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:
Tim and Amy Marshall <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 5 Apr 1996 11:10:35 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
This post is long and is conflicting with most of the views on controversail
exhibts, read it at your risk. It is my opinion and nothing more.

I think Gingrich is horribly wrong for condeming something he has not even
witnessed.  I also think that the 2 exhibts in question are educational and
thought provoking. But you also have to admit that the concept of the
original exhibits, would, without a doubt cause a certain amount of outrage.
I truly hope that the exhibits were originally concieved to make us all
think, not to just denigrate a symbol of the hard won fredom we have in this
country. And, might it also be that these exhibits carry the artist's
political message?  I find nothing wrong that Newt is using them to tell his
own political message, he has that right as an American.
        Deep down I feel an outrage at the nature of the exhibits.  I was
brought up to respect the flag and hate to see it treated in such a manner.
It is an overall symbol for everything good and bad in this country. The
artists could have picked more appropiate, more selective symbols. Maybe the
artist could have had a map of the United States going into a toilet, surely
not everything the flag represents, good, bad, and otherwise is heading into
the toilet.  And could not the other artist put a piece of glass over the
flag leading to the guest book so people were not actually walking on the
flag.  I find both exhbits heavy handed, in poor taste, and intended to
cause outrage.  Other symbols could have been used, more specific ones.
Granted the power of the new symbols may not be as strong as the flag, a
little honest thought could have come up with something equally thought
provoking and less apt to just play on emotions.
        I use my right of free speech to tell everyone that the museum and
the exhibits should be allowed to continue and make us all think more deeply
about our nation.  But I also tell everyone the artists were heavy handed,
and did not put enough thought into making exhibits that could be thought
provoking, but not so deeply offensive.  It takes little thought to put a
flag in a toilet, but to create an exhibit that shows how selected
componenets of America are sprialling downward, which makes one think from
an intellectual level, not from a simple emotional level is truly difficult.
I will tell anyone I know that we must uphold the artists right to make such
exhibits, but can also express our feelings about the exhibits in a fair and
legal mannor.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2