Palo Alto's famous circuit-board egg sculpture, "Digital DNA," may soon receive a major facelift -- and it won't be cheap.
The iconic Lytton Plaza landmark, which had originally cost the city $9,950, would cost over $80,000 to restore, the city's Public Arts Commission learned Thursday evening (Dec.15).
"The egg keeps coming back to us for some reason. It's had many rebirths, shall we say," commission Chair Ally Richter said.
In a proposal addressed to the commission, artist Adriana Varella called for complete and urgent restoration of the sculpture based on continued exposure to the sun, rain and human touch. Producer Alex Lage of Ringo Films would sponsor the entire refurbishment process, which would cost $82,400 -- more than eight times the sculpture's original price. In return, Lage asked for a plaque recognizing Ringo Films' support.
In the proposal, Lage and his production team they said they would deposit the money into the art commission's budget for the commission to manage.
The budget laid out everything from Varella and Lage's airfare and accommodations, the hiring of helpers, an art studio rental for restoration and new circuit boards to cover the entire structure, to the transportation and the public "re-hatching" of the sculpture as well as funds for an online broadcast of the one-month restoration process.
Digital DNA, one of Palo Alto's most popular sculptures, has had a rocky history since the city commissioned it in 2000. Six months into its creation, the artist's neighbor mistakenly threw the egg away. Then when the egg was almost ready to be installed, a fire swept through the warehouse where the sculpture was stored, completely destroying the piece. Varella and her husband Nilton Malz scrambled to rebuild the egg from scratch before installing it in 2005.
Former Mayor Le Levy and developer Roxy Rapp, who advocated for a complete redesign of Lytton Plaza with a large fountain and a giant chess set as the centerpiece, protested Digital DNA's final installation.
The commission has supported multiple restorations of the sculpture in the past, paying to replace circuit boards and recoat the egg in protective resin. In 2010, the commission doubled the maintenance budget for the sculpture and denied the artist's request to "gold plate" the egg.
"I have all kind of 'jitteries' about this particular project," Richter said. "We just spent $8,000 refurbishing this when originally it was only supposed to be $4,000.
"I don't want to have an issue with this piece every two to three years if we are spending this kind of money, so I'm a little apprehensive about the budget," Richter said.
Elise DeMarzo, the staff liaison to the commission, has been in contact with Varella about the proposed restoration.
She said the artist wants to take the time to re-do the sculpture properly.
"Previously she had to work on it in a parking stall in a parking lot, so I think her vision is that this budget would give her the ability to work in a climate-controlled studio, using all the material she wants," DeMarzo said.
DeMarzo, who spoke on behalf of the artist, said Varella would use a "more hearty" resin this time.
Richter and other commissioners also discussed asking Varella to completely re-do the piece or moving it to a safer location.
"Why don't we have her just make another egg, if she is going to give over $82,000?" Richter asked. "And just move the new one to a more protected location."
When the city questioned the sculpture's location in 2005, a group of young anarchists protested saying the egg represented the plaza as a "place for the people."
The commissioners agreed they would rather keep the sculpture where it is than have to move it.
"We all like the piece, and we want to see it stay," Commissioner Trish Collins said. "It represents Palo Alto's birthplace of Silicon Valley."
However, the commission decided not to take any further action before they have more concrete information about the budget and a direct breakdown of funds.
"We need to make sure we will get what we originally paid for. We need to ask her some hard questions.
"Because if its $82,400, two years from now I don't want to have to see us pay $15,000 just to give the egg a new shell," Richter said.
DeMarzo said she plans to communicate with the artist to ask her for a more detailed report and discuss her findings at the commission's next meeting on Feb. 16, 2012.
Comments
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
And just how much would it cost to just cart if off and forget about it?
Professorville
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:17 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Can you say Bamboozled....
Barron Park
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:17 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:17 pm
What a joke, Throw the thing away and give the money to the SCHOOLS. Somebody has their head where the sun dont shine to want to spend money to fix a piece of art.
In fact, if it was made so shoddy, get the ARTIST to fix the thing.
College Terrace
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:22 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Who is the Artist that designed and made It?
Crack the EGG!!
Barron Park
on Dec 16, 2011 at 6:03 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Famous? How about "infamous"? Why do some many splinter groups in Palo Alto think they can milk the skimpy General Revenue fund for their pet projects? Looks like the sculptor will have a life time job if the egg continues to deteriorate from outdoor exposure - new resin or no.
Most popular sculpture? Almost every on line comment I've read was negative - including this blog. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, whose eye thinks this joke is beautiful?
Save the money for a worth while cause and dump the egg.
Downtown North
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:32 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:32 pm
This is insulting! 80,000 to redo an ugly egg. Wow!!! Please do something more useful with this money. Make a few sculptures with local artists, give it to art programs in our schools, do something that matters. Varella is not a local artist, shd is not even from this country. Why don't we place the egg in a "museum" and give the opportunity to local artists to create something more meanifull and that looks good?
