Art: an endangered exhibit?

By BRIAN FREEDMAN
Collegian Arts Writer

When most people think of Penn State, art is not the first thing to spring to mind. But in recent months, the University has found itself at the center of a heated debate over what constitutes art.

The controversy climaxed in January when a class project by Christine Enedy's (senior-visual arts) was displayed outside the Palmer Museum of Art. Her work, a grotto containing a statue of the Virgin Mary emerging from an oversized bloody vagina, touched off a controversy that grew, in a matter of days, into a national issue.

Five days into the 11-day run of the Art 330 (Intermediate Sculpture) projects, Enedy removed the grotto, citing pressure from the University's Catholic community.

But the uproar about her work did not end there.

The display of her project was covered in The Wanderer, a national Catholic newspaper. It also was discussed on the CNN show "Crossfire" when William Donahue, president of the Catholic League, appeared.

Then last month Zoller Gallery displayed another Enedy creation. A quilt, entitled 25 Years of Virginity: A Self Portrait, was constructed to include 25 pairs of underpants, each with a scarlet cross sewn to its crotch. That was when the Philadelphia Inquirer got involved.

John Woestendiek, a weekly humor columnist in the Inquirer, gave the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights an Ostrich Award, which the article described as "a handsome statuette of a large bird with its head buried deep in the sand."

"All the things I mentioned in that column seemed overprotective," he said. "People designating themselves as the protectors."

The controversy continued last month at the University's annual budget hearing in Harrisburg.

At the hearing University President Graham Spanier testified about the University's proposed budget.

State Rep. John Lawless, R-Montgomery, told Spanier that he would vote to withhold the University's $281 million subsidy if the quilt was not removed.

After the television cameras stopped rolling, Spanier and Lawless met face-to-face.

"Lawless just started screaming and yelling and stormed out of the room," said one observer who was present at the meeting and wished to remain anonymous. "It was an embarrassment to the Legislature that somebody would act that way."

Rep. Lawless was unavailable for comment, but sent a message through his legislative aide, Lisa Nicholas.

"The House is currently in session and has been in session a great deal in the past day-and-a-half," the message said. "I'm sorry I'm unable to meet your demands for this story, but evidently I'm as busy as Graham Spanier because Graham Spanier doesn't return calls either."

Last week as the Zoller show closed, the quilt was taken down and the controversy seemed to end.

But the question remains -- what is visual art?

"Trying to define 'art' by content makes it very difficult," said Don Kunze, associate professor of integrative arts and architecture. "Art, in many cases, tends to encourage ambiguity. You have to ask yourself about the intention (of the artist)."

What each viewer sees is totally subjective and is affected by a number of things, including the sophistication of those looking at the so-called work of art, he said.

"There are different audiences for everything, including tractor-pulls," Kunze said. "And they're sophisticated in their own way, too."

But there are many people who disagree, and take issue with any work of art that does not follow their personal views of what is proper.

"The question is of government officials trying to censor what is displayed . . . this is the type of thing communist dictators would try," said Robert O'Connor, associate professor of political science. "If you're going to not show art, or anything that's offensive to anyone, we'll shut down."

But artistic expression historically has fueled debate. The artist is one who expresses what he or she feels, be that feeling one of aesthetic beauty or one of disappointment with his or her religion. Whether or not that creation is 'art' is the subject of much controversy.

"Chiefly it's a matter of conventions of framing -- communities create standards as to what is presented as art," said Don Kunze. "Something that is presented in the context of an art class is being presented as art. . . . You have to ask yourself about the intention (of the artist)."

In the case of Enedy, the intention was to express ideas about religion, she said previously. But other reasons run the gamut from the emotional and personal to the simple desire to push to the limit what normally is considered acceptable.

The New York artist Marcel Duchamp, for example, dedicated the better part of his career questioning the conventions of what had until then been called art. He is most famous for painting a mustache on a copy of the Mona Lisa and displaying a ready-made urinal in an art gallery. He argued that a work becomes 'art' as soon as the artist declares it as such.

"I've taken contemporary art classes. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion," said Andrea Crocker (senior-biochemistry). "I could put a blank piece of paper on the wall and call it art in protest of my P-chem test tonight. It's my prerogative. If that's what the artist wants to show, then that is art."

But a solid definition nonetheless proves elusive even for those who make a living displaying the work of artists.

"The trouble with any kind of definition (of art) is that they're all so simplistic that they're full of contradictions," said Glenn Willumson, curator for Palmer Museum of Art. "But it does seem to me that an argument could be made that something can be art, whatever that means, if someone is attempting to make art, and in that attempt is trying to express (himself)."

But no matter what the motivation behind the creation of a piece of art, there almost always will be people who are offended by it.

"The idea of creating art that promotes controversy is nothing new," said Craig Zabel, interim department head of the department of art history. "I don't think it matters if it is offensive to me or not. That a work is offensive does not mean it shouldn't be displayed," he added

The University administration has taken a similar attitude.

"We're not going to get into the business of being the thought police for the community," said Steve MacCarthy, Executive Director of University Relations. "We don't think it's our role to determine . . . what art (the community) should view. They should be able to determine that themselves."