What I feel people are missing is that this is a quadruple win. Di Modico wins, because artists thrive on publicity. If you want people to buy or exhibit your

What I feel people are missing is that this is a quadruple win. Di Modico wins, because artists thrive on publicity. If you want people to buy or exhibit your work, they need to know your name. I live half a planet away from the New York Stock Exchange and I hadn't heard of Arturo Di Modica until today (and I think the scupture is amazing). If I read things correctly, this is just the latest in a series of publicity stunts surrounding Charging Bull so I suspect Di Modica knows what he's doing. The outcome (whether Fearless Girl is removed or not) does not impact this at all. The people of New York win, because now they doesn't have one artwork right out the NYSE that can be interpreted and explained in many ways and makes people think, but they have two, locked in symbiosis. Together with the history and controversy behind both works, possible interpretations of either work individually, and with respect to each other, this is a fantastic and enviable piece of public culture. I envy the tour guides who get to explain this stuff to tourists. Third wave feminists win, because a large financial organization publicizing a diversity fund in such a public and original way not only helps their cause, but shows how mainstream their cause has become. This is not a fringe movement anymore, and Fearless Girl makes this more apparent than anything recently. Finally, SSGA wins because their diversity fund gets the publicity they hoped for when commissioning Fearless Girl. Looks to me like there's no downside. (sidenote: I don't think what I love more: guerilla art right in investment bankers' faces, or guerilla marketing commissioned by investment banker masquerading as guerilla art right in investment bankers' faces)