Midtown
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:48 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:48 pm
I would love to find a big hill and watch it roll.
$80,000 ! what the hell is this women doing? Is she buying new computers to get the circuit boards?? That stuff can be had for free.
It belongs to the city now. I say palo alto should let other artists bid on fixing it.
Hell I'm no artist and I'll sell my services to palo alto. I'll glue on new circuit boards and coat it with epoxy.
What the hell I'm really mad about this
Greenmeadow
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:56 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 7:56 pm
Only in Palo Alto would a jumble of e-waste have an $80,000 repair tag! Yes, it's e-waste, and I suppose, that too is a legacy of Silicon Valley. If Mr. Lage has $80,000 he's willing spend to hot glue a bunch of broken circuit boards back together in exchange for a plaque, I would invite him to reconsider. Perhaps Mr. Lage would consider making a more worthy donation towards urban art, art in the schools (excellent suggestion Ann) or anything else for that matter, and receive some well deserved recognition for his generosity.
Crescent Park
on Dec 16, 2011 at 8:32 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Sounds like it need to be planted with some video cameras in hopes of catching the violent incidents that seem to happen right in that location ... maybe cameras can plug right into some of those existing PC boards ... how about giving it some wheels so it can wander around town and see what's going on, who's getting mugged or hit by a baseball bat?
Seriously, I always disliked that scupture, and the feeling was intensified the close I got to it and saw how ugly it really is close up. We can't do any better than this? No wonder they had to go to China to get the new statue of MLK. Sheesh!
Community Center
on Dec 16, 2011 at 10:01 pm
on Dec 16, 2011 at 10:01 pm
Once upon a time Lytton Plaza was a really pretty place, with a nice atmosphere. Then the city remodeled it into a stark, cold, unfriendly, harshly lit dismal stone- surfaced glaring corner lot with an outdoor urinal. It could have been beautiful, and
that egg is a big joke. Get rid of it. If the city spends one dime on this, some heads should roll.
Old Palo Alto
on Dec 17, 2011 at 1:20 am
on Dec 17, 2011 at 1:20 am
The ugly egg is just a giant piece of e-waste.
A reminder for all of us to think twice before buying more short lived electronic junk, or e-waste disguised as art.
This is one rotten egg. It is too toxic to be disposed.
We need to call a certified e-waste hauler with a chain of custody to ensure proper disposal.
The artist probably laughed all the way to the bank.
The art commission has never represented the majority views of the citizens of this city.
The commission needs to budget removal of other pieces of rusty metal art littering the public areas in our city.
Downtown North
on Dec 17, 2011 at 2:51 am
on Dec 17, 2011 at 2:51 am
I agree, the ugly egg is just a giant piece of e-waste!
Palo Verde
on Dec 17, 2011 at 7:48 am
on Dec 17, 2011 at 7:48 am
If it were made of copper we wouldn't have to worry about it because it would be stolen by now. Regarding maintenance-intensive sculptures, which landfill did our Foreign Friends at Waverley and Embarcadero end up in?
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 17, 2011 at 12:12 pm
on Dec 17, 2011 at 12:12 pm
The problem with our City Council is that they are all, without exception, members of the one percent club, so it's very easy for them to waste $80,000 to refurbishing that ugly e-waste digital egg!!! $80,000 is chump change to them!!
Professorville
on Dec 17, 2011 at 4:47 pm
on Dec 17, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Please just remove the thing. It's been an eyesore ever since it was installed. Honestly, Palo Alto has some of the worst "public art" I've ever seen in any city and the egg presents itself as the acme of this Bad Art. Please take the rich housewives off the Art's Council and put real artists on it.
Duveneck/St. Francis
on Dec 17, 2011 at 7:39 pm
on Dec 17, 2011 at 7:39 pm
I'd like to hear from the PA Art Commissioners. Chime in, defend this steaming heap of "art", if you can.
Midtown
on Dec 18, 2011 at 8:51 am
on Dec 18, 2011 at 8:51 am
It was a novelty when originally installed. I actually thought it was a temporary showing rather than a permanent sculpture. $80,000? What does a cop or fire fighter make annually? After 20 years, it may be time to leave Palo Alto for a saner city.
another community
on Dec 18, 2011 at 11:13 am
on Dec 18, 2011 at 11:13 am
I always liked the original sculpture and it seemed to fit well in Lytton Plaza. Since Lytton Plaza has been remodeled why not make a new "Digital DNA" such as a sculpture of a "Double Helix" instead.
College Terrace
on Dec 18, 2011 at 1:10 pm
on Dec 18, 2011 at 1:10 pm
How about we take the egg money and direct it to keeping the Hamilton post office open??
Midtown
on Dec 19, 2011 at 10:22 am
on Dec 19, 2011 at 10:22 am
More insanity.
