Public Art Research Paper

1201 Words3 Pages

“Through government partnerships, public art can also transform dull or run-down public spaces and inspire the people who live and work there.” (Source 2) Government funding is beneficial in creating art and can benefit many lives through public art, however, it can also affect the livelihood of artist and sculptors due to the beauty and pure intentions not recognized by the public. For this reason, the City Council should fund artist. When they do fund them however, they should both come to an agreement on the art to be created so there is no dissatisfactory on either part. Government funding is beneficial in creating art and can benefit many lives through public art. With proper funding from the government artist can make works of art that …show more content…

“The process of familiarization brought trouble. Picasso's untitled sculpture proclaimed metamorphosis the chief business of an artist by crossing images of an Afghan dog and a woman. However, the effort at first did not count for much, in part because Chicago's earlier monuments—statues of past leaders—commemorated a different idea: civic achievement. Col. Jack Reilly, the mayor's director of special events, immediately urged removal of the sculpture. Ald. John J. Hoellen went further, recommending that the City Council “deport” the piece and construct in its place a statue of "Mr. Cub . . . Ernie Banks." (Source 3) This is a challenge sometimes common for artist when taxpayers and “important people of the city” feel their money isn’t being spent well and in this case want the statue removed, replaced and even deported due to not seeing the beauty in it. When you are being given money from the government they can have power over you and what you do and that can have many negative affects on an artist because whatever the government makes they can destroy. “In 1832, to commemorate the centennial of George Washington’s birth, the United States Congress commissioned a statue by the sculptor Horatio Greenough. Greenough’s depiction of Washington was …show more content…

For this reason, the City Council should fund artist. When they do fund them however, they should both come to an agreement on the art to be created so there is no dissatisfactory on either part. If an agreement is made between the funder and the artist, both benefit and can get paid. I feel that being funded by the government is good because it can broaden the spand to people that see the art and are impacted by it but, I also see it as bad because since they are funding you many things can go wrong. If they don’t like the art being created they can have it destroyed or even cut the funding off to the artist. That can affect the artist negatively due to the waste of precious time and hard work and also if that was their only means of living and getting by. Due to those negative effects I feel that depending on the situation, receiving money from private funders is better because you are being given money as a donation to support your art rather than being funded where that can be taken

Open Document