>
> It suggests to the museum that if, in the future,
> they contemplate other controversial exhibitions they might suffer the
> consequence of diminished financial support.  Yeah, its their right, but
> this warning exerts a powerful influence and, if multiplied unchecked by
> hundreds of corporations and museums in similar relationships, undermines
> the free flow of ideas through our institutions to the people.

I don't know how the real world of funding works with museums but it seems
to me that once Dial hands over whatever funding they give, the use
should be up to the museums discretion (concerning ethical museum
guidelines). If the Dial Corp has any concern that they do not want
support "controversial" exhibitions, then why would they choose to fund the
museum? Either they support and fund the museum and trust it's judgement
or they don't.

I know that the funding from both SRP and Dial is probably
crucial to the Phoenix Art Museum, but it seems like such a hypocritical
thing to do (on Dials side) to give the funding and then take it back when
they feel like it's getting too hot in the kitchen.

I suppose this is just a personal pet-peeve, but I had a room-mate like
this and I am very intolerant of this type of behaviour now :-)

R.B. Wilkins
..........................................................................
                                     O-