Braaten, David

English

DigitalCommons@URI

University of Rhode IslandDigitalCommons@URIObscenity: News Articles (1989) Education: National Endowment for the Arts andHumanities, Subject Files II (1962-1996)1989Obscenity: News Articles (1989): News Article 09David BraatenFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_58This News Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Education: National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, Subject Files II(1962-1996) at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Obscenity: News Articles (1989) by an authorized administrator ofDigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@etal.uri.edu.Recommended CitationBraaten, David, "Obscenity: News Articles (1989): News Article 09" (1989). Obscenity: News Articles (1989). Paper 2.http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_58/2http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_II_58/2The Washington Times Wednesday, April 26, 1989 page AS Pastor attacks 'art' as 'anti-Christian' By David Braaten THE WASHINGTON TIMES An exhibit of a photograph of a crucified Christ put in a bottle and submerged in the artist's urine. set off a political controversy yesterday when it was discovered that it was in part supported by a federal grant. The Mississippi pastor who led the fight against the movie, "The Last Temptation of Christ," is lead-ing the protest. Denouncing the· work as "anti-Christian bigotry;• the Rev. Donald E. Wildmon demanded the firing of whoever at the National Endowment for the Arts was responsible. "Religious bigotry should not be supported by tax dollars;' Mr. Wild-man said yesterday in a telephone interview from his Tupelo-based American Family Association. Mr. Wildmon, a United Methodist minister, asked if he wasn't afraid his objections would stir up public-ity for the artist and his work. said: "That's always a calculated risk. But the alternative is to stick your head in the sand." He said the difference between "The Last Temptation" - which he said lost more than $10 million -and the photograph is that federal taxes supported the $15,000 prize awarded to Mr. Serrano and the three-city tour of the subsequent ex-hibit. "Here's the whole thing," said Mr, Wildmon. "If there's companies out there that want to support this kind of bigotry, we don't have to buy their products. But when it's federal tax dollars, that's a different matter:' The 5-by-3V2-foot work is titled "Piss Christ" and the anist, Andres Serrano, acknowledged yesterday that he anticipated objection to the work, primarily because of its pro-vocative title. "I feel when people attack a work of art to such a great extent. they imbue it with a far greater power than when they ignore it and. in that, I'm flattered that they think it de-serves such attention." the 38-year-old artist said. Pinning down individual responsi-bility beyond the artist's was made difficult by the bureaucracy of the Awards in the Visual Arts program that paid for the prize and the ex-hibit. The program, now in its eighth year, is funded by the arts endow-ment, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Equitable Foundation, which is part of the Equitable Life Assur-ance Society. But the actual money goes as a grant to the Southeast Center for Contemporary Art in Winston-Salem, N.C. The center selected five jurors to pick 10 regional winners of $15.000 awards, based on color slides they submitted of their .best works. The winning artists then chose what they wanted to go in the exhibit - not necessarily ones they had sub-mitted to the jury. In fact, three of the five jurors could not remember if they had seen "Piss Christ" among Mr. Serrano's submissions. "We saw hundreds of slides," said juror Ned Rifkin, chief curator of painting and sculpture at the Hirshhorn Museum. "I can't be sure, but I don't think we saw it. We could have seen it without the title." Juror Howard Fox of the Los An-geles County Museum of Art, and Howardena Pindell, a New York art-ist, were likewise unsure. Mr. Serrano did not say whether he had included a slide of the photo-graph in his submission to the jury. He said he made four prints, and has already sold one for $3,600. In addition to his demand that the arts endowment fire whoever was responsible, Mr. Wildmon de-manded apologies from the two foundations. He suggested individu-als cancel their Equitable insurance policies if no apology was made. The Equitable Foundation issued a statement yesterday regretting "any distress" caused by the epi-sode, and pointing out that it had not been involved in the selection pro-cess for the exhibit or the prize. "Equitable did not and would not knowingly lend its name and its sup-port to such a piece of work," the statement said. The arts endowment also issued a statement;noting that it is forbidden by law from interfering in the "artis-tic choices made by its grantees." It added: "We at the endowment do, nonetheless, deeply regret any of-fense to any individual." Rockefeller Foundation president Peter Goldmark said: "I respect the right of any individual to object to a work of art, and the parallel right of artists to express themselves and of exhibitors to show works they deem interesting and meritorious anisti-cally." In New York. Stefan Stux. owner of the Soho gallery that normally ex-hibits Mr. Serrano's work, described the artist as a Christian who doesn't always express his religious beliefs "exactly the way every other guy does." The most eloquent defense of the Serrano work was made last month in Richmond, where objections sur-faced in the press nearly two months after the exhibit had closed at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. The photograph "cruelly juxta-poses the sacred and the profane to shock the viewer into a reconsider-ation of the image and its true mean-ing," said museum director Paul Per-rot. 

Obscenity: News Articles (1989): News Article 09

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&amp;context=pell_neh_II_58

Obscenity: News Articles (1989): News Article 09

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@URI