# Conservatives want to dictate art in Smithsonian gallery; Jesus plus ants not ok **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 1, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492 "2010-12-01T00:32:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/61 "2010-12-01T13:33:51Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Do you really think this is how controversial art comes to be accepted, by the “public” rallying against the hoity-toity art critics? It is an even more elite group than the critics who change the dominant patterns in art, it is the artists themselves, who are generally despised for much of their own lifetimes (except those few who live to an old age), who introduce novelty and freshness to art, slowly winning over critics to their perspective, and THEN the public (usually kicking and screaming and mocking) who come aboard. > > When you say “techniques,” you not talking about how the paint got applied, or how visible the brushstrokes were, but rather how they chose to portray the world–it was their choice of subjects, and how they saw and rendered those subjects that was so controversial. “My kid can paint better than that” is typically the “public”'s opinion of most new art, which the artists and the critics simply ignore. That’s why museums of “old” art are useful–people who want to look at pretty still lifes (including me, sometimes) can visit them any time they choose, but people who want to see edgier stuff, that encourages them to think about the world in new ways, should get to see what artists today are working on. Your perspective dictates to me what art is, while mine allows you to view whatever you like. No, none of what you said applies strongly to the Impressionists. I agree that the Ashcan School, with people like Henri and Hopper, got a huge amount of grief for their desire to portray unpleasant reality. But the main attack against the Impressionists was against their technique. The “my kid can paint better than that” is not a criticism that was applied beofre the Abstract Expressionists, Pollack and his crowd. Maybe someone said that about Klimt and the Symbolists, but if they did, they were fooling themselves about their kid’s talent. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/62 "2010-12-01T13:45:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure, I’m OK with it. I’m even OK with the images under discussion, which don’t sound particularly offensive to me. > > I do oppose NEA funding for stuff like “Piss Christ,” but for everything we’ve discussed so far, if I were the curator, I’d allow it, and if I were a Congressman, I wouldn’t threaten budget cuts over it. Good thanks, so you agree they’re being unreasonable, or at least ill informed? > [@](#): > > No. I’m saying that if you depend on goverment funding, you must accept that government restrictions may appear, and they may be ones you don’t agree with. There’s no “duty to not be offensive.” But if the government thinks your art is offensive, they can turn off the spigot. And how is offensive defined? In this case it appears it to be blasphemy concerning the treatment of a religious icon. Are you okay with the government making decisions about what is and isn’t blasphemy? Is that healthy for a free society? Assuming the government is not in the business of endorsing religion is there a nonreligious reason it’s anymore offensive than other depictions of a guy nailed to a cross? > [@](#): > > If the Taliban limited their objections to withdrawing financial support, I’d say they had every right to do so. But these Republicans are threatening withholding our money, not theirs. The Smithsonian sees [25 to 30 million visitors a year](http://newsdesk.si.edu/about/stats), The public is getting nothing from it? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/63 "2010-12-01T13:56:46Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Good thanks, so you agree they’re being unreasonable, or at least ill informed? No. Not everyone who disagrees with me is unreasonable. I think they’re ill-informed to the extent that I doubt they have much knowledge of or exposure to art, but that’s the risk an artist takes when accepting a patron. The Emperor can always decide that the opera has too many notes. > [@](#): > > And how is offensive defined? In this case it appears it to be blasphemy concerning the treatment of a religious icon. Are you okay with the government making decisions about what is and isn’t blasphemy? Is that healthy for a free society? Your question loses an important part of this discussion. I’m fine with government deciding not to use its own speech to offend religions, yes. If government sought to prohibit speech in general on those grounds, it would not be healthy. > [@](#): > > But these Republicans are threatening withholding our money, not theirs. The Smithsonian sees [25 to 30 million visitors a year](http://newsdesk.si.edu/about/stats), The public is getting nothing from it? I don’t know what this question means. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/64 "2010-12-01T14:28:40Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Excellent question. > > We have to develop some kind of a system to determine how to allocate tax dollars. > > And we have. Your complaint is that the decision made by our system seems to have gone against you. I have no problem with tyranny by the majority, but I was not aware that you ascribed to it as well. