![\"\u05d4\u05de\u05d6\u05e8\u05e7\u05d4](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Hkgn3m4rfGx_0_0_3000_1987_0_x-large.jpg\" "\\"Photo:")
<\/a><\/p>\n(Photo: ChameleonsEye, shutterstock)<\/p>\n
Over the years, it also stood at the center of disputes between Agam and planners, among them the late architect Israel Goodovitch, who also died recently, over the fountain\u2019s place and function in the urban landscape.<\/p>\n
Now, with Agam\u2019s death at 98, shortly after Goodovitch\u2019s death, it is an appropriate moment to revisit the complex story of the iconic work, the passionate battles waged around it and the question of what may happen to it next.<\/p>\n
Within one month, Israeli culture lost two creators who left a deep mark on art, architecture and public space. Last month, Israel Goodovitch died at 92. He was one of the most influential and prominent figures in Israel\u2019s architectural and urban debate, particularly in Tel Aviv, and served as Tel Aviv city engineer from 1999 to 2000 and as chief architect at the Housing Ministry.<\/p>\n
This week, Agam died at 98. He was a pioneer of kinetic art and one of Israel\u2019s best-known and most successful artists internationally. This year, he was also chosen to receive the Israel Prize in art and design.<\/p>\n
Alongside their impressive professional achievements, the two men shared striking traits. Both had a powerful public presence, and both were charismatic, opinionated and uncompromising figures who did not hesitate to state their views forcefully and fight for their worldview, whether on their art, the design of public space or almost any issue on the public agenda.<\/p>\n
Beyond their broader contribution to Israeli culture and the urban landscape, the two were also linked by one of the most publicized disputes over public art in Israel. At the center of the disagreement was Agam\u2019s \u201cFire and Water,\u201d which over the years became both an urban symbol and an ideological battlefield between different approaches to preservation, planning and the design of public space.<\/p>\n
Agam saw the fountain as a complete work that could not be separated from the square. Goodovitch argued that the changes Dizengoff Square had undergone over the years required a new examination of its place and role.<\/p>\n
\u201cFire and Water,\u201d inaugurated in 1986 at the center of Zina Dizengoff Square in the presence of then-prime minister Shimon Peres, was one of Agam\u2019s most ambitious public-space projects.<\/p>\n
Like many of his works, it sought to challenge the idea of art as a static, fixed object. Combining water, fire, light, color and movement, Agam created a changing kinetic display in which rotating rings and colored panels constantly produced new shapes and compositions.<\/p>\n
The work expressed one of the central ideas in Agam\u2019s art: Art is not something fixed and absolute, but an experience that changes according to time, place and the viewer\u2019s perspective.<\/p>\n
Today, it is difficult to separate the fountain from the fierce arguments it provoked over the years. But according to Agam\u2019s family, it was greeted with great public enthusiasm at the beginning.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn opening day, there were thousands of people there from all over the country,\u201d Ron Agam, Yaacov Agam\u2019s son, said in an interview with ynet. \u201cPeople came to him, hugged him and told him how beautiful it was.\u201d<\/p>\n
Agam by the fountain <\/p>\n (Photo: Shaul Golan)<\/p>\n According to him, \u201cat least 90% of the public, maybe more, admired that work.\u201d Only later did critical voices begin to emerge, mainly from professionals and art critics. Over time, the debate around the fountain widened and turned it into one of Israel\u2019s most discussed and controversial works of public art.<\/p>\n The criticism did not focus only on artistic questions. Alongside appreciation for its innovation and its status as one of Tel Aviv\u2019s most prominent symbols, critics pointed to its high maintenance costs and technical complexity, which included movement mechanisms, lighting, water and fire.<\/p>\n Over the years, the debate expanded to include the question of its place in the public realm: Did its dominant presence enrich the square, or did it harm the function of the space as an open and accessible urban area? Another recurring question was whether Dizengoff Square was the right place for such a large and prominent work, or whether it might have fit better in another urban context.<\/p>\n Almost no one remained indifferent to it. Some saw it as an urban masterpiece. Others believed it had no place at the heart of the square.<\/p>\n The dispute took a significant turn during the project to return Dizengoff Square to street level after years in which it stood on an elevated platform above the road. As part of that project, the fountain was moved into temporary storage, reopening the debate over its future, location and preservation.<\/p>\n Earlier, in 2011, the fountain underwent extensive restoration and upgrading work at a cost of about 2 million shekels. The colored panels were repainted, and technical changes were made, including the cancellation of the original rotating mechanism of the rings.<\/p>\n When the renovation of the square was completed in 2018, the fountain was placed back in the center, but the colored elements were never reinstalled because of a dispute between Agam and the municipality, which led to a prolonged public confrontation.<\/p>\n Agam argued that the changes damaged the integrity of the work and his artistic vision, and that the fountain had been returned to the public in a partial version that did not reflect his original intentions.<\/p>\n \u201cI dedicated 10 years to creating \u2018Fire and Water\u2019 for the city of Tel Aviv, and they turned it into a shameful piece of junk. They turned my most important work into junk,\u201d Agam once said in an interview with Yedioth Ahronoth\u2019s \u201c7 Days\u201d weekend suplemental.<\/p>\n Goodovitch <\/p>\n (Photo: Ryan Frois)<\/p>\n The municipality, for its part, said the decisions were made for reasons of safety, maintenance and budget.<\/p>\n Goodovitch was among the fiercest critics of the decision to place the fountain back in the center of the square after Dizengoff Square was returned to ground level. While Agam insisted that the work return to its original location and in colors he would personally approve, Goodovitch believed the square\u2019s transformation required a fresh look at the issue.<\/p>\n In one interview, Goodovitch even called the fountain \u201cthe world\u2019s largest washing machine\u201d and argued that the renewed square should prioritize pedestrians and diverse urban uses, not a central and dominant sculpture.<\/p>\n Still, in an interview with ynet, his son, architect Dekel Goodovitch, said his father\u2019s position was more complex than it sometimes appeared. On the one hand, he wanted to restore the square to its historical state and kept in his office a photograph of the original square from the 1930s. On the other hand, he also attached great importance to the square\u2019s traffic function.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think he fully resolved it within himself,\u201d Dekel said.<\/p>\n Behind the public confrontation, however, stood a more complex and respectful relationship than it seemed from the outside. The younger Goodovitch said the disagreement between the two men was never personal.<\/p>\n \u201cIt was entirely professional,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n According to him, at the beginning his father believed that if Dizengoff Square was being returned to its original design, it should be restored fully to its historical state, a period in which Agam\u2019s work did not stand at its center at all.<\/p>\n![\"\u05d9\u05e2\u05e7\u05d1](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/ByN32QNrfGx_0_0_3000_2000_0_x-large.jpg\" "\\"Agam")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\u05d4\u05d0\u05d3\u05e8\u05d9\u05db\u05dc](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/S1xOr5RA1Gg_0_0_3000_2000_0_x-large.jpg\" "\\"Goodovitch")
<\/a><\/p>\n
![\"\u05d4\u05de\u05d6\u05e8\u05e7\u05d4](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/ryh2XEHzMe_0_0_3000_2000_0_x-large.jpg\" "\\"The")
<\/a>![\"\u05d9\u05e2\u05e7\u05d1](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/HJBZ5rbFD_0_0_1576_1080_0_x-large.jpg\" "\\"Photo:")
<\/a>