If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on the tilted arc controversy. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality the tilted arc controversy paper right on time.
Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in the tilted arc controversy, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your the tilted arc controversy paper at affordable prices!
Dana Ignarski
10/8/0
The Tilted Arc Controversy
The twelve-foot-high by 10-foot-long arc of two and a half-inch-thick rusting Cor-Ten steel had once stood amidst the Federal Plaza of New York City. Opposing public opinion provoked miscommunication between artist Richard Serra and the government, questioning the intent and value of the architecture and its surroundings. Because of the lack of education as to why it was chosen for public art, the community may have disliked the piece's purpose. The artist may have also obscured the sincere and forthright intentions of Tilted Arc's design.
On the night of March 16, 18, the General Services Administration (GSA) dismantled Tilted Arc. Ten years earlier, the same federal government agency commissioned Richard Serra to build an urban sculpture for permanent installation in the Federal Plaza as a part of its percent-for-art program (Serra, 5). The GSA agency offices in both Washington and New York accepted the sculpture for instillation in the summer of 181 after the two-year commissioning process. Initiating the government's anti-Tilted Arc campaign, Chief Judge Edward Re of The Court of International Trade wrote to Washington holding the sculpture responsible for the plaza's accumulation of graffiti, litter, rats, and terrorists who might use it as a blasting wall for bombs (Serra, 5). Another controversy instigator, William Diamond, (the newly appointed GSA regional administrator) unsuccessfully solicited to have the artwork removed (Senie, 8). Forgoing site-specificity stressed in Serra's work, Diamond eventually introduced a relocation idea, and he utilized the New York Times to incite the public. In an article published by Grace Glueck, he quoted, "Tilted Arc was a mistake which had been made because at the time the impact of the piece was not understood" (Glueck, sec pg 1, 7). Many workers in the Federal Plaza reported that the piece disrupted their movement through the region, causing them to hurry because of uneasiness (VanLaar and Diepeveen, 4).
Serra and his defenders argued several points. First, the artist followed established procedures and fulfilled all GSA requirements. "It was understood in all stages of the decision-making process that Serra was making a permanent work for a specific site," said Julia Brown who negotiated the GSA contract (Serra, 5)." Representatives from the GSA approved the esthetic concept of Tilted Arc. In addition, representatives of the architectural firm that originally designed the plaza and office towers supported the inauguration of the Tilted Arc (Serra, 5).Historically, the AGA has commissioned art for the artistic skill as a means of broadening the appeal and the impact of public policies and institutions, not commissioning art for the aesthetic welfare of society or "for art's sake" (Jordan, 1). Serra suffers because of a change that the public rejected. Despite the earlier works of art commissioned, the agency had chosen his work with knowledge of his internationally acclaimed minimalistic style. Second, the artist argued the violation of his first amendment (free speech) and his fifth-amendment (due process) rights (Senie, 8). Serra was not constitutionally entitled to a hearing before the sculpture's removal. Richard Serra designed the sculpture around the particular configuration of streets and buildings that comprise the Federal Plaza. Because of the site-specificity of the piece, relocation would correspond to demolition. He sold his art to the government, obliging the Tilted Arc at federal disposal. Their right to property abandoned his freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and his freedom to protect the intention and integrity of his works (Serra, 4). This testimony solely based on taste, questions not like or dislike, but the perception of Tilted Arc. Because the GSA chose Serra's work for the project, does it mean that his work is at GSA disposal?
Nevertheless, Richard Serra needed to specify his intentions for the piece. The artist saw himself as a social critic. "I've found a way to dislocate or alter the decorative function of the plaza and actively bring people into the sculpture's context…after the piece is created, the space will be understood primarily as a function of the sculpture" (VanLaar and Diepeveen, ). Serra created Tilted Arc to view how it altered the states of those who encountered it, and how it provoked critical reflection sans aesthetic value. The sculpture and its power manipulated the passersby. Knowing this, he could have expressed concerns during the evaluation prior to its building. The artist could have assisted the uninformed public in interpreting and understanding this contemporary work (Jordan, 1).By explaining the social function of the piece, the public would become aware of its purpose and appreciate the work. To many, Tilted Arc did not appeal to the eye. "It prevents viewers of it from using the plaza merely to imagine the existence of an alternative public space. That Tilted Arc deprived people of the privilege of their illusions, is the reason it became a focus of dispute" (Horowitz, 10). The Tilted Arc sculpture may have destroyed some specific beautiful aspect of the plaza. Ultimately, beauty in art is subjective. Furthermore, many misrepresented the symbols of the piece. To some, the rusted steel barrier may have undermined the goals of generating respect for the Courthouse's symbol of justice because of its location (Horowitz, ). The Art-in-Architecture (AIA) program's mission statement claims to "improve the quality of the built environment" (www.AIA.com). The piece could obscure the AIA's intent according to how one perceives improvement, beauty, or purpose of art. Moreover, the sculpture made the space less effective. Many people couldn't see over it and had to walk its 10-foot entirety to reach the other side. It also prohibited certain concerts and events to occur in the space because of its impeding location (Senie, 00).
Supporting art means to support the artist. Artists could make beautiful objects that "enhance" our environment, or the artist could play a confrontational role in displaying how they view the world, with hopes of reform. Richard Serra was blamed for not considering the people who frequent the plaza.The public did not choose Tilted Arc, and consenting the public was never a prerequisite. The AGA had chosen the specific sculpture for a specific space for the Art-in-Architecture program. Serra followed the rules of the AIA. In my opinion, the destroyed arc resulted from the government underestimating its power and the public lacking adequate knowledge of its function.
Bibliography
Diepeveen, Leonard, and VanLaar, Timothy. Active Sights. Mayfield Publishing
Company. Mountain View CA. 18.
Glueck, Grace. "What Part Should the Public Play in Choosing Public Art?" New York
Times. Feb. , 185 Sec. . pp1, 7.
Horowitz, Gregg M. "The spectacle of the Tilted Arc Controversy." The Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Winter 14 Vol. 54. Issue 1. Pg. 8
Jordan, Sherrill. Public Art Public Controversy. ACA Books. NY. 187.
Senie, Harriet. "Richard Serra's Tilted Arc Art and Non-Art Issues." Art Journal. Dec. 18 Vol. 48. Issue 4. Pg. 8.
Serra, Richard. "Tilted Arc Destroyed." Art in America. May 18 Pg. 4-47.
Http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints/visualarts/titledar…
Please note that this sample paper on the tilted arc controversy is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on the tilted arc controversy, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on the tilted arc controversy will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!