Throughout history, art has caused controversy. From Michelangelo’s n*de David to the Detroit Industry fresco painted by Diego Rivera, outcries from the public have led to modifications of art and even its destruction.

In 1981, American artist Richard Serra completed a work of art that caused a stir for nearly eight years. He was commissioned by the General Services Administration to create a public sculpture for the Federal Building in New York City. He was paid $175,000 of public funding for which he created a curved wall of steel—120 feet long and 12 feet high.

Graffiti artists tagged the sculpture and many employees found it inconvenient to have to walk around the sculpture prior to entering the building. It was recommended that the sculpture be moved; however, Serra stated that it was site-specific (designed and constructed for a certain location) and did not agree. During a public hearing in 1985, the panel voted 4-1 to have the sculpture removed, and after Serra’s appeal was denied, the sculpture was destroyed in 1989.

Conduct further research about controversy in art and make a determination about the role government should play in art. Should they use public funds (money generated by taxpayers) to pay for artwork? Who should determine what constitutes a quality work of art? Post a discussion in the appropriate forum and respond to at least two of your classmates. Do you agree with their comments? Why or why not?