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
protective and subversive." (Erica Doss 1995, p.18). The petitioners saw this attempt of <br /> consciousness raising as dysfunctional and demanded that the abstract sculpture be removed <br /> because it"was ugly; that it spoiled the view; that it prevented the plaza from being used for <br /> concerts, performances, or social gatherings; that it attracted graffiti; that it made access to the <br /> building difficult." (Erica Doss 1995, p.18). The GSA's decision to remove the Tilted Arc was <br /> viewed from the standpoint that there was a universally recognized "public" and that <br /> accessibility and"public use" of the space was paramount. This decision was on the forefront of <br /> a widespread movement away from abstract art in public places toward public art that was more <br /> utilitarian functional in nature. Consequently, utilitarian objects such as bicycle racks, drinking <br /> fountains, park benches and picnic tables were designed as artwork to enhance urban spaces. <br /> To others, the debate surrounding the removal of the Tilted Arc was representative of"the <br /> degree to which public art discourse had become a struggle over the meaning of democracy" <br /> (Deutsche 1996, p. 265). This attitude was prevalent and reflected a "general tendency in <br /> neoconservative discourse to accuse art of arrogance or inaccessibility in order to champion <br /> privatization and justify state censorship in the name of the rights of"the people."" (Deutsche <br /> 1996, p. 265). In 1985, the GSA held hearings to determine whether the Tilted Arc would stay <br /> or be relocated. Even though 122 people spoke in favor of keeping the sculpture, and only 58 in <br /> favor of relocating it, the hearing panel voted for removal. The remarks of GSA chief Diamond <br /> at the conclusion of the hearing indicated that a populist victory had been won. He stated, "The <br /> people have spoken and they have been listened to by their government." (Doss 1995). He <br /> further stated, "This is a day for the people to rejoice, because now the plaza returns rightfully to <br /> the people." (Doss 1995). <br /> 52 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.