The Shift From the Traditional to the Intangible in Public Art

The curator of Frieze Sculpture, Fatos Üstek, discusses the importance of public sculpture just in time for Frieze week in London. 

The surge in exhibiting art outdoors is not just a trend—it’s a deliberate strategy woven into the inclusive growth plans of local councils and governmental regulations targeting property developers, among many other motivations that include economic prosperity and social wealth. From public commissions by art institutions to place-making initiatives spearheaded by agencies and governments worldwide, showcasing art outdoors has become a dynamic blend of necessity, obligation, and aspiration. This global push reflects a growing recognition of art’s role in shaping vibrant, inclusive public spaces.

The tradition of commissioning artisans to create statues and monuments dates back to prehistoric times, when sculpture first emerged in the open air. Ancient statues and cultural relics, often positioned to mark boundaries or claim territories, were powerful symbols of authority. These works, typically commissioned by emperors and rulers, served a dual purpose: projecting their strength and dominance while embodying cultural myths and values meant to inspire and unify the public. Outdoor sculpture, from its inception, has always been about more than aesthetics—it was a statement of power, identity, and collective belief. The social value of these commemorative representations was tied to their ability to glorify the powerful, immortalizing rulers and heroes in stone and bronze. But art eventually moved beyond the heroic and the elite, as seen in Rodin’s The Burghers of Calais, which shifted the focus from grandiose figures to ordinary citizens in moments of struggle. Sculpture, too, was the first to challenge the very structures that displayed it, questioning the authority of the plinth and the pedestal. This rebellion paved the way for painting to follow suit, with artists like Fontana slashing through the canvas itself, breaking the surface and disrupting traditional modes of representation.

The evolution of public art has shifted from traditional statues and monuments to a more expansive understanding of sculpture within art institutions and the broader cultural landscape. In the expanded field of sculpture, works are no longer static objects to be revered; instead, they serve as dynamic interventions that encourage participation, reflection, and discourse. This democratization of art, influenced by movements like Land Art, has established public art as a vital form of collective engagement, fundamentally reshaping how communities interact with both the artwork and their surrounding spaces. The boundaries of sculpture have eroded, allowing it to engage with the landscape in ways that transform it into architectural, environmental, or discursive elements. 

Fast forward centuries^[1], the strength of the public arena stayed intact across cultures. The possibility and plausibility of collective force has been the dream and nightmare of many governments. Crowds gather to celebrate achievements, to raise a voice against an injustice, to protest the wrongdoings in the world and they do so in public arenas such as squares, grand avenues – simply in (mostly centrally located) open air sites. Public art, in these contexts, serves not just as decoration but as a catalyst for social cohesion, representing collective pride, courage, or resistance. 

So, what happens with public art today? The shift from permanent to temporary installations reflects a growing awareness that nothing is truly lasting—not even the most dominant ideologies or regimes, as history has shown. With this foresight, placing art in the public realm requires an approach that acknowledges impermanence. While statues and monuments still account for a significant share of commissions worldwide, contemporary public art increasingly embraces change, responding to shifting social and political landscapes and engaging with communities in dynamic, temporary ways.

The role of regeneration in reshaping urban areas is often hailed as a vital economic strategy, but it can also have unintended consequences for public art. While touted as a tool for revitalization, the same growth strategies that promise to enhance a community’s identity often end up sidelining the very art they claim to celebrate. Art, intended to enrich public spaces, can be pushed to the periphery, hidden beneath highway tunnels or overshadowed by towering new developments. This contradiction exposes a flaw in regeneration efforts: they prioritize economic gain over cultural preservation, forcing art to adapt to, rather than shape, the changing landscape. If regeneration truly aims to uplift, it must place art at the forefront, not as an afterthought in the shadows of urban expansion.

What about the principle of democratization in art, which asserts that access should be possible for people from all walks of life? This idea fundamentally challenges the traditional hierarchies that have historically positioned art within the realm of the elite and the ruling class. By removing art from these exclusive confines, we create opportunities for diverse voices and perspectives to be heard and represented. 

Democratization of art involves not only the physical accessibility of artworks—placing them in public spaces where anyone can engage with them—but also the conceptual openness of artistic practices. It invites community participation, allowing individuals to contribute to the creative process and share their narratives through various forms of expression. This shift fosters a more inclusive dialogue, where the experiences and identities of marginalized communities can challenge dominant narratives and redefine cultural value. 