“…artist Adriana Varella called for complete and urgent restoration of the sculpture based on continued exposure to the sun, rain and human touch.”
Why was it put outside if it wasn’t meant to be touched or exposed to the elements?
“… the artist wants to take the time to re-do the sculpture properly.”
Why didn’t she do it right the first time and why was she paid multiple times for multiple mistakes?
“… so I'm a little apprehensive about the budget," says Art Commissioner Richter.
Just a LITTLE apprehensive? After all the refurbs and taxpayer money wasted?
“… one of Palo Alto's most popular sculptures…”
Says who?
"The commission has supported multiple restorations of the sculpture in the past, paying to replace circuit boards and recoat the egg in protective resin. In 2010, the commission doubled the maintenance budget for the sculpture and denied the artist's request to "gold plate" the egg.”
What fantasyland does this artist live in? She obviously believes all the hype the art commission has been feeding her. Time to get rid of the egg, the artist and the commission!
Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Dec 19, 2011 at 10:34 am
on Dec 19, 2011 at 10:34 am
It's hard to imagine, that during these very challenging financial times, that anyone would consider spending a nickel on this project. Our city leaders have spent the past several years describing this unprecedented budget crisis, but yet they still mull over expenditures such as these. It makes no sense. If we are indeed facing a financial crisis as they say, then why are we spending money on public art, park refurbishing, playground construction, and bike bridges? All at the expense of public safety and vital infrastructure needs. Deep cuts have been made in areas of need, while the purses are open for non-essential projects. Enough already and have your actions back up your rhetoric.
another community
on Dec 19, 2011 at 1:59 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 1:59 pm
"$80,000"? thats it? Does that figure include the cost of having City departments and city staff spend countless hours working on this issue? Getting estimates, reviewing bids, legal paperwork, creating reports to commissions and council? etc etc etc.
I'm sure the real total cost will be much greater than $80,000.
another community
on Dec 19, 2011 at 4:40 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 4:40 pm
This one has truly laid an egg.
Crescent Park
on Dec 19, 2011 at 5:05 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 5:05 pm
Get rid of it. POS.
Fairmeadow
on Dec 19, 2011 at 5:45 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Oh,yeah,this shit,I thought it has been done and gone already.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2011 at 9:54 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 9:54 pm
How about taking it to the dump? Oh wait, we no longer have a dump or recycling center. Well, let's donate this piece of trash to the artist who made it! And she can keep it in HER yard.
Stanford
on Dec 19, 2011 at 11:02 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Whaddya say we take the egg and Go Momma (California Ave.) and roll them into oblivion? At no taxpayers' cost.
Stanford
on Dec 19, 2011 at 11:04 pm
on Dec 19, 2011 at 11:04 pm
Posted by Charlotte, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Dec 18, 2011 at 1:10 pm
How about we take the egg money and direct it to keeping the Hamilton post office open??
___________
Yes!
Fairmeadow
on Dec 20, 2011 at 9:55 am
on Dec 20, 2011 at 9:55 am
Maybe public art in the city should be on a renewable 5-year contract: Every 5 years, the public is can vote on whether to keep each piece. If people like a particular art work, then it stays for another 5 years. If a piece gets thumbs-down, then it goes back to the artist, and the Arts Commission selects another work to take its place.
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 20, 2011 at 10:56 am
on Dec 20, 2011 at 10:56 am
WilliamR:
Great idea!! And may be The Public can vote on what to bring to PA in the first place--I am sick and tired of multiple pieces of ugly art made by minimally talented friends of members of our Art Commission (like "yo, mama," the ridiculous bottle house at city hall, and "The Color of Palo Alto") being shoved down our throats--what a waste of money!! Not to mention the absurd "Egg"-- if it's famous, the reason is that other communities are laughing at Palo Alt for being so foolish as to pay huges sums of money for someone else's recycling. (I do like the sculpture in front of the MSC, though.)
Zdo like the sculpture in front if the MSC, though.)
Woodside
on Dec 20, 2011 at 12:38 pm
on Dec 20, 2011 at 12:38 pm
WilliamR, how dare you insinuate that regular citizens should be able to override the decisions of art experts? It is extremely ungrateful of you.
Evergreen Park
on Dec 21, 2011 at 3:23 am
on Dec 21, 2011 at 3:23 am
Iconic? You can't be serious. Recycle the darned thing!
Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 21, 2011 at 8:52 am
on Dec 21, 2011 at 8:52 am
Famous? No. Infamous? Yes.
Midtown
on Dec 21, 2011 at 9:54 am
on Dec 21, 2011 at 9:54 am
History of the egg at Web Link Worth reading to see how the city paid for the egg twice.
The artist said of the design, “It reminds me (of) the Faberge eggs given as a gift to the Russian imperial family." Such modesty!
While the egg was being built in the artist’s garage, her neighbor mistook it for junk and tossed it. That’s someone we should have on the art commission!