| The controversies that regularly meet public art projects and museum exhibitions as well as the embattlement of public funding for the arts have made apparent that we have to re-examine the function of art and the responsibility of artists and art administrators working in the public realm. These disputes are more than questions about what kind of art is appropriate for display in public spaces. They indicate the disappearance of a genuine public sphere and, simultaneously, point to the need for critical dialogue concerning diverse cultural values and needs. In recent years, a subcategory of public art has emerged, which not only problematizes its relationship to the public realm, but also explores the possibility of generating a public sphere of critical interaction through art.;To clarify the complex relationship of art to the public realm and the potential of generating critical debate through art, this dissertation turns to Jurgen Habermas's conception of the public sphere and communicative action. Specifically, this dissertation argues that his theories provide a critical methodology that lends support to current public art practices. Habermas's analysis of the public sphere unmasks the discourses of power operative in that realm. While his theory of communicative action establishes the conditions that make mutual understanding possible. His concept of the public sphere, then, offers a critical model that elucidates the relationship between culture and the socio-political domain. As such, it is helpful in clarifying how public art functions in the public realm and, simultaneously, betrays facile interpretations and misrepresentations of public art. While other theoretical models, such as urban geography, urban sociology, or Foucault's theory of power, are useful in identifying the discourses that shape the public realm, they do not suggest how to resist or transform them. However, Habermas's analysis of the public sphere and communicative action provide a model that goes beyond mere ideology critique. They offer a means for reclaiming the emancipatory promise of the public sphere, that is, its role as arbiter of collective action. At the same time, they indicate the role art that moves into the public realm can play in this effort. |
