bbc.com
Teessaurus Park Dinosaurs Denied Listed Status
Historic England rejected a bid to grant Grade II listed status to three steel triceratops sculptures in Middlesbrough's Teessaurus Park due to their repainted finish and the artist's lack of national recognition, despite the C20 Society's argument for their significance as a rare major 20th-century public art commission by a female artist.
- What factors led to the rejection of the Grade II listed status for the Teessaurus Park sculptures?
- Middlesbrough's Teessaurus Park's steel triceratops sculptures were denied Grade II listed status by Historic England due to their brightly colored paint and the artist's lack of national recognition. This decision follows a listing bid by the C20 Society amid controversy over council plans to relocate the sculptures. The sculptures, created in the 1970s by Genevieve Glatt, represent a rare major 20th Century public art commission for a female artist.
- How does this decision reflect broader challenges in preserving post-war public art, particularly works by female artists?
- Historic England's rejection highlights the challenges of preserving post-war public art, particularly when balancing local significance with national criteria. The repainting of the sculptures compromised their original aesthetic, and the artist's limited national profile influenced the decision. This case underscores the complexities of evaluating art's historical merit, especially for female artists whose work may not fit traditional notions of national recognition.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of this decision for future preservation efforts and the evaluation criteria for public art?
- The decision not to list the sculptures may impact future preservation efforts for similar public art installations. The emphasis on the artist's national recognition rather than the artwork's unique local significance raises questions about broader criteria for evaluating public art. The repainting, while intended to enhance the park, ultimately worked against the sculptures' listing bid, highlighting a conflict between aesthetic preservation and community engagement.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the rejection of the listing bid as a disappointment, primarily highlighting the C20 Society's perspective and emphasizing the arguments against the decision. While Historic England's reasons are presented, the framing leans towards portraying the rejection as an oversight or misjudgment. The headline itself, "Disappointment as dinosaurs denied listed status," sets a negative tone from the outset.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and descriptive. However, phrases like "enormous disappointment" and "missing the point" convey subjective opinions rather than objective facts. The description of the repainted dinosaurs as compromising "the original austere nature of the art" is a value judgment, implying a preference for a certain aesthetic style. Neutral alternatives could include: Instead of "enormous disappointment," use "significant disappointment" or simply state the fact of disappointment. Instead of "missing the point," use something like "a different perspective" or "an alternative interpretation." Instead of "compromising the original austere nature of the art," consider "altering the original appearance of the artwork."
Bias by Omission
The analysis focuses heavily on Historic England's reasoning for rejecting the listing, but omits perspectives from other stakeholders beyond the C20 Society and the artist's family. The article doesn't explore alternative criteria for assessing the sculptures' significance or consider the broader impact of the decision on public art preservation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by focusing on the conflict between the 'original austere nature' of the art and its current brightly colored paint job, implying that these are mutually exclusive and neglecting the possibility of the art's value residing in its evolution and adaptation to its current context. The article also presents a false dichotomy regarding the artist's national recognition, implying that only nationally recognized artists can create great art.
Gender Bias
The article mentions the artist's gender in relation to the rarity of major public art commissions for women at the time. However, this detail does not appear to influence the overall assessment of the artwork's merit. The focus remains on the artistic merit and historical context, rather than on gender-based assumptions or stereotypes.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights efforts to preserve public art in Middlesbrough's Teessaurus Park, contributing to the aesthetic and cultural value of the community. The debate around the dinosaurs