Controversial art at recent museum and gallery shows has sparked a renewed interest in first amendment issues

By: Garry Boulard - ABN Contributing Editor

It could be any gallery’s vision of a nightmare of a dream: out of nowhere large crowds gather at the front window, spurred on by fantastic press coverage and wild talk in the community. Everyone has something to say about that controversial painting or sculpture or photograph on display.

There are now so many people massing outside that security is a real concern. And all of a sudden come a phone call – it can’t be traced – and the message is clear: take down the offending art or else.

"Things like that can happen," said Sally Williams of the Brooklyn Museum of Art. "People get worked up, protesters show up and before you know it you have a real scary problem on your hands."

Angry response to the Brooklyn Museum’s recent "SENSATION" exhibit is now the stuff of legend, the kind of controversy that accomplished the seemingly unthinkable when it prompted millions of people across the country to weigh freedom of speech against the rights of any group in the community who may find that speech – or art – offensive.

The controversy surrounding the "SENSATION" exhibit, of course, was also fired by New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s move to yank some $7 million in city funding from the Brooklyn Museum – nearly a third of its annual operating budget – and the nature of the offending art in question: a large colorful painting called the "Holy Virgin Mary" by painter Chris Olfili, which used, among other materials, elephant dung.

"This is sick stuff," said Giuliani as opinion polls showed that up to a third of New Yorkers agreed.

The freedom-of-speech vs. community-tastes debate has also found its way to Hot Springs, Ark., where its mayor, Bob Mathis, recently asked local galleries to remove any paintings or sculpture depicting nudity after receiving complaints from tourist who found such art offensive.

At the Detroit Institute of Arts artists Jef Bourgeau’s "Art Until Now" exhibit was abruptly closed only three days into it’s scheduled run in November by museum director Graham Beal after complaints that two works were offensive. One, entitled "Bathtub Jesus," showed a doll purported to be Jesus wearing a condom.

The second work in question showed a Brazil nut held by two metal clamps underneath a label bearing the word "nigger."

But it was not until the show was actually shuttered that Catholics complained about the former work, African-Americans the latter. "We had a lot of phone calls once we announced the exhibit had been padlocked," Leah Wilson in public relations office of the Detroit museum. "The response was pretty much immediate. And the director just felt that this had been the right thing to do."

And popular too, if the results of a Detroit News feedback survey are any indication – some 57 percent of the respondents agreed with Beal’s decision to cancel the Bourgeau exhibit. "My first thought was why did they want to host that exhibit in the first place," one local respondent remarked.

It Rutland, Vt., the director of the Moon Brook Arts Union gallery, a non-profit organization, forbade half of Andres Aquino’s photographs, mostly depicting nude women, from being shown, because she said she was afraid of local reaction; while in Manhattan art dealer Mary Boone offended the local district attorney’s office with an exhibition by artist Tom Sachs that include a sculpture of shotguns and a vase full of live nine-millimeter cartridges, which were offered to visitors.

"We are seeing this kind of thing all over the country," claimed Roz Udow, director of education and public affairs for the National Coalition Against Censorship in New York. "And I am afraid recent events in Brooklyn and now in Detroit are going to have a very suffocating effect on galleries, both public and private, across the country," continued Udow, "because they create their own kind of dangerous momentum."

Vali Talbor, owner of Talbot-Engman Fine Arts in Hot Springs, said Mayor Mathis’ complaints against the nude paintings done by artist Andie Hathcote first surprised and then alarmed her.

"We’ve never had complaints of this kind before," said Talbot, "even with groups of school children coming and going out of here.’

At least three other Hot Springs galleries also received messages from the mayor asking that they take down any art portraying nude figures.

"We talked with the mayor about all of this, and he was basically just embarrassed," added Talbot. "He heard some tourists complain, and he just wanted to keep them happy by telling us about his concerns."

None of the Hot Springs galleries, including Talbot-Engman Fine Arts, removed the offending art. But what alarmed Talbot was the environment in which the friendly suggestion was received. "This happened at the same time that all of the controversy about the "SENSATION" exhibit was going on in Brooklyn," she said. "And you quickly got the feeling that maybe something large out there was at work, and that is a scary thing."

Other galleries think the presence of controversial art can only be a good thing. "It gets people talking," said an assistant in the Sherman Gallery of Chicago who would only reveal her first name, Barbara. "Art should inspire passion, and if people get angry or upset about something, that’s a good thing. It generates excitement."

Gallery owner Daniell O’Rhan-Horlick said she would welcome a little bit of controversy. "Sometimes you get the impression that there just isn’t anything left that will make people surprised or cause them to pay attention to what you have going on in your gallery," she said.

Noting that her gallery is in the heart of the art district in Key West, Fla., an island town that celebrates a "live and let live" attitude, O’Rhan-Horlick added: "Anything goes here. We have drag queens walking around on the street. No one gets much attention for very long, which is why I think a controversy could be very good business."

That certainly was the case with the "SENSATION" show in Brooklyn. "Obviously having something like this happen give you exposure in the media that you would never have otherwise," said Williams with the museum. "And to that extent it certainly did increase sales, so that is a positive."

In New York, gallery owner Boone, who was led away in handcuffs in October for offering visitors bullets, only to see the charges dropped in December, remarked that attempts to censor gallery art has been good for the industry. Giuliani, Boone contended, has actually "strengthened the art world."

But Williams said she wonders if all galleries could withstand the sort of intense public pressure the Brooklyn Museum of Art did. "The smaller the gallery, the more difficult it may be," she remarked.

That is a concern that also bothers Udow with the National Coalition Against Censorship. "The worst threat against a public gallery is the threat to have its funding withheld, but the courts have said that can’t be done," said Udow. "For private galleries, the pressue could be more coercive, a threat to boycott an exhibition."

Udow continued by saying: "Maybe that isn’t something that is very likely, but if it even happens to one private gallery, it’s worth being alarmed about."