th anniversary celebration (M. Cannon, personal communication, September 2, 2017). The fortune tellers were supposed to allude to the mystery surrounding what is happening in the gallery space. On average, the participating visitors were teens or adults, and they stayed at the station for about 10 minutes. The interactions between museum visitors and the Museum Educators were very informal. I was hoping that the facilitators would explain to participants why the ArtLab had a fortune teller theme. Unfortunately, there was no mention of how the activity tied in with the museum installations.
Figure 3. The ArtLab station is set up in the lobby and ready for museum participants. Figure 4. This is an image of a finished paper fortune teller, created at the ArtLab station.
On September 9, MF invited children, ages 3-5, to attend Mini-Factory at the museum. The activities of this event centered on a texture theme. One girl, age 5, participated in the program with her father. The Mini-Factory coordinator, Teresa Duff, first read two books about texture to the participant. They talked about how things feel to the touch, as the stories progressed. Afterward, they walked to another MF building down the block, stopping to talk about various textures along the street. Within the other museum building, they talked about texture, in relationship to the current installation work on display. Finally, Duff brought the girl back to the MF education studio to create a texture collage. I was fascinated by how much the participant enjoyed finding and discussing textures. Duff incorporated instruction for a variety of learning styles, ensuring that any young child would understand at their own level of learning.
I believe that ArtLab and Mini-Factory are successful in advancing the mission of MF. They familiarize the public to installation art and allow participants to experiment with materials. The programs focus more on process and experimentation, rather than final product (M. Cannon, personal communication, September 2, 2017). Although both programs connected activities to concepts from installation art, Mini-Factory had more substance and depth. Duff directly correlated the concept of texture to installation works, through sight and touch. Cannon’s approach was much less clear and direct than that of Mini-Factory. More verbal or written communication to museum-goers could have assisted in connecting this particular ArtLab experience to present installations.
I believe that ArtLab and Mini-Factory are successful in advancing the mission of MF. They familiarize the public to installation art and allow participants to experiment with materials. The programs focus more on process and experimentation, rather than final product (M. Cannon, personal communication, September 2, 2017). Although both programs connected activities to concepts from installation art, Mini-Factory had more substance and depth. Duff directly correlated the concept of texture to installation works, through sight and touch. Cannon’s approach was much less clear and direct than that of Mini-Factory. More verbal or written communication to museum-goers could have assisted in connecting this particular ArtLab experience to present installations.
Figure 5. The Mini-Factory participant engages with a large-scale cement installation exhibit. Figure 6. This is an image of the participant’s finished texture collage.
Implications
Installation artwork is current and relevant to art education practices. McKay (2008) explains how she connects installation art and education:
The media of what goes into a classroom is so rich, including the variables that each of the students’ bodies brings in on a daily basis…Thinking of education as installation art means creating a thoughtful environment with lots of variables, sometimes left to chance, where something amazing can happen at any given time. It also depends a lot on the mindset of the participants in the space, which is also a lot like installation art (p. 76).
This connection is something that I had not considered, until I began my research for this case study. MF is pursuing programming that pushes the boundaries of traditional art education practices. McKay’s interview with artist, Annette Lawrence, reminds readers that the contemporary art world does affect art education. Contemporary art prompts questions within cultural and social groups. These conversations trickle into the classroom setting, where the teacher should address accordingly.
Green (1996) also addresses the benefits to engaging in installation art production and discussion in the art classroom. Similar to McKay, he explains that installation art can raise stimulating topics for discussion. Students come to the art classroom with preconceived notions about art and art making. Often, installation art defies these opinions. Green states, “Exposing children to contemporary modes of thinking and responding relates the world at large to the personal experiences of the child making the course of instruction relevant to everyday living” (p. 19). In short, the study of installation art helps children relate to their day-to-day surroundings.
The programming at MF is vast and innovative, and it provides an excellent model for reaching all age groups through art education. Their flexibility in locations also offers the opportunity to reach a wide population. While not all Pittsburgh residents will visit an art museum, they are perhaps more likely to attends schools and community events. MF staff members bring their expertise to these conventional and unconventional locations, offering many children and adults the opportunity to make connections to installation art.
After completing my observations at MF, I am left to wonder about advertising. MF is embedded into the North Side community and has a healthy museum attendance. Why, then, was there only one participant at the Saturday morning Mini-Factory? Is the museum simply geared more towards teens and adults? Is there a gap in advertising for children’s programming? In future research, I hope to find more information about advertising and sustaining art education programming. Such issues could directly affect my future capstone research. I also plan to further research the benefits of studying and creating installation art in the classroom setting. This unconventional topic would be new to my teaching curriculum, but certainly offers an opportunity for growth and exploration.
References
Green, G. (1996). Installation art: A bit of the spoiled brat or provocative pedagogy? Art Education, 49(2), 16-19.
History mattress factory. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mattress.org/content/history
McKay, S. (2008). Education as installation art and other useful ideas from the contemporary art world: Conversation with artist Annette Lawrence. Art Education, 61(2), 71-76.
Installation artwork is current and relevant to art education practices. McKay (2008) explains how she connects installation art and education:
The media of what goes into a classroom is so rich, including the variables that each of the students’ bodies brings in on a daily basis…Thinking of education as installation art means creating a thoughtful environment with lots of variables, sometimes left to chance, where something amazing can happen at any given time. It also depends a lot on the mindset of the participants in the space, which is also a lot like installation art (p. 76).
This connection is something that I had not considered, until I began my research for this case study. MF is pursuing programming that pushes the boundaries of traditional art education practices. McKay’s interview with artist, Annette Lawrence, reminds readers that the contemporary art world does affect art education. Contemporary art prompts questions within cultural and social groups. These conversations trickle into the classroom setting, where the teacher should address accordingly.
Green (1996) also addresses the benefits to engaging in installation art production and discussion in the art classroom. Similar to McKay, he explains that installation art can raise stimulating topics for discussion. Students come to the art classroom with preconceived notions about art and art making. Often, installation art defies these opinions. Green states, “Exposing children to contemporary modes of thinking and responding relates the world at large to the personal experiences of the child making the course of instruction relevant to everyday living” (p. 19). In short, the study of installation art helps children relate to their day-to-day surroundings.
The programming at MF is vast and innovative, and it provides an excellent model for reaching all age groups through art education. Their flexibility in locations also offers the opportunity to reach a wide population. While not all Pittsburgh residents will visit an art museum, they are perhaps more likely to attends schools and community events. MF staff members bring their expertise to these conventional and unconventional locations, offering many children and adults the opportunity to make connections to installation art.
After completing my observations at MF, I am left to wonder about advertising. MF is embedded into the North Side community and has a healthy museum attendance. Why, then, was there only one participant at the Saturday morning Mini-Factory? Is the museum simply geared more towards teens and adults? Is there a gap in advertising for children’s programming? In future research, I hope to find more information about advertising and sustaining art education programming. Such issues could directly affect my future capstone research. I also plan to further research the benefits of studying and creating installation art in the classroom setting. This unconventional topic would be new to my teaching curriculum, but certainly offers an opportunity for growth and exploration.
References
Green, G. (1996). Installation art: A bit of the spoiled brat or provocative pedagogy? Art Education, 49(2), 16-19.
History mattress factory. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mattress.org/content/history
McKay, S. (2008). Education as installation art and other useful ideas from the contemporary art world: Conversation with artist Annette Lawrence. Art Education, 61(2), 71-76.