'Charging Bull' sculptor says New York's 'Fearless Girl' statue violates his rights

[Adam]

I don't understand how these things get installed there and how they stay there. I mean, the bull is heavy and stable enough to just be set on the ground and it's not gonna move. But the girl looks like she'd fall over if a pedestrian brushed against her. She must be anchored into the ground somehow. The dog looks small enough that someone could just carry it off if it isn't anchored. And if these things are anchored down, then they can hardly be just stealth installed overnight. This is Wall Street, not some hippie commune. Somebody must control that bit of space. I think if I showed up with a statue and no permission and started pulling up bricks to install my statue, I would expect to be arrested before I could finish the job.

It would only really take two or three bolts to hold down the dog, and Wall Street is pretty desolate at night and on weekends (particularly holiday weekends), so really it wouldn't be that hard to just show up, drill a couple of holes in the concrete/flagstone/whatever it is, sink some bolts, and be gone. Probably could do it in under thirty minutes if you had a couple of people. And there's a good chance that no one would be the least bit wiser until well after it was all over.

That having been said, from the article:

"Fearless Girl” was placed opposite Di Modica’s bull in March for International Women’s Day on a temporary permit — which Mayor Bill de Blasio then extended for 11 months after pressure from women’s groups to keep it around longer.

Based upon that, I would think that this isn't a "rogue" installation, but that this guy did get a permit of some sort for the dog. I can only guess that there must be some sort of city arts commission or something that just rubber-stamped this, or else perhaps they are bound to not deny anyone except for extraordinary reasons. Or, maybe the guy just went to them and made a convincing case. But in any case, my guess is that if this were actually "rogue" then the public works people would have been out there to take it away about 30 minutes after the Post hit newsstands this morning.

[Lady Marva]

Poor dog. It looks like a cat.

[Gingersnap]

What's next?

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk

Good question. Could be anything at this point.

When the The Girl was installed with no input, it set a precedent artistically. It meant that anybody can artistically degrade your installation no questions asked. If you dislike a piece of public art, it's legitimate to mock the art with a permanent installation of your own.

The Pug is an example of this and giving normal people everywhere much amusement. Perhaps someone will install a Dogcatcher next to the Pug or perhaps a CPS employee attempting to remove the Girl to foster care.

Could go in a lot of directions.

[Billy Jingo]

It's not very good at all.

If you are going to be a guerrilla, say something. Hell, random gang tagging says more than that.

[Billy Jingo]

Fearless Girl is being moved.

[Newman]

Fearless Girl is being moved.

All is well. I agree with the bull sculptor (Arturo Di Modica) that the Fearless Girl is an infringement on his statue, just as he argues, but I didn't know he shares a common rascality with Kristen Visbal (Fearless Girl):

That's not the only controversy Fearless Girl has weathered. (And we're not just talking about the cheeky dog statue that was briefly placed as though it were urinating on the girl.)

Some critics, as NPR's Rose Friedman has reported, objected to the idea of depicting American womanhood in the form of a young girl — seeing it as patronizing, rather than progressive.

And the sculptor of Charging Bull was affronted by the addition of the new statue, saying it changed the meaning of his original — making the bull not a symbol of strength, but an ominous villain. He also called the statue an "advertising trick."

Arturo Di Modica installed his Charging Bull sculpture in the financial district in the late 1980s, putting the large statue in place overnight, without a permit.

The bull is now located in Bowling Green Park on Broadway, where the Fearless Girl is currently facing him down.

But that wasn't the bull's first stomping ground. It was first placed on Broad Street, in front of the New York Stock Exchange, which promptly had the statue removed.

As it happens, that's the spot where the Fearless Girl is headed next.

[Gingersnap]

While installing art without a permit is obviously wrong, the Bull seems to have become an iconic and much loved symbol at least for the people who work in that area. I assume the Bull has been legitimized at this point and was when The Fearless Girl was installed.

When she is detached from the Bull, I'd guess that her artistic meaning and relevance will be lost completely. She only has value as a counterpoint to the Bull. A defiant little girl staring up at nothing is probably not going to provoke much interest except from jokers taking selfies.

I was surprised to read that some women objected to the Girl although I get what they disliked about it. I don't think the entire thing really "worked" if more female representation on Wall Street was the point. I'm not sure what would have worked visually.

[Newman]

A defiant little girl staring up at nothing is probably not going to provoke much interest except from jokers taking selfies.

image.jpg

"I want to be a real boy!"

[Gingersnap]

With some welding, she can!

[Celeste Chalfonte]

I like the girl statue. She could easily be defying NYC itself...or its reputation. They could move her to the Bay Area and everyone would assume she's defying Trump. OK, had idea, may return. Hold that thought.

[Frostbit]

They could move her to the Bay Area and everyone would piss on her or lean against her while taking a dump.

There's an app for that.

[Celeste Chalfonte]

There's an app for that.

I'll have you know we appreciate art here. Besides, that's what light poles are for.