Eng 102-11 - Controversial Art

Brittany J. Brown

Professor Slabaugh

English 102-11

12 April 2017

“Research Paper”

         Why is the art of sculpture so controversial? Being an artist myself I have come across this question more than the average person. Controversial art has always been a concern and an interest of mine due to the fact that I have watched and heard about other artists being criticized due to their art not meeting the expectations of the audience or because their work may offend the audience. I have taken this topic upon myself to write about and study because I realize that as an artist I could and very much will have my art criticized one day. Now, I may be criticized differently due to being a photographer not a sculptor but controversial art is still controversial art. Researching this subject has helped me become aware of why the audience or viewers of art have come to find specific pieces of art so controversial. This is so helpful due to gaining a new understanding of the rhetoric being used to communicate. Where the communication is between the artist and the viewer by displaying works of art. I have found that within these conversations there are a few misconceptions picked up by the audience which makes the art become controversial. I believe that the convenience of the sculpture to the audience, the content of the sculpture and whether the artists meaning is either explicitly stated or implied factors on the sculpture becoming controversial.

The first supporting fact I have come to find in my research is the fact that the art works of sculpture must be of convenience to the audience. While researching to find examples to support this claim I found the Tilted Arc, as seen pictured to the right. The Tilted Arc was designed and sculpted by Richard Serra to be located in front of the Federal Plaza. This sculpture was designed to be in a specific spot and specific space which depended on the context and layout of this plaza. This kind of art work is called “site specific”. The ideal purpose behind this sculpture was for it to be tilted so the audience, as they were walking by, would become aware of their changing viewpoint and perspective and become aware of their movement. [pic 1][pic 2]

Now that a little bit of the background story has been stated we can move onto why this sculpture became so controversial. In Greg Horowitz article, “Public Art/Public Space: The Spectacle of the Tilted Arc Controversy.” he gives recognition to why this sculpture became so controversial. Horowitz states that:

“Tilted Arc was removed from Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan. Because Tilted Arc was designed specifically for, and so in part, derived its identity from, its site, its expulsion from Federal Plaza was at the same time its destruction…not only does it make the Plaza less effective as a public space, it also makes it a possibly dangerous place to be when a large number of people congregate at once.”.

 After reading through this entire article it was very clear that this sculpture was removed because people did not like the fact that they had to walk around this sculpture when they could have it removed and have a “greater” use of this Plaza. This goes to prove that the sculptures must be of convenience to the audience and displayed in a way that they approve of not necessarily how the artist wants it displayed.

As an artist, after reading this and finding out this information I am left shocked. The people of this world have placed art to be in such a high demand. Yet, when artists unveil their work the audience studies the art and tries to pin point anything they can to make it seem wrong or unfit which then makes the art work controversial. Sculpture is especially seen to be found more controversial due to it not being so commonly used or displayed. This puts so much pressure on the artist to make everything perfect and acceptable when viewed by the audience. In the end, I am left with the questions “If the audience themselves could create a sculpture based on what they want or what they think is appropriate, would they still have a problem with their own sculpture? Would their own sculpture become controversial?”. This then leads me to my next point. Not only does the convenience of the sculpture weigh on becoming controversial but so does the content of the sculpture.

Content of a sculpture can be easily taken out of context. Content is pretty self- explanatory. For example, it is what an object is made of or what it is depicting. A perfect example of sculpture being taken out of context due to its content is seen with the monumental Marilyn sculpture known as Forever Marilyn by Seward Johnson, as seen pictured to the left. This sculpture was made to stand out on Chicago’s Magnificent Mile so the audience can easily see her from afar yet can easily have access to Marilyn. The original meaning and purpose of this sculpture was to, “rekindle an attitude and optimism from an era that this iconic figure represents – a time when we, as a nation and a people, were proud, productive, optimistic and self-assured, if a bit mischievous. We seek a return to American Exceptionalism, and trust Marilyn will propel our attitudes in the right direction,” as stated by Paul Zeller, who commissioned this work of art. The controversy of this sculpture comes from the monumental size of Forever Marilyn. Due to her overexaggerated size she now stands twenty- six feet tall. That is twenty- six feet of pure opportunity to make this piece of art controversial, and that is exactly what the audience did. Pictures started to be taken with viewers looking up Marilyn’s skirt as well as pictures being taken that look directly up her skirt. Even though this version of Marilyn is a sculpture, the audience took matters into their own hands and completely invaded her sense of privacy as well as accomplishing the fact that this sculpture became controversial. [pic 3][pic 4]