Moreover, this principle encourages the development of public art projects that prioritize collaboration, ensuring that local voices are integral to the creation and implementation of artworks. By doing so, we move toward a more equitable art landscape that values participation over prestige, reflecting the diverse fabric of society rather than a singular, elite perspective. Ultimately, the democratization of art transforms public spaces into platforms for shared experiences, making art a collective endeavor that resonates with everyone.

New artistic approaches are reshaping our understanding of public art, moving beyond traditional definitions and challenging preconceived notions of what a sculptural work can be. Contemporary artists have further pushed these boundaries by embracing new media, ephemeral materials, social interactions, and conceptual frameworks that reflect broader cultural and political currents. This transition from Land Art to a more fluid and expanded notion of sculpture represents a radical rethinking of both material and space in the art world, paving the way for the future of art in public contexts. For instance, Theaster Gates’ The Duet, 2024 at Frieze Sculpture offers a third place for sculpture – the one that holds its surroundings into relation. Similarly, Frances Goodman’s Pillars, suggests a visionary crossing that is reminiscent of the act of taking a pill. In this context, Albano Hernández’s work emerges as a porous entity, seamlessly infiltrating the grassy landscape and casting the shadow of the sweetgum tree, defying the conventional expectations of sculpture as a three-dimensional object tethered to human scale. Nika Neelova’s Crude Hints, 2024, employs subtlety in configuring a diorama of London through its materials and colour tones on a two-dimensional mosaic flooring.

These new relationships to sculpture challenge the notion of inanimate objects that impose a cataclysmic relationship with viewers. Instead, works like Inci Eviner’s Materials for Mind Theatre, continuously triangulate a relationship between the fictional, the imagined and the allegorical semblance to reality; Kirstine Roepstorff’s Lightning Rod posit beyond the tangible and visible while building a reception of the reality through knowledges we build. Meanwhile, Anna Boghiguian’s characters Sea and Earth reposition the viewer as an integral part of the artwork’s existence, inviting them to participate in a dynamic interplay of meaning.

Transdisciplinary practices are also gaining prominence, exemplified by Libby Heaney’s exploration of quantum computing and fluctuating realities, which challenges the very nature of perception and existence in the realm of sculpture. Similarly, socially conscious works by artists such as Zanele Muholi, Nathan Coley, Celine Condorelli, and Ashwini Bhat resonate deeply with contemporary issues provoking contemplation rather than overt spectacle.

Furthermore, the traditions and belief systems embedded in sculpture are powerfully articulated in the works of artists like Woody De Othello, Zizipho Poswa, Theresa Chromati and Mohammed Ahmed Ibrahim. Their pieces speak to the complexities of identity and experience, illuminating the bodies of sculpture as vessels of cultural narratives, social traditions and personal history. In this evolving landscape, sculpture is no longer a static object but a living conversation that reflects the intricate relationships between art, viewer, and society.

These artistic practices are dismantling the often invisible divide between art, culture, and the broader public. They also seek to challenge the conventional practice of retrofitting art into public spaces, instead striving to cultivate a sense of ownership and, where possible, a reflection of the communities themselves.

Words by Fatos Üstek

*The title is an appropriation of Richard Hamilton’s famous pop-collage titled “Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so appealing?, 1956.”

---

^[1] In the 17th and 18th centuries, public spaces were often commissioned by monarchs and aristocrats to project power and influence, centralizing gatherings and directing attention toward symbols of authority—statues, monuments, and grand architecture. By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, artists began questioning these traditional roles, shifting public art away from glorifying individuals and toward social engagement and community reflection. Auguste Rodin’s The Burghers of Calais, (1889) is an important example that illustrates this shift not only through its depiction of vulnerability and choice of its subjects but also its reprimand of the use of plinths – that typically elevate figures above the public, symbolizing a more democratic relationship between the artwork and the community. The 20th century, especially after the devastation of two world wars, marked a dramatic transformation in the role of public art. Rather than celebrating nationalism or heroic figures, artists began addressing themes of social justice, collective memory, and critiques of power structures. Public art became a platform for reflecting on the traumas of war, civil rights, displacement, and environmental concerns. Instead of being confined to elite audiences or institutional spaces, it became an egalitarian medium, allowing for civic dialogue and engaging a diverse public.