Plop art

. The derisive term was eagerly taken up both by progressives (like Wines) and by conservatives. Progressives were critical of the failure of much public art to take an environmentally-oriented approach to the relationship between public art and architecture. Conservatives liked the term because it suggested something ugly, formless, and meaningless, produced without any real skill or care. The very word "plop" suggested something falling wetly and heavily - extruded, as it were, from the fundament of the art world, and often at public expense.

More recently, defenders of public art funding have tried to reclaim the term. The book "Plop: Recent Projects of the Public Art Fund", celebrates the success of the Public Art Fund in financing many publicly placed works of art over the last few decades, many of which are now beloved, though they may at first have been derided as "ploppings". Several currents or movements in contemporary art, such as environmental sculpture, site-specific art, and land art, counterpose themselves philosophically to "plop art," as well as to traditional public monumental sculpture.

ee also

*James Wines
*Public art
*Public Art Fund
*Environmental sculpture
*Environmental art

References

* Susan K Freedman. [http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/oclc/55954972&tab=holdings?loc=10001#tabs "Plop : recent projects of the Public Art Fund"] (London ; New York : Merrell Publishers in association with Public Art Fund, New York, 2004) ISBN 1858942489; ISBN 1858942470

External links

* [http://www.artlex.com/ Artlex.com]
* [http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/index/bookreport/bookreport8-6-04.asp Artnet.com]