--- Teresa Whitt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am interested in listers' opinions on this.  I can't help but be reminded
> of all of the PC flack that came out in the 1990s regarding exhibitions and
> controversial works (can anyone say Enola Gay?)  However, this is a different
> situation, but still very interesting.

I find that statue less offensive than the incessant 9-11 coverage that's been
going on, the impending war with Iraq or the photos on the front page of the
Washington Times of the dogs being gassed to death by al-Queda (from about a
month back).

People jumping to their deaths are disturbing. I thought the statue was very
tastefully done. The sculptor could have put a giant splat on the ground. As
for covering it up, please. I've seen worse on display at the Hirshhorn in DC.
Picasso's Guernica (probably spelled wrong) is incredibly disturbing but it is
meant to be. Is that going to be covered up because people get upset by looking
at it? No. Why should this statue be any different?

As for censorship, I'm really hesitant to use that term. The work was
commissioned and it is up to the owners to display it or not. I think they are
being wusses for covering it at the first protest. Afterall, they had to have
seen the design before it was finished. They could have asked for it to be
changed at any time.

deb

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).