In a shocking move that is more reminiscent of 1990 then 2010, the Smithsonian Institution today removed a piece of work by renowed East Village artist David Wojnarowicz because of criticism from not-so-renowned art critics Catholic League President William Donahue and Rep. John Boehner. The video, which depicts Christ on the cross crawling with ants as an AIDS analogy, is part of an remarkable new exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery about gender identity and gay sexuality, the first such show that the Smithsonian has even mounted.
But now the gay-haters have latched onto this groundbreaking exhibit as a case of taxpayer waste, which is absurd when the amount of federal money spent on the show pales in comparison to the earmarks and general pork barreling that goes on up on Capitol Hill everyday. Regardless, the new Speaker of The House felt that American taxpayer money shouldn't be used for the exhibit and that "it's symbolic of the arrogance Washington routinely applies to thousands of spending decisions involving Americans' hard-earned money."
Of coure, the real arrogance here is Boner's assumption that he, as a elected official, should be the judge and jury of what is and isn't art. Perhaps Boner should focus on slightly more important matters of governance, like, you know, maybe reducing the federal deficit before we bankrupt the country? Or how about repealing "Dont'Ask, Don't Tell" now that the US military's report says they are fine with it? I don't think it's a coincidence that the day after that report came out, this is what Mr. Boner is focused on. In a nutshell, he should stick to his job and leave the art to the artists.
Brian, I went with a large Yale GALA alumni group to the exhibition about 2 weeks ago for a private tour by co-curator Jonathan Katz (a Yalie) and he made a passionate case to an originally dubious (albeit friendly) crowd that anger at the Smithsonian was misplaced. He said (and I'm paraphrasing) that in over a decade since the exhibit was first conceived, not a single other private or public museum had shown any willingness to mount the show. He declined to name museums but said it was all the major ones you would think of and many others besides. He said that some were quite abrubt and dismissive -- not just a relic of the post-Jesse Helms No Promo Homo ethos, but out of of what might only be seen as homophobia in curatorial ranks. ONLY the National Portrait Gallery had shown receptivity, saying that they saw it in their mandate to do the show, as Hide/Seek illuminated a valid and important light on American art and life.
ReplyDeleteKatz noted ruefully that some of the art world commentators who are now criticizing the Smithsonian, and whose arguments are echoed by the people seen at the NY Public Library event, are naive at best and hypocritical at worst to be chastising the Smithsonian over a show that they themselves had refused even to entertain the notion of exhibiting.
I became convinced that in that light, it is counter-productive to condemn the one organization that was open to the show, that still has kept on the walls all the other pieces that the Catholic League et al, if they were sophisticated enough to recognize the subtexts, would find equally outrageous. And that the tactical trimming of their sail to fend off an all out reprise of the culture war, which in the real political world that we are entering with a Republican majority in the House, would have truly damaged the one institution that is accomplishing something that's still quite remarkable, and that made a forgivable, even if saddening and angering decision.
We play into the hands of the Catholic League and the Family Research Councils and their ilk by angry fanning of the flames and marching up and down with placards and demonstrating. In my opinion, those that tried to chant at the NY Public Library would be as effective as the anti-globalization demonstrators who march around Washington streets with huge puppets -- not at all. Its street theater, its indulgenty and shortsighted, and is worse than ineffective, instead it hands the forces of Palinism and Boehnerism and Donahueism the all out elites-versus mainstream fight they relish.
I saw at the Natl Portrait Gallery a LOT of tourists, in the prototypical knit holiday sweaters with mooses and everything, and they were in the gallery, and buying the catalog, and they had their kids with them and everything. It makes no sense to alienate such people, and to punish the Smithsonian, with an emotionally satisfying but tactically and strategically mistaken campaign against the museum.
That's my insight; I hope it will be considered by others of your friends who read this.
XO
Jim