My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 01/09/2025
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Parks and Recreation Commission
>
2025
>
Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 01/09/2025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 1:53:42 PM
Creation date
1/17/2025 10:52:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Parks and Recreation Commission
Document Date
01/09/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
496
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
One of the most notable examples of failure in the proper siting of public art from this <br /> period is a sculpture in Manhattan's Foley Square Federal Plaza known as the Tilted Arc. The <br /> General Services Administration (GSA) commissioned the Tilted Arc for this location in 1979, <br /> and it was removed in 1989 after much public controversy. Artist Richard Serra created the <br /> massive sculpture and it was installed in 1981. Tilted Arc was an unadorned steel sculpture <br /> nearly the length of a city block that was 120 feet long, 12 feet high, and 2.5 inches thick. From <br /> the beginning, the sculpture fell under extreme criticism and was derisively nicknamed"The <br /> Berlin Wall of Foley Square" (Doss 1995, pp. 17-18). Because of the controversy surrounding <br /> this sculpture in regard to its use of public space, Tilted Arc is one of the most discussed <br /> examples of 20th century public art (Baldini 2014). The work raised questions about how public <br /> art is commissioned, what are appropriate styles of art, and what are the criteria for the <br /> successful implementation of public art. More importantly, when describing The Destruction of <br /> Tilted Arc: Documents published in 1991 (C. Weyergraf-Serra, M. Buskirk), Rosalyn Deutsche <br /> (1996, p. 258) writes: "The documents raise timely questions, whose implications extend far <br /> beyond arcane art-world matters, about what it means for art and space to be "public." Insofar as <br /> the GSA ostensibly dismantled Tilted Arc "to increase public use of the plaza." <br /> The removal of the Tilted Arc was a direct result of a petition by some 1300 office <br /> workers from buildings adjacent to the public plaza. The artist defended his work through the <br /> hearing process, saying that it was designed as a site-specific sculpture, and that removing the <br /> work, or placing it in another location, would render it meaningless (Babon 2000). In part, the <br /> controversy that arose was an intentional consequence of the artist's desire to make people see <br /> their surroundings differently: "He wanted a sculpture that provoked a relentless consciousness <br /> of the streets, office buildings and court around it, to be at the same time analytical and mythical, <br /> 51 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.