From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: U. of Illinois may remove non"pleasant" art from vistor's center
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:53:04 GMT


[Reprinted with permission from the Daily Illini, Champaign, IL.
 The article appeared on August 5th, 1992, (the day before
 the article I just posted), p.1]

Faculty center might remove two paintings News story by Brian Krumm,
Daily Illini reporter, Pg.1.

Two works of art at an exhibition inside the University's Levis
Faculty Center might be taken down because of complaints that they
are objectionable, one of the exhibition's artists said Tuesday.
Cathy Smith, a University alumna who is one of the exhibition's
artists, said the bookkeeper in the office of the facilities manager
at Levis told her that two of her paintings would have to be taken
down because the center had received complaints about "objectionable"
artwork.  "They said it was because it was not really a gallery
space; it was a visitor's office," Smith said.  The artworks in
question already had been taken off the wall or had fallen from
the wall at least once, said University Ombudsman Hugh Satterlee,
whose office is near some of the exhibition's paintings on the
center's first floor. Satterlee said he hung one second-floor
painting back up on Monday after he found it leaning against a
wall.  Smith said both of the paintings were taken down more than
once. She said she put one of the first-floor paintings back up
after finding it by a courtesy phone on Friday.  The two artworks
in question are titled "Sight Specific" and "2 Close." Smith
described the first as "a pretty stereotypical picture of a woman's
ass," with the words "Am I privilege to your judgement" painted
across the work.  Smith said "2 Close" is a two-section painting
with a woman's face on one side and a vaginal symbol on the other.
Across the painting are the words "Does my anger alienate you."
Satterlee said he received complaints about the paintings and passed
them on to Sandy Roberts, financial manager of Levis, who is in
charge of the exhibition spaces. Roberts was on vacation Tuesday
and could not be reached for comment.  Satterlee declined to release
the names of the people who had complained about the paintings,
which were still on display Tuesday afternoon, but he said two were
visitors to the center and two were University employees.  Satterlee
said he was "not an appropriate person to judge the paintings"
because he was not in charge of the exhibition spaces, but he added
that he thought the paintings were "provocative" and "thought-provoking."
Smith said that during a Tuesday afternoon meeting, Satterlee told
her that she would have to talk to someone in Roberts' office to
find out whether she could continue to display the paintings.
"According to the people who are in charge of exhibition space,
the (two artworks) will have to come down," Smith said.  The art
exhibition, titled For Exterior Use Only, has been on display since
July 11 and is scheduled to remain at Levis until Aug. 31, Smith
said. She said she and the two other featured artists had to sign
a contract with Levis that included provisions for maintenance and
security costs in order to present their exhibition there.  In
addition, Levis receives a 10 percent commission on any artwork
sold. "Sight Specific" sold for $150 during the exhibition's opening
night, and "2 Close" is priced at $500, Smith said.  Smith said
she considers a removal of the paintings a breach of contract. She
added that she was not sure if Levis would want the commission from
the sale of "Sight Specific." Smith and Satterlee both said a Levis
committee had to approve the works before they could be displayed.
"It's weird that they're waiting until now to raise a complaint,"
said Tracey Moore, a graduate student whose works are also featured
in the exhibition.  Moore said no one has complained about her
works even though they contain material similar to Smith's works.
"It's kind of interesting because the imagery they're complaining
about are vivid female anatomical parts," Moore said. "And you can
just look at my imagery across the hall and see male anatomical
things and religious combinations with homo-eroticism."

 


--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: Mark.Sablow@iphase.UUCP (Mark Sablow)
Sender: FredGate@iphase.UUCP