Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Smithsonian: Smithsonian's chief regrets hasty removal of controversial video
latimes.com: "G. Wayne Clough, the Smithsonian Institution's chief executive, said Thursday that Republican House leaders' threats of budgetary consequences factored into his Nov. 30 decision to remove a video from a National Portrait Gallery exhibition of work done primarily by artists who are gay and lesbian.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Scary stuff...With a possible 5 year freeze on discretionary, non-defense related spending it is easy to see how a governmental official could use this time for budget cuts to also benefit their own artistic sense along the way. I am not saying that is definitely what is happening here, but watching this play out will be interesting to see how a nationally funded art institute responds to orders from the higher ups.
It's no secret that I hate censorship, especially when it comes to issues such as this. There is a fine line between saying something that no one wants to hear (because it is true) and hate speech. Much of what christian organizations say to and about the gay population could be considered hateful, but since they're in the majority there is little opposition from the government. As soon as someone turns the tables or does something that could be considered prejudice, they get shut down? Arguing that some Christian organizations are oppressive is not farfetched, nor is arguing that christianity has become archaic or any other message that was in the piece.
The troubling issue here is that the backlash against the art piece was NOT because of any artistic criticism. It was purely a reaction to what the critics see as an attack on their moral values and way of life. The problem is that there is no way Congressmen should be involved in regulating the moral content of art. They are tasked with making and enforcing laws, not moral values.
I completely agree with Sam. This article actually made me feel sick inside. The content of a Museum is set by the organization and not by outside forces. Congressmen have better things that they should be focusing their time on. This kind of blatant misuse of influence is a injustice to his constituents.
I'm glad that the arts community has stood up and vocalized their stance over this situation. However, it will be interesting to see what happens between the Andy Warhol Foundation and the Smithsonian down the line. Hopefully their relationship can return to prosperous one.
Post a Comment