Abbott & Cordova, 7 August 1971: It's Definitely a Riot

Conclusion

            Abbott & Cordova, 7 August 1971 is a technically accomplished work. The piece would fit in nicely with another of Douglas' projects that focus on the DTES such as Every Building on the 100 Block West Hastings or his Crowds and Riots series. The work becomes problematic when issues such as size, scale and its inclusion in the highly contentious Woodward's II project are considered. In analysing Abbott & Cordova it is impossible to not talk about its LOCATION. As a standalone piece it has different connotations and implications than when it is considered within the aestheticised landscape of the Woodward's II complex. Questions that are raised regarding its meaning during the formal analysis are difficult to answer but the signifying strategies become even more fraught when the location that the work occupies is considered. For close to thirty years the Woodward's location has been ground zero for protest and activism highlighting issues such as poverty, homelessness, violence and now gentrification. As an artist born in the city who has spent many years in the neighbourhood and as someone with an interest in socio-historical narratives, Douglas would obviously be aware of the history and importance of the site. Douglas says that he lobbied to get to the commission to install Abbott & Cordova at the Woodward's II location. Douglas recalls that "The conversation was initiated by the architect Gregory Henriquez. He asked if I was interested in doing a work for a project he was designing in North Vancouver. I told him that I would be more interested in doing something for the commission he had in Gastown, at the old Woodward’s department store site. Eventually I had discussions with him and the developer, Ian Gillespie" (Alberro 14). Has Douglas done enough with this opportunity? Has the work become co-opted by the spectacle that is Woodward's II? Reflecting on the artifice of the image together with the artifice of the re-built, aestheticised Woodward's II development, does the overtly artificial construction of the image comment on the artificial nature of the development in such a way as to highlight the emptiness found at the centre of it all? Is Douglas showing us what is missing in the centre? So much of our past, our histories, are re-remembered through images and narratives surrounding these histories are re-framed and mediated through these images. Does Abbott & Cordova influence the way we interpret the history of conflict and activism in the DTES? If so, does it make palatable, soften our understanding of struggles that cannot be given up?
            Each subsection of the preceding essay offers a conclusion based on the contexts and arguments developed over the course of that section. I am not sure that it is necessary to re-articulate those conclusions again here. Hopefully, the arguments and conclusions will be useful in continuing a discussion of or developing alternative frames of analysis regarding Abbott & Cordova whether you agree with them or not. Meaning is contingent on many factors and, of course, our interpretations of the work will vary based on our experiences. However, the contentious nature of the DTES, the Woodward's II development and Abbott & Cordova itself is difficult to dispute. 

This page has paths: