ONE PLACE AFTER ANOTHER - Monoskop

170
Insights/On Sites: Perspectives on Art in Public Places (Washington, D.C.: Partners for
Livable Places, 1984), 62.
3 Rosalyn Deutsche has made an important distinction between an assimilative model of
site specificity—in which the art work is geared toward integration into the existing
environment, producing a unified, “harmonious” space of wholeness and cohesion—
and an interruptive model in which the art work functions as a critical intervention in the
existing order of a site through some sort of disruption. See her essays “Tilted Arc and
the Uses of Public Space,” Design Book Review 23 (Winter 1992): 22–27; and “Uneven
Development: Public Art in New York City,” October 47 (Winter 1988): 3–52. For more
on this distinction in the context of public art, see chapter 3.
4 Michael Fried, “Art and Objecthood” (1967), in Gregory Battcock, ed., Minimal Art: A
Critical Anthology (New York: Dutton, 1968), 116–147.
5 Robert Barry in Arthur R. Rose (pseud.), “Four Interviews with Barry, Huebler, Kosuth,
Weiner,” Arts Magazine (February 1969): 22.
6 Richard Serra, letter to Donald Thalacker dated January 1, 1985, as published in Clara
Weyergraf-Serra and Martha Buskirk, eds., The Destruction of Tilted Arc: Documents
(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991), 38. See chapter 3 for more on the Tilted Arc controversy.
7 Richard Serra, “Tilted Arc Destroyed,” Art in America 77, no. 5 (May 1989): 34–47.
8 The controversy over Tilted Arc obviously involved other issues besides the status of
site specificity, but, in the end, site specificity was the term upon which Serra hung his
entire defense. Despite his defeat, the legal definition of site specificity still remains
unresolved and continues to be grounds for many juridical conflicts. For a discussion
concerning legal questions in the Tilted Arc case, see Barbara Hoffman, “Law for Art’s
Sake in the Public Realm,” in W. J. T. Mitchell, ed., Art in the Public Sphere (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1991), 113–146. Thanks to James Marcovitz for discussions
concerning the legality of site specificity.
9 See Hal Foster’s seminal essay “The Crux of Minimalism,” in Howard Singerman, ed.,
Individuals: A Selected History of Contemporary Art 1945–1986 (Los Angeles: Museum of
Contemporary Art, 1986), 162–183. See also Craig Owens, “From Work to Frame, or, Is
There Life After ‘The Death of the Author’?,” in Scott Bryson et al., eds., Beyond Recog-
nition: Representation, Power, and Culture (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1992), 122–139.