• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Guy YedwabPower (Exercise #6) Ngugi, a Kenyan, discusses public art as the struggle performance of power between the artistand the state. The situation he describes in Kenya cleanly fits into that dichotomy. Unfortunately,standing in the middle of the Doris Freedman Plaza on the edge of Central Park, I'm having a littletrouble buying that same line of reasoning.In the middle of the tiny Doris Freedman Plaza is a work of art named
2001
. It is a beautiful,iridescent cube-sphere sitting modestly across the street from the more elaborate Grand Army Plaza,whose pride is
General Sherman
.
General Sherman
is clearly a performance of power: it wascommissioned at the end of the Civil War to commemorate one of the main victors of the Civil War. Itwas he who crushed much of the Southern resistance to the American government. Even the name of the plaza reflects the power of the government: Grand Army plaza.So what does the abstract
2001
represent? It certainly does not uphold the order thegovernment, except possibly by not being interventionalist, as Kwon would put it. In one way, it seemsto affirm the world around it—it is not glaringly incongruous, nor does it contain a biting socialcommentary. On the other hand, by its beauty and its modesty, it seems to upstage the display of power  by the government.In truth, it simply seems to be more relatable than the performance of government power inGrand Army Plaza. Even to the modern day patriot, General Sherman's March to the Sea is no longer the prideful event it once was; now that the South is part of America, we can't help but sympathize withthe destruction of their homes, the destruction of Atlanta. On the other hand,
2001
is contemporary, isattractive (as opposed to the corroding
General Sherman
). In a way, it seems to point out
General Sherman
's flaws subtly, without having to interrupt the lives of the everyday in the way that
 
Kwondescribes
Tilted Arc
having done. In truth, it is more like the gently subversive sculptures by TomOtterness at the 14
th
St. Subway Station, without being quite as obvious.
 
So perhaps, in that gentle nudge of playfulness, the power of the artist is gently asserting itself.But a look beneath the surface makes the power of the artist appear even more boldly.
2001
is in a plaza called Doris Freedman Plaza. Doris Freedman is the founders of the Public Art Fund, a New York non-profit organization which fights for the rights of the artists. In a way, it is a union of New York artists, representing their rights to public spaces, which Ngugi describes the government as wanting tocontrol. Has the government been opposed to that? Not exactly—Mayor Michael Bloomberg has beenopen and hospitable to the Public Art Fund. As a conservative, he tends to believe that the private sector (in this case, the artists themselves) don't need government support, but on the other hand, in terms of  public art, he has not put up a fight to their being constructed. In fact, he invited the Public Art Fund tocommission a piece of art in City Hall Park.On the other hand, the Public Art Fund is falling into gap left by the National Endowment of theArts—its government counterpart. Ever since the Reagan administration, the NEA has been cut back severely, and as Kwon observes, they have been slowly tightening up the sorts of art which areconsidered acceptable for funding. The NEA has been notorious for cutting off funding to artists whouse the money for controversial tasks, whether insulting religion or abusing government, or creatingworks which are seemingly lacking in merit.Of course, there certainly is no war between the Public Art Fund and the NEA. It is simply thatthe NEA does not sponsor certain artists, but for the most part, the government does not control the public spaces to the point of excluding. The government seems to be a patron of the arts in New York— all the money they have poured into revitalizing Broadway is a sure sign of that. Nowhere in the UnitedStates can you see as much art in the public sphere as in New York.In a way, the vitality of art in public spaces seems to be as much a performance of power astheir own commissioned works. It is a shrewd city which realizes that people will appreciate the citymore if artists are given somewhat of a free reign. While the city does not always give that free reign asmuch as the artist would desire, the gap between Michael Bloomberg and the post-colonial government
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...