Anything but brief

Official refutes artwork's validity

A University student has created a stir on the floor of the state legislature over a piece of artwork that hangs in the University's Zoller Gallery. At least one state representative has threatened to withhold the University's $281 million state subsidy if the artwork remains on display.

Enedy is familiar with controversy - she removed a sculpture from an outdoor display earlier this semester when a campus priest received complaints that the sculpture was anti-Catholic. That sculpture was described as a grotto with a statue of the Virgin Mary emerging from a bloody vagina.

State Rep. John Lawless, R-Montgomery, demanded yesterday something be done about the display. State Rep. Lynn Herman, R-Centre, responded to Lawless, saying the University was changing its policy regarding student art display. Herman also said he was told the art would be removed in the near future.

The exposition was scheduled to end Saturday and University officials gave no indications the artwork was going to be removed ahead of schedule.

The policy on student art has been slightly amended recently, Sallie McCorkle, associate professor of art, said. She said the new language was only an attempt to foster discussion on sensitive issues, and was not meant to censor students in any way.

The new paragraph added to the School of Visual Art's guidelines encourages students and faculty to be aware of cultural differences when displaying art outside of the classroom, McCorkle said.

Herman had not seen the artwork, he said, but he had seen pictures of it on television and in the Centre Daily Times.

"I thought it was terribly offensive and it does not fit mine or the public's description of artwork," Herman said.

During appropriations hearings last month before the state legislature, University President Graham Spanier was repeatedly questioned about the issue by Lawless. Lawless demanded the artwork be removed, threatening the University's vital $281 million state appropriation if the art was not taken down. Spanier said the University does not condone censorship, and the art would remain.

Spanier was disappointed that Lawless detracted from the real issues at an appropriations hearing, said Steve MacCarthy, executive director of University relations.

"It's an unfortunate distraction from the real issues," MacCarthy said. "A serious question is why Penn State tuition has to be what it is. That is because the level of funding is so low. That's an issue to be concerned about, not whether a student is making a statement with a piece of artwork."

University administrators do not seem overly concerned about Lawless' threats, however.

"There is always the hope that there are enough level-headed people in the capital to not let someone with an extreme agenda sideline the real issues," MacCarthy said.

The University felt it was important not to give in to this attempt at censorship, he said.

"The University believes very much in the absolute right to freedom of expression," MacCarthy said. "At the same time, we want a tolerant campus, and students tolerant toward other views. However, the expression of ideas on a university campus is a very important tenet."

People would probably not think the artwork was offensive at all, McCorkle said, if they actually had seen it in the context of the exposition.

Bill Mahon, director of public information, agreed.

"Most people who have criticized the artwork haven't even seen it," he said.

Lawless admitted at the state appropriations hearing he had never seen the artwork either, Mahon said, but that he wanted it removed regardless.

One person who did see the display was campus Catholic priest Father Fred Byrne. In a statement last month, he said he had no problem with Enedy's art and that it was not offensive at all to Catholics.

But William Donohue, president of the Catholic League of America, disagreed. He was a vocal opponent of the University's support of Enedy's right to display her work, and encouraged the 250,000 members of the Catholic League to instigate a letter writing campaign in protest.

The quilt is part of an undergraduate exposition in Zoller Gallery which was reviewed by a prominent New York artist, McCorkle said. She felt that Enedy may have been unfairly targeted, because the exposition features many other works with a religious theme which no one took issue with.

Enedy was not available for comment.