As usual, Jay Heuman has made suggestions based on calm appraisal of the
situation and advice how to mediate a difficult situation. On the other
hand, I was intrigued to see how many museum folk recommended an almost
arbitrary and authoritarian censorship of an author's work. That is a
serious question-how much control may a museum impose on an artist's vision,
particularly after the contract is signed?
What has lacked in the discussion thus far is a consideration of the
fundamental error that the museum made in contracting for this exhibit-not
contracting an exhibit based on a review of all materials beforehand. No
serious museum just agrees to an exhibit and them tries to "dig itself out
from a sticky situation." Agreement to what items constitute the exhibit
needed to have been negotiated out before an exhibition agreement was
signed. This would have raised the issue early on and in a very limited
scale. All affected parties could have laid out their needs and concerns and
in all likelihood a reasonably satisfactory solution could have been found.
This type of contract is very common in the movie industry. Major actors are
signed to a specific script of a movie not just the movie in general. Any
changes need to be renegotiated. I once had to cool my heels with a 17th
century ship and a crew of ten for three weeks while Demi Moore and Disney
tried to renegotiate a single scene change.
Now there is a genuine mess. On one hand, you will have a deeply offended
segment of actual or potential supporters on the other hand you will have an
angry artist. In fact, if the offending objects are pulled from the exhibit
without the artist's permission, she/he could go to court suing for
compromising artistic vision. I don't think that this suit would prevail,
but it definitely would cause further dissension in the community. I am
familiar with one case (in the 1820's) when a sculptor successfully sued for
breach of contract over dispute in vision of the work.
In short, in my view, belatedly the museum is attempting to "put Humpty
Dumpty together again." If the original work on this exhibit was the result
of the Executive Director's efforts I would hope that the Board would have
some serious suggestions at the time of performance review. If this mess was
created by the curator then that person should be ready for an uncomfortable
performance review. In any case, the Board needs to have much better
policies for contracting exhibits in place. Due diligence saves one much
grief over time.
nburlakoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
Of Jay Heuman
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 12:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Help...sticky situation
Hi Candace,
I sympathize with you, as this situation has you and your museum stuck
in a potential minefield. However, you have a duty to be fair to the
mission of your organization and the purpose and subject of the
contemporary fraktur exhibition.
I'm more or less with Bennet Seigel. If the 'potentially offensive'
marriage certificates enhance the selection of contemporary fraktur, you
could choose to leave the works in the exhibition. For example: If they
include unique compositions, color schemes or symbols - unlike anything
else in the exhibition - you will lessen the effectiveness of the
exhibition by omitting them. OTOH, if they do not enhance the selection
-- if they are "more of the same" -- you could leave them out.
As I favor open dialogue and not censorship, I'd lean toward leaving in
examples the artist feels represents his style and technique. And tell
the board member and/or others who express critical views that the more
attention they draw to the work, the more attention the work will get.
I assume that's the opposite of what they want. If they simply ignore
it, most visitors will look at those examples, appreciate the style, and
move on . . . likely without even noticing the "gay marriage" content.
Best wishes in this trying time,
Jay Heuman, Curator of Education
Nora Eccles Harrison Museum of Art
Utah State University
4020 Old Main Hill
Logan, UT 84322-4020
T 435.797.0165
F 435.797.3423
Education costs money, but then so does ignorance.
Sir Charles Moser, b. 1922
=========================================================
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).
=========================================================
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).
|
