We wouldn't be outraged because of artistic integrity. We'd be outraged because it would be in bad taste, despite the anti-objectification intent of the artist.

We wouldn't be outraged because of artistic integrity. We'd be outraged because it would be in bad taste, despite the anti-objectification intent of the artist. There would be no outrage about a more neutral installation. The original artist might object, but unless they own the land is there any protection of their artistic intent in the law?