Kw-logo-smaller

Art Inspired by September 11

It's been years since the World Trade Towers fell on September 11, 2001, but many people are still trying to deal with the devastation. Some people have decided to deal with their grief - like New York artist, Eric Fischl - through art, music or other creative expression. But where do we draw the line on what's art and what's just plain offensive?

Eric Fischl is the artist responsible for the sculpture Tumbling Woman displayed in Rockefeller Center in New York. Tumbling Woman is supposed to be representative of all those people who either jumped or fell from the Trade Towers. The sculpture drew a ton of criticism and was soon hidden behind curtains and then removed. While some people say this art project was incredibly insensitive, Eric Fischl stands by his sculpture.

"The sculpture was not meant to hurt anybody," Fischl said in a statement. "It was a sincere expression of deepest sympathy for the vulnerability of the human condition. Both specifically towards the victims of Sept. 11 and towards humanity in general."

A similar art display also caused controversy at the Jamaica Center for Arts in New York. This time it was a project of Sharon Paz's. The display, called Falling, was made up of cutouts of falling bodies of various shapes and forms stuck to the windows of the gallery. The piece was supposed to stay up until October 1, 2002 but was taken down on September 23, 2002 after complaints from staff and patrons.

Both artists claim to be trying to help the people of New York heal with these art projects. But how does a statue of a naked woman falling to her death help anyone? Wouldn't it be better to celebrate those people's lives in a less graphic, less morbid way? I'm sure those people do not want to be remembered for their less than glorious end.

The Pentagon chose a piece of artwork titled "Freedom" by Kerry Swank in light of September 11th. Her piece was made five months before the attacks on the Trade Towers but its subject is a perfect example of what the people of America should be celebrating and remembering about the United States.

Have Your Say

Here's what Kidzworld member Brian had to say: "I don't think that it should have been removed. You ask how "Tumbling Woman" can help anyone and wouldn't it be better to celebrate in a less morbid way? You're missing the point of the sculpture. It demonstrates human fragility and confronts tragedy head on. We can't just close our eyes and forget about 9/11. Doing so would just be burying more denial about the tragedy. Art shouldn't just be about the good stuff in life; the bad exists, too. The purpose of art is to portray one's thoughts or reactions (in this case, to the attacks), and the sculpture does just that. It surprises me that it was removed for being too effective."

What do you think about these art pieces? Should they have been removed or kept on display? Add your comment below!

Related Stories
144 Comments

latest videos

F1033084741265

9-11 Artwork: Offensive or Not?

  • Yes.
  • No.
  • I'm undecided.

related stories

Micro_greektv_micro
Kidzworld hung out on set with the cast of Greek to get their fun and useful back-to-school tips....
Micro_literacy_micro
September 8 is International Literacy Day. Seems pretty fitting, since kids around the world are ...
Micro_patriot_micro
This day is to honor all those who lost their lives in the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center...

Random in the forums

ZackZakir147
ZackZakir147 posted in General:
i met a girl recently by days passed we became lovers... she eventually asks why do you love me. i don't have any reason but o love her so much. so is the reason important ? :confused
reply 21 minutes
vanillatwilightguy
-arrogant -childish -introverted -sensitive -footballer -insomniac -hoot owl -belieber -quantum mechanics (interest) -luv romantic comedies
reply 22 minutes
deadguy
deadguy posted in General:
Banned for having jelly in your name. Jelly goes in sandwiches not usernames (;.
reply 28 minutes
Anthani3
Anthani3 posted in Debating:
Plus How is it not discriminating when you are allowed to not except a customer because of how they feel about the person. I smell Discrimination. 
reply about 1 hour
Anthani3
Anthani3 posted in Debating:
"Teh_Skittlez" wrote: "TheEnd777" wrote: This OP is biased. The law is NOT about discrimination it is about religious freedom. Why should a caterer or a florist be forced to serve for a wedding that they believe is wrong and immoral according to their religion? Doesn't that violate their freedoms?  No, we already decided this in the Civil Rights era, when the argument was about interracial marriage and segregation instead of gay marriage, and the same arguments were being used by the racists; why should a religious business owner with genuinely held convictions that he believes are religiously inspired be required to serve a black man? Surely, he should be able to deny service to those he believes wrong and immoral according to his religion? Wouldn't it violate his freedoms to force him to serve people of other races?   Or do you see the problem?  Thank you I have had to use that on so many people
reply about 1 hour

play online games