Julia,

We recently went through the same problem, and explicitly decided NOT to
post signage.  Instead, our receptionist advised every visitor,
verbally; "The nature of the work in the exhibition _______ is
controversial and some visitors may find this exhibit offensive.  It may
be unsuitable for children."

We began the warnings three days into the show, because visitor feedback
and guest book comments indicated that it was a problem (not because of
the nudity, but because one group of grotesque figures reflected the
process of aging.)

By making the interaction personal, we did a pretty good job of turning
response around.  Of course, the problem then shifted to the religious
right, who objected to another portion of the exhibit where bibles were
"desecrated" (Actually they were folded origami-like)

Back to the good old label discussion... people often don't read... use
the "advisory" as one more tool to stimulate discussion, rather than
being put in the uncomfortable (and dishonest) position of
self-censoring.

My two cents

Craig d'Arcy
Executive Director
West Parry Sound District Museum

*** The opinions expressed herein are my own, and my instution damn well
better share them if they want to be right.***


"J./B. Moore" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I posted this question about disclaimers/warning labels in response to a
>discussion on the topic on Museum-Ed.  Any other opinions from Museum-L?
>
>Julia Moore
>Indianapolis Art Center
>
>
>>What about warning people that they may be offended even before entering?
>>I object to creating tempests in teapots by telling people to look out for
>>offensive stuff, but sometimes people are caught off-guard by offensive
>>exhibitions and prefer to know in advance if they are likely to be
>>shocked. We are, even as we speak, installing an exhibition and we want to
>>warn people that it might offend them (there is some cartoon-ish nakedness
>>as opposed to "artistic" nudity, and an explicit scatalogical reference) or
>their
>>children.  We are posting the following warning (this is still a draft at
>>this point):
>>
>>INDIANA DIRECTIONS '96 contains material that might offend some viewers.
>>The Indianapolis Art Center requests that persons under the age of 18 be
>>accompanied by an adult when viewing the exhibition.
>>
>>(The visitor then has to open a closed door to enter the exhibition.  The
>>first room, which they can see through the door, does not contain the
>>potentially offensive material.  They can see into the second room, but
>cannot see the material until they round a corner)
>>
>>Is this a sufficient deterrent?  Can someone else suggest better wording?
>>What has everybody else used?
>>
>>There is some urgency as we need to post something by the end of the day
>>Friday.
>>
>>On another matter, once we had a show that had a beautiful portrait of two
>>women (both clothed, but standing very close to each other with the hand of
>one placed on the shoulder of the other).  There was a
>>little controversy because the women were obviously lesbians, and by
>>exhibiting it we were seen to be condoning homosexual relationships.  It
>>was part of a traveling show about marriage that had a wonderful,
>>interpretive catalogue.  We explained as best as we could to those who
>>objected, but what more could we have done without belaboring the point?
>>
>>Thanks--
>>
>>Julia Moore
>>Indianapolis Art Center
>>
>>