Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorBrent D. Ryan.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEarl, Samantha Cen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.coverage.spatialn-us-nyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-03-01T15:22:58Z
dc.date.available2012-03-01T15:22:58Z
dc.date.copyright2011en_US
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/69530
dc.descriptionThesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 2011.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 142-148).en_US
dc.description.abstractThis thesis explores the relationship between urban planning and public art, and questions the efficacy of past and current models, whilst pushing us to develop new ones. It strives to glean the most salient issues universal to all instances of public art, and uses four case studies to illuminate such issues in practice. Tilted Arc by Richard Serra and Metronome by Jones and Ginzel adhere to a conventional model of public art - an object in a public space, commissioned by a small group of "experts," with an essentially passive role accorded to audience. The Gates and the work of artist Mierle Laderman Ukeles emphasize ephemerality, integration and participation. While vastly different from one another, the latter two also strive to engage more directly with urban planning and political processes. Tilted Arc is the watershed public artwork, and sets the stage upon which the other three case studies unfold. Within the context of New York City's neoliberal transformation, this thesis seeks to situate public art's role in the process, capping the story with The Gates in 2005. With modernist notions of public art losing relevance, this thesis argues that unrealistic expectations are still all-too-often placed on public art, using vestigial notions of the relationship between artist and audience. Simultaneously such outdated ideas undermine the potential for us as urban planners and public art producers to find new ways of working together in the service of cities that are "revitalized, cosmopolitan, just and democratic."' Instead this thesis argues that we deconstruct concepts of form, process, and audience/intention, and reconstitute new models for public art in our cities. Optimistically I argue that such thinking is already underway in cities like New York. It is fundamental that we consider how to refine and consolidate what is working for public art, and integrate such aspects into urban planning and policy from the outset. With both public art and urban planning at a crossroads, the potential exists to think and act boldly as we move forward. Professional silos need to be regularly challenged - collaboration will be the most important ingredient needed to redefine and shape the trajectory of public art in the 21st century.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Samantha C. Earl.en_US
dc.format.extent148 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectUrban Studies and Planning.en_US
dc.titleThe tilted trajectory of public art : New York City, 1979 - 2005en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeM.C.P.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Urban Studies and Planning
dc.identifier.oclc774908413en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record