Object-hood’s Indecencies: Tilted Arc and the Lessons Learnt in Breakdown

Open Philosophy 2 (1):206-210 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay looks to re-evaluate sculptor Richard Serra’s famous claim that “to remove the work is to destroy it.” Using OOO, and particularly Graham Harman’s interpretation of Martin Heidegger’s tool analysis, in order to analyze the now famous moment when Tilted Arc was de-installed from Federal Plaza, Manhattan in 1989, this paper argues that the work was not in fact destroyed but rather that its ontological autonomy was even more absolutely revealed in that moment as such. Although it is the case that art objects and sites are prone to discursive co-construction and evaluation, it is this analysis’ claim that they both are possessive of a deep, substantive form also, a form resistant to appropriation. Tilted Arc therefore revealed something even more insidious and dangerous to those who opposed it than the power of art to speak back to its surroundings. Rather, it uncovered the substantive objecthood of the site itself.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-08-03

Downloads
22 (#972,197)

6 months
7 (#706,906)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Emma Dickson
Heriot-Watt University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Materialism is Not the Solution: On Matter, Form, and Mimesis.Graham Harman - 2015 - Nordic Journal of Aesthetics 24 (47):94-110.

Add more references