The current New York City Commissioner of Cultural Affairs, Tom Finkelpearl, not only has extensive experience in museum administration, but also has a background in art and in sculpture. In his introductory essay, Finkelpearl summarizes the evolving attitudes towards public art, as well as the role that the artist, government and architecture play in the relationship with public art. Furthermore, the relationship between artist, institutionalized systems and public site is also questioned and investigated. Exploring the means by which art can interact with constantly changing social, economic, and political forces, Finkelpearl studies the idea that art can exist in a public space, interact with the community, and instigate change. In his introductory chapter he analyzes what it means to create “socially engaged art” and the challenges that the artist or the public may face. The idea that public art and society are continually evolving from each other is highlighted by the use of architecture in the post-World War II era. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay People were abandoning the city for the suburbs in an effort to live the “American Dream.” This consequently created a suburban banality, where architects were no longer invited to design these houses. Through urban renewal projects and the introduction of high modernism, art began to change the city (for better or worse). Through trial and error, the design process began to shift towards user preferences and respond to “community needs.” Michael von Maschzisker said he “spreads the message that the fine arts must be returned to American architecture; that sterility and its handmaiden, monotony, must be banished from our streets." Furthermore, Mierle Laderman Ukeles, who created profoundly unique public art, proved to be a great example in support of Finkelpearl's theory. Before the 1990s, sculpture and public art were limited to simple monuments placed in an open space. Artists like Ukeles have helped redefine “public art,” and now public artists are no longer limited to creating monuments: they can now create their own “square” and create their own urban environments. A new emphasis was placed on the place of public art, which would then mark the art form as “unique” in their environments. Ukeles once mentioned that he did a lot of housework and “now I'll just do these daily maintenance things and bring them to consciousness, expose them as art. ” Being quite radical for the time, Mierle Laderman Ukeles challenged the concept of a site for art. Her artistic performance led her to create her own “public space” which ultimately allowed her to interact with the city in a way that left an impact. Finklepearl writes a compelling thesis, as public art has evolved through many social changes. The definition of “public art,” one might argue, will always change. How audiences resonate and communicate with such art will depend on when and where the artwork takes place. Just as the world has seen change since World War II, the world will continue to see change through the evolution of technology. How will these technological advances affect public art and sculpture? How will they influence the “place” in which art must exist? Finklepearl wrote well about how the past influenced the present and how the artist community got to where it is today, but he doesn't mention what public art will look like in the future. For”.”.