Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-02-25
Cities.
and People
Dictator
Of Art?
BY ROBERT J. LEWIS


Sevelt would be disgraced,
finished and done with.
Last Wednesday, after a
great buildup of suspense,
the commission acted in the
full panoply of its powers.
1t withheld its approval"
That's all.
One might think this &C
ton served to raise a huge
club, then bring it down with
smashing force upon the de-
sign, breaking it into smith
Greens, and destroying it
forever.
Instead, the commissions
decision-unless it has pub
lie support-has hardly more
force than a tap on the wrist.
Strangely to some, the
commission cannot conf
mand. 1t can only persuade.
Its function is only advisory.
1t wants 1t that way, for
therein lies its strength.
ANY CENSOR - and the
Fine Arts Commission must
inevitably play that role-is
in a difficult position in a
democracy.
An all powerful censor
would be in an intolerable
position.
That's the reason the Fine
Arts Commission would lock
itself in mortal combat with
anyone who wanted to make
1t a dictator Of art.
In its own words, the COM
mission was set up to serve
a two-fold purpose:
First, to give advice con-
corning esthetic questions
and matters of design in
volved in the orderly devel-
opment of the city of Wash
ington; and, second, to
furnish expert advice on
questions of art to the Pres
ident, the Congress and its
committees and m e m b e S,
and the heads of Govern
ment departments"
For more than so years,
the commission has adhered
closely to this conception of
its duties.
If it's advice is needed, we'll
and good. If its advice is
ignored, then the conse-
quences good or bad - are
the other fellows response
bility.
Some years ago, it was
proposed the commission be
turned into a sort of Minis
try of Fine Arts, to admin
lister Federal subsidies and
provide a central guidance
for Government supported
cultural activity.
In a Enthusiastically mild
reply, the commission said it
didn't want to be mixed up
in any concentration of au-
thority such as has not ex-
listed in this field in the
United States"
Because of its clear under
standing of the perils of
censorship in a system under
which the people rule, the
Fine Arts Commission is sat-
isfied with only the power to
express an opinion from a
lofty place. In this self
limited ambition, it stands
almost unique among Gov
eminent agencies.
u Il II II
THERE is, of course, the
question of whether anyone
can be an expert" in mat
tiers of art, rather than
merely the repository of an
accumulation of prejudices
and predictions.
The available records do
not reveal whether the COM
mission has ever faced up
to this philosophical ques-
ton. But certain facts do
tend to uphold, at least, the
democratic nature of the
commissions expertise. Not
least of these is that its
membership changes, from
time to time, and is not
static.
Paradoxically enough, Pie
tro Belluschi and Joseph
Hudnut are former members
Since those two Well-qual-
flied gentlemen were men,
bers of the jury which en-
Enthusiastically chose Petersen
g. Tilney's giant tablets as
the winner among STA SUBJ
missions in the Roosevelt
Memorial competition, an
academic question arises.
How would they have votec
last Wednesday had they
still been commission mem
bers, instead Of. jurors?
Not that the answer would
make a great deal Of differ
ence as to whether the me-
mortal will eventually be
built in West Potomac Park
The only dictator in that