Read the article below and then watch a video about a controversial sculpture by Robert Arneson. Post your response: Do you think Arneson's "Portrait of George" should have remained at it's original site? Explain why or why not. (for video click here).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ba499/ba499a4e754cd1f76fd22a92fe7f6bdd79d3bab9" alt=""
"Arneson's Portrait of George departs from the status quo of bland, bronze portrait heads of political leaders that are common in parks and in lobbies of many public buildings. This sculpture is irreverent, colorful, and very large, and the viewer cannot pass by without noticing it. It was the pedestal below the head, however, that caused the greatest controversy. Among the words, bullet holes apparently pierce the column, making a comment on the ubiquity of guns in the United States today. A yellow, phallic Twinkie is prominent. Dan White received a light sentence of voluntary manslaughter for his crimes. His lawyers claimed that he had been unbalanced at the time of the shootings because he had eaten too many Twinkie snack cakes. Many San Franciscans protested the lighter sentence, and there was a night of rioting. Arneson's Portrait of George was a vivid, permanent reminder of the circumstances that surrounded his death, the recent riot, and the tensions in the city. (Margaret Lazzari & Dona Schlesier, "Exploring Art," p. 360. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.)