Art 111 journal entry #2

In 1981, the government commissioned Richard Serra to create a piece of public art in Federal Plaza in New York City. The result was a 120 foot long, 12 foot high steel wall that was tilted slightly. This work, called Tilted Arc, divided the plaza almost in half. Many people, mostly those who had to work in the plaza, immediately took issue with its inconvenience and appearance. They complained that one had to go way out of one's way to get around the large monument in order to traverse the plaza. There were also complaints that the wall attracted graffiti. Eventually, after several years, a court ruled that the wall had to be removed. Serra argued that the fact that the wall forced people to go out of their was exactly its purpose, and to move it to another location would render it meaningless. I tend to agree with the court's decision in this case. If a work of public art is commissioned with public money, it should appeal to those who in effect payed for it. Most painters wouldn't tell their patron that their opinion of their portrait was unimportant. I feel the same thing goes for public art. Purposeful or not, art created for the masses and paid by for the masses should appeal to the masses. Otherwise you just have a big wall in the middle of a plaza pissing people off as they try to get to work:)