The charging bull sculpture, sculpted by Arturo Di Modica, on Wall street is a very well-known piece. Earlier this year there was another sculpture placed in front of the charging bull called, "Fearless Girl", sculpted by Kristen Visbal. This sculpture being placed in front of the charging bull has caused some major controversy. Some believe that the fearless girl sculpture needs to be taken down because it takes away from the meaning behind the original sculpture. Others believe that the fearless girl sculpture should be kept because it sends a good message out there for women. The fearless girl sculpture should be evaluated because of the controversy it has caused. Once they evaluate the sculpture they can make a final decision whether they …show more content…
There is a lot of criteria needed to evaluate both sculptures. The criteria needed to evaluate the fearless girl sculpture includes, the meaning behind why it was built, why the sculpture was placed in front of the charging bull and if it effects the meaning behind the charging bull sculpture. The criteria needed to evaluate the charging bull sculpture is very similar to the criteria needed for the fearless girl sculpture. Why was the charging bull sculpture built? Is the meaning behind it destroyed with the fearless girl sculpture being placed in front of it? With all of this criterion being used to evaluate these sculptures it will be able to determine whether or not the sculpture stays or goes.
The charging bull sculpture was built after the 1987 stock market crash. Arturo Di Modica's purpose behind the sculpture was to symbol strength and power in American people. Kristen Visbal's purpose behind the sculpture and its location is to show women to be fearless and stand up against sexual harassment and gender discrimination. The fearless girl sculpture needs the charging bull for its purpose to be visible. Without the charging bull, fearless girl just looks like a confident