Heba Hasan wrote an article ” 10 of the Most Controversial Pieces Of Public Art" (2012) to show readers what controversial public art is. Generally, a piece of public art has become arguable somehow it is hard to be accepted by the public. Through a history of public art, the article shows readers a more complete idea of controversial public art.
P.S. All pictures are belonged to Flavor Wire Cultural News And Critique.
Richard Serra, Tilted Arc (1989), New York
John Ahearn, The South Bronx Bronzes (1988), New York
Seward Johnson, Forever Marilyn (2011), Chicago
David Hammons, How Ya Like Me Now? (1988), Washington DC
Lei Yikin, Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial (2011), Washington DC
David Černý, Nation to Itself (2002), Prague
Maurice Agis, Dreamspace V (2006), County Durham, England
Guerilla Girls, Do Women Have to be Naked to get into the Met. Museum? (1990), New York
Victor Pasmore, Apollo Pavilion (1969), County Durham, England
Gran Fury, Kissing Doesn’t Kill (1989), New York, Chicago, and DC
I do not know if you have the same feeling with me. To some degree, most of them are good ideas, and I appreciate some ideas from these 10 art works. Besides, I believe that artists wants to express some realization through their works, but it is hard for majority of people to accept these ideas (which are too bare) although they may be truth. As a result, I have an interesting idea for public art. Would they observe dramatically different results if they were displayed in a different time?