MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Ann Harlow <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Mar 1997 11:19:38 -0800
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (42 lines)
Ross Weeks, could you clarify where you stand on this, preferably in
response to the descriptions of the three controversial works that I sent
to the list on March 22?  I'd also like to hear from others about whether,
from the description, these artworks sound like anti-Catholic statements.

Here are some excerpts from the latest letter.  It is a letter of
resignation from the Development Office representative to our Advisory
Board, who has been out of town this whole time and has therefore only
had the works described to him, not seen them himself or read the
artists' statements.

". . . virulently anti-Cahtolic works dominating the Mary show . . . .
aggressively insulting (sophomoric, artless) collections of trash . . . .
The fact is, there is no such thing as artistic freedom in the
contemporary arts community, any more than there is academic freedom on
campuses. They censor each other absolutely, compelling total conformity
to their prevailing ethics of leftist political engagement."

In a phone conversation last week, he asked if I could give any examples
of art that "lampoons" an ethnic group or a leftist political viewpoint.
All I could think of offhand was a Robert Colescott painting in the
Oakland Museum that I would think some African Americans would find
offensive.  Mel Ramos's paintings are potentially offensive to women.
What else?  Obviously I'm dealing here with someone who already had a
major chip or two on his shoulder.  I asked him to come see the show
before writing a letter of resignation, but he decided not to.  He says
our claim that the artists didn't mean "to cause offense or mock anyone's
devotional practices" is "like OJ Simpson saying he didn't mean to kill
Ron Goldman."  Dialog may be hopeless, but I keep trying . . .

Ann

On Wed, 26 Mar 1997, Ross Weeks wrote:

> I'm sorry to read of this problem involving depictions of Mary.  I thought
> everyone had become acquainted with (but perhaps had not liked) the
> depictions of Jesus on the Cross from the various Christian cultures and at
> various times over the centuries.  Carrie, I think it's trendy to do
> Christian bashing....and this is "our Easter season" for those who are not
> Roman Catholic.
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2