The Controversial Installation Of The Tilted Arc, By Richard Serra
The Controversial Installation
There are several meanings for the term, "art". Art comes in many different forms, like paintings, sculptures, poetry, film, etcetera. It serves as a vessel for storytelling and projects the relationship between man and its surroundings by utilizing their vision and creativity. Unfortunately, society at times fails to understand the meaning and rejects it. There was one particular installation that surprisingly caused controversy. The piece was called the, "Tilted Arc", constructed by the minimalist sculptor Richard Serra. The location of where the installation was placed caused tension and debate. I believe that the installation should have not triggered such a hostile reaction, because he was a noteworthy artist …show more content…
His medium mainly consisted of sheet metal. Countries all over the world requested him to create sculptures for their plazas as well. According to Artspace.com, "His works have been at exhibited the Venice Biennale and the Whitney Biennial, as well as at numerous institutions including the Guggenheim Museum, the Museum of Modern Art, and the Metropolitan Museum". He was selected by the panel from the U.S. GSA, and the commissioned the piece. He was chosen out of the many artists who were also prominent in the early 1980's. Though, the government's investment would cost to construct the sculpture was $175,000, they had faith in Serra to create a piece for the Federal Foley Plaza in New York City. The plaza is in the center of New York City's most powerful. The plaza consists of the Supreme Court, FBI authorities, headquarters of the NYPD, etc. My point here is that they had knowledge of his previous works and had some notion of what the finished result would be visually or else they would not have hired him to carry out this …show more content…
The reaction that the sculpture received was unexpected. He did not anticipate controversy that would soon come. He believed the outcome would be quite the opposite, and that the public would be in total awe. When the Tiled Arc was completed, people were surprisingly irate. WNYC.com stated, "Two months after its installation, a petition requesting the removal of the sculpture was signed by 1,300 federal employees working in and around the plaza". The workers thought of the piece as rubbish, and that it was hazardous and could attract terrorists. In my opinion, I believe their view is ludicrous. What would be the difference if it were an enormous eagle made out of steel or something of that nature? They would have not blinked an eye. The dilemma here is that these people do not grasp the concepts of art. Their interests lie in politics, law enforcement, etcetera. According to Serra, " This is the point, "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes". Unfortunately, the viewers did not visualize it in that aspect. I think this situation is ironic, because American's always preach about free will and free speech but yet when others put out something into society they reject it
There are several meanings for the term, "art". Art comes in many different forms, like paintings, sculptures, poetry, film, etcetera. It serves as a vessel for storytelling and projects the relationship between man and its surroundings by utilizing their vision and creativity. Unfortunately, society at times fails to understand the meaning and rejects it. There was one particular installation that surprisingly caused controversy. The piece was called the, "Tilted Arc", constructed by the minimalist sculptor Richard Serra. The location of where the installation was placed caused tension and debate. I believe that the installation should have not triggered such a hostile reaction, because he was a noteworthy artist …show more content…
His medium mainly consisted of sheet metal. Countries all over the world requested him to create sculptures for their plazas as well. According to Artspace.com, "His works have been at exhibited the Venice Biennale and the Whitney Biennial, as well as at numerous institutions including the Guggenheim Museum, the Museum of Modern Art, and the Metropolitan Museum". He was selected by the panel from the U.S. GSA, and the commissioned the piece. He was chosen out of the many artists who were also prominent in the early 1980's. Though, the government's investment would cost to construct the sculpture was $175,000, they had faith in Serra to create a piece for the Federal Foley Plaza in New York City. The plaza is in the center of New York City's most powerful. The plaza consists of the Supreme Court, FBI authorities, headquarters of the NYPD, etc. My point here is that they had knowledge of his previous works and had some notion of what the finished result would be visually or else they would not have hired him to carry out this …show more content…
The reaction that the sculpture received was unexpected. He did not anticipate controversy that would soon come. He believed the outcome would be quite the opposite, and that the public would be in total awe. When the Tiled Arc was completed, people were surprisingly irate. WNYC.com stated, "Two months after its installation, a petition requesting the removal of the sculpture was signed by 1,300 federal employees working in and around the plaza". The workers thought of the piece as rubbish, and that it was hazardous and could attract terrorists. In my opinion, I believe their view is ludicrous. What would be the difference if it were an enormous eagle made out of steel or something of that nature? They would have not blinked an eye. The dilemma here is that these people do not grasp the concepts of art. Their interests lie in politics, law enforcement, etcetera. According to Serra, " This is the point, "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes". Unfortunately, the viewers did not visualize it in that aspect. I think this situation is ironic, because American's always preach about free will and free speech but yet when others put out something into society they reject it