Antagonism/ Agonism and Art as Ecology

Antagonism/ Agonism:

There are several controversies surrounding Richard Serra’s Tilted Arc (1981). Serra’s essay “Art and Censorship” (1991) highlights an often undiscussed aspect of public art: political rhetoric shrouded by the guise of ownership over a work. While Serra brings up valid points about who owns a work commissioned by a government or independent agency, the artist also implies the meaninglessness of legislation adopted by a government when a key aspect of the Act is intentionally omitted. The focus on the omission of the moral rights clause in the U.S. adaptation of the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 raises more questions about government enforced censorship in a nation that claims freedom of speech and expression as a founding idea. At the same time, once ownership is established, why would an artwork’s creator be allowed a say in what happens to the work? In this instance, control and ownership rights battle over aesthetic appeal, contractual obligations, and First Amendment rights. Without knowing the exact wording of the General Services Administration (GSA) Art-in-Architecture contract for the funds awarded to Serra, I am unable to speculate as to whether one should override the other.

Similarly, in Michael Brenson’s article, “The Messy Saga of ‘Tilted Arc’ Is Far From Over” (1989), the author attempts to balance between both sides of the argument. Brenson states the GSA is not an independent agency and the sculpture was doomed before the first complaint arose because the regional administrator and the 1985 Tilted Arc open hearing chairman, Mr. Diamond, did not like the work. Furthermore, Brenson states three-fifths of the hearing’s panel were the chairman’s appointees, implying an automatic bias built into the panel by Mr. Diamond. The 1988 Court of Appeals ruling resolves some questions about owership, yet opens more concerns about the censorship to which Serra (1991) refers in his essay. Both Serra and Brenson indicate art that is generally palatable to “the community” (Serra,1991; Brenson, 1989) is less likely to confront the public in a way that makes artists think three or four times before deciding to apply for government funding for a public work and homogenize the ideas presented to a diverse community.

Art as Ecology:

The works of Revival Field (Mel Chin, 1991- ongoing), Neukom Vivarium (Mark Dion, 2006), and The Farm by the Freeway (Crossroads Community or The Farm, 1974-1987) present different views of art as ecology. In Revival Field, Chin revives contaminated land by extracting heavy metals through hyperaccumulator plants in an ecologically-friendly form of remediation. Similarly, The Farm by the Freeway sought to return natural elements in the middle of an urban setting, growing food crops and teaching the involved community about the importance of caring for the environment. Alternately, Dion’s Neukom Vivarium is a fallen hemlock moved to a new setting, recontextualizing the nurse log through education and a living art system (Art 21, 2006). I say living because while the tree itself died in 1996, there are lifeforms sustained by the decomposing hemlock, bridging a gap between art and science, life and death, renewal and degeneration.