The article mentioned, "institutional framing of art, in other words, not only distinguishes qualitative value: it also reproduces specific forms of knowledge that are historically located and culturally determined." I'm reminded of visiting the Eiffle Tower and how it was the centerpiece of a city designed symmetrically. It's iconology alone almost demands it's presence in Paris and no place other. It's both devaluing and humoring to know there's a Paris, Texas with a cheap rip-off of an architectural phenomenon. ( I think I might have to visit there as well.) There is a physical upkeep of site specific art that does contribute to the value of a piece. This article gave an example of a performance involving keeping the stalk white setting of a gallery stalk white. Artist Mierle Laderman Ukeles does maintenance on her hands and knees cleaning a museum that takes on a hierarchical role in her concept of labor relations versus the pristine settings of art. So to take the quote from Robert Barry "to remove work is to destroy the work" in many instances is very much true. Although because an environment is not ageless there is a continuous upkeep of a piece surroundings, so that the piece maintains it's same effect.

