This article attempts to identify and examine the major legal (state and federal), political, sociological, and aesthetic issues involved in the commissioning of public art, and to suggest ways of accommodating the various interests so as to manage those controversies that may occur.
Recent controversies about the commissioning, installation, and maintenance of public art - especially sculpture - have raised a number of issues, but resolved few of these. In some cases, public outcry has prevented a work from being installed or has contributed to its redesign. In other cases, opposition has rapidly quieted as the once-offended public has come to accept, even to enthusiastically champion, the previously detested work. Each instance has been seen as essentially idiosyncratic, hence few commonalities have been discerned to provide guidelines for future commissions and installations, although commissioning agencies have adjusted their procedures in response to mistakes and controversies.
This article attempts to identify and examine the major legal (state and federal), political, sociological and aesthetic issues involved in the commissioning of public art, and to suggest ways of accommodating the various interests so as to manage those controversies that may occur.
CONTENTS
The case of Tilted Art.
Private and Historical Models as commissioning public art.
Alternative contemporary models: The NEA and the GSA.
Recent GSA controversies.
Unresolved issues.
The management of Public Controversy: The lessons of Tilted Arc.
This article attempts to identify and examine the major legal (state and federal), political, sociological, and aesthetic issues involved in the commissioning of public art, and to suggest ways of accommodating the various interests so as to manage those controversies that may occur.
