Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

Roberley Bell

Public Art Public Spaces

"Argument for keeping Richard Serra's Title Arc"

Kelvin Patterson

Tilted Arc should have stayed

Tilted Arc was commissioned by the Arts-in-Architecture program of the U.S. General Service

Administration to be installed in the Federal Plaza in New York City. The sculpture is the work of

renowned minimalist artist Richard Serra whose work of art has been known for producing provocative

reaction from the public and the art community at large. Richard Serra's sculpture was not meet with

some criticism. The loan wolf in the campaign to dismantle the Titled Arc was Judge Edward Re who

wanted to have the Arc relocated. This of course was met with resistance from the artist and a

percentage of the public as the fought to prevent the removal of the controversial art installation.

Because of outcry from Judge Edward Re, William Diamond the U.S. General Service Administration

regional administrator held a public hearing for the purpose of establishing whether or not Richard

Serra sculpture should be relocated. This hearing lasted about four years and ended in March 1985. At

the time of the hearing, testimony was heard by 180 people. Of that number only 122 were in favour of

having the sculpture retain its address on the plaza of the Federal building and these were all members

of the general public. While the remaining 58 people who advocated for the relocation of the sculpture

were members of the public who worked in the building. The arguments presented for the removal of

the sculpture was that it interfered with public use of the plaza; presents a canvas for graffiti and could

be used by terrorist as a blast wall for bombs. Needless to say, that as silly as these arguments were,

they were enough for the five member jury to vote four to one in favour of removing the sculpture.
In the mists of all the controversy surrounding the Tilted Arc, what was most unfortunate in the whole

debacle was the injustice that was done to the community of artist who are normally commissioned for

such work. The arguments that were presented in support of removing the Titled Arc were opinion

based and had little or no merit. Further more the General Service Administration was in breach of its

contract the moment they when ahead with the relocation of Serra's art work.

If there is outcry every-time the public dislikes a display of public art or every time they don't

understand its meaning, then there would be no art to appreciate in the public realm. Public art should

be allowed to exist the way the artist intended. With regards to the Titled Arc, the General Service

Administration knew what they were getting from the beginning of the process and if they did not like

it should have found a different artist to create something they would have all be happier with, without

being disrespectful and condescending.

At the end of the day, the decision was a premature one. Sad to say Richard Serra's art work never

really had a fair chance to be fully appreciated by the public for whom it was created. Never the less,

despite of the removal of the sculpture, to date it is probably the most well known of Serra's work

simply because of the its notoriety.

Citations:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints/visualarts/tiltedarc_a.html

http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/martin/art_law/tilted_arc.htm

Potrebbero piacerti anche