Wall Street's Charging Bull artist takes issue with Fearless Girl

The Wall Street statue of the Fearless Girl won a permit to spend 11 months in front of the iconic Charging Bull statue. The roughly four-foot statue has become a social media sensation, but the artist behind the bull claims it alters the meaning of his work and infringes on his copyright. Tony Dokoupil reports.

---
Delivered by Charlie Rose, Norah O’Donnell and Gayle King, "CBS This Morning" offers a thoughtful, substantive and insightful source of news and information to a daily audience of 3 million viewers. The Emmy Award-winning broadcast presents a mix of daily news, coverage of developing stories of national and global significance, and interviews with leading figures in politics, business and entertainment. Check local listings for "CBS This Morning" broadcast times.

[towelietowel]

The bull is a sign of prosperity and good economic fortune. That means the girl wants downfall and economic hardships. How powerful, how strong

[AATD]

the girl should be facing the stock exchange building instead of the bull

[kellyb]

It should not be permanent. If the artist of the girl wanted to make her own bull and place it across from the girl in another location, totally okay. But she should not be able to hijack someone else's art, use is as the second element in her art (the girl on her own would not mean half as much), meanwhile altering the message of the other artist's art; that's wrong. What if the bull were moved so its butt were in her face? Obviously it would destroy the meaning, which is exactly what happened here.

[demonwalker]

The message that little girl statue will become, women can usurp another artists work for their own gain and it's acceptable. So insulting, stealing other work and calling it a triumph for women.

[AlC]

The statue represents the arrogance of youth.

[PWarHawk]

The woman artist who created Fearless Girl doesn't know how to respect other artists and the art itself. People who aren't artist could be pleased by this performance and be motivated by the message, I think that is good for them. But, as an artist myself, It would be terrible when someone tweaks the meaning of my work to fulfill his or hers.

[cafeta]

they could have put the statue anywhere... why in from of the bull??? just BS!

[nottoblame]

How about someone making a statue of a bear ( bear market ) about to grab her from behind? Lets see if her artist thinks it has changed the meaning of her statue,

[richlaw]

We can all agree that she doesnt belong on wall street.

[cbrahmar]

Symbolicly if they wanted to achieve something positive they could have made the girl ride the bull. Women power enhances the bullish ride on Wall Street.

[patrickmccarron]

This ruins a great piece of art.  The Running Bull is the second most popular statue in New York City.  What is next?  Let's put a machine gun in the arms of the Statue of Liberty.  How about we paint a mustache on Mona Lisa?

[kotk]

i find it funny that without the bull, no one would care about FG

[juanalonso]

Why don’t they turn the girl statue away from the bull. Or move it to another location .

[jake]

Shows us that feminism is destroying our forward approach

[_Brennus]

Total disrespect for the artist's creation.

[yoleeisbored]

should just put it next to the bull if the majority dont want it removed. the bull represents good fortune and prosperity

[mrdoggo]

Threaten to take your bull, then she's got nothing to complain about, just like in real life

[benhahn]

I have no problem with the idea of fearless women, although I find it a bit ridiculous. I think it undermines the idea that women are capable in the first place. Do they really need a statue to represent them. But that's not the main problem I have with the statue. First of all the meaning is completely misguided. No one in their right mind would assume she is brave for taking a bull head on. That seems more like stupidity to me. Plus considering the bulls meaning, it can be assumed that the girl is standing in the face of economic success. However, above all I think it's just not moral to keep it there. The original artist is spot on in saying it changes the meaning of his work. It completely takes away from the powerful meaning of the bull on its own, and the original artist did not intend for it to be that way. I find it wrong to alter someone else's work of art and refuse to remove the changes. And you can't argue that it's a separate piece of art because without the bull, the girl has no meaning.

[MrAnibl]

Facts: The bull was not intended as a sex symbol but a market strength/health and prosperity symbol. Inescapably The girl changes that a little. The bull is a symbol of market strength the opposite not being a cow but a bear. If females charged by nature you would have a cow and cuddly panda bear instead of a muscular bull and giant bear but for obvious reasons that is not the case. oh and when you or any one says people are upset as if it is a male thing... Well not necessarily this is art yes but "in your face" nobody likes that. The problem is the left frames everything in sexist ways to promote "equality" But at what expense and on who's back? However The author of the W s bull Statue feels understandably upset "as an artist!" nothing to do with sex. His rights are trampled. This seems pretty similar to me to a copy rights issue. But you can believe whatever you want.

[knudkinut]

now, we're going to need to change "Fearless Girl" to be racially correct