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/65 "2010-12-01T14:35:25Z")
It seems logical to me that people should not be expected to involuntarily subsidize art which they find grossly offensive without getting to weigh in on the matter. People who find the work valuable get to express their opinions too. If supposed arty types want to display an image of Jesus covered in ants or Barney Frank covered in maggots, they should expect (and undoubtedly crave) heat. If all that free speech is distasteful, the curators need to rely solely on private donations. They can have their displays selected by expert panels and not have nosy politicians or other arbiters of public morality looking over their shoulders. Actually, this whole “let’s goose middle American morality and giggle at the response” meme has gotten hackneyed and boring. > [@sh1bu1](#): > > The art scene is becoming more and more insular to the point that it is completely cut off from the public at large. Really, you want to put a crack in the floor and have people stand around and look at it? Or stack cold cuts on a bed? Mmmm, cold cuts on a bed\*. Is audience interaction allowed? \*The image of George Costanza comes to mind. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/66 "2010-12-01T14:36:19Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I have no problem with tyranny by the majority, but I was not aware that you ascribed to it as well. I like our current system just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/67 "2010-12-01T15:26:35Z")
> [@BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](#): > > And was it trolling, or lashing out at a religion that has only in the last week said that spreading AIDS is a worse sin that using a condom? And religious conservatives are angry at the pope for taking this position. I’m sorry, which is the part that you are angry about? The part where you don’t know of any previous document where the Pope (who is not the religion) has said that commiting murder is worse than prophilactics? “Thou shalt not kill” is pretty old, but then, it wasn’t a Pope who wrote it down - and any “religious conservatives” who haven’t heard of that one need to hie themselves to a good ear doctor. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/68 "2010-12-01T15:41:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The “my kid can paint better than that” is not a criticism that was applied beofre the Abstract Expressionists, Pollack and his crowd. Le Petit Parisien on the paintings of Paul Cezanne: “The procedure somewhat recalls the designs that schoolchildren make by squeezing the heads of flies between the folds of a sheet of paper.” ([http://www.trivia-library.com/c/great-art-bad-reviews-paul-cezanne-paintings.htm](http://www.trivia-library.com/c/great-art-bad-reviews-paul-cezanne-paintings.htm)) ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/69 "2010-12-01T15:45:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Your question loses an important part of this discussion. I’m fine with government deciding not to use its own speech to offend religions, yes. If government sought to prohibit speech in general on those grounds, it would not be healthy. There’s a danger, over time, though of back-door establishment, isn’t there? If every time there is a ‘controversial’ type exhibit, Congress takes a look at the list of exhibits and runs down it… Rape Buddha - OK; Decapitated Allah - OK; Drowned Shiva - OK; Piss Christ - not OK, we’ll defund you if this is included… Wouldn’t that create an establishment problem? And what then if they go through each time threatening defunding for all “religiously offensive” art, but not for other “offensive” works? Telling the artist “you can have funding provided you don’t insult Christianity” strikes me as pretty close to an unconstitutional condition on Government spending. ---
**Author:** ![BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/70 "2010-12-01T16:06:09Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > I’m sorry, which is the part that you are angry about? The part where you don’t know of any previous document where the Pope (who is not the religion) has said that commiting murder is worse than prophilactics? “Thou shalt not kill” is pretty old, but then, it wasn’t a Pope who wrote it down - and any “religious conservatives” who haven’t heard of that one need to hie themselves to a good ear doctor. As far as I know, up until last week the position of the church has been that condoms shouldn’t be worn for any reason. Then the pope said that if they’re used to prevent the spread of AIDS, condoms are ok. From what I heard, religious conservatives were angry about this. They may have heard “thou shalt not kill,” but apparently infecting people with AIDS isn’t enough close enough to killing that it should supersede the possibility that a baby (with AIDS) could be born. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/71 "2010-12-01T16:35:28Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > You’re kidding, right? Let’s just stick with your first example for a sec: There are literally countless works of patriotic art hanging in museums around the world, some good (IMO), some bland treacley jingositic crap (IMO), but no shortage of this stuff is on public display. You could argue that most of the statuary on Washington DC’s streets is absurdly patriotic, absurdly public displays of art in exactly this vein–and you choose this as your first example of art that the government doesn’t support? And the vast majority of those were done long ago. These days public art tends to be some complete crap. Try and sneak a realistic statue of Washington or anyone else for that matter into a museum these days. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/72 "2010-12-01T16:54:46Z")
> [@Mach Tuck](#): > > Ah, yes. The conservative outrage over art. That’s worked well for them in the past. [QUOTE=Algher] It has worked VERY well for them, raised LOTS of money from folks upset about Maplethorpe and Serrano exhibits. [/quote] I wonder how well it’s worked out for arts organizations, who should be able to rev up their funding base by highlighting supposed threats to artistic expression. “Look! The Philistines are at the gates! Send money!!!” ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/73 "2010-12-01T16:59:36Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > I wonder how well it’s worked out for arts organizations, who should be able to rev up their funding base by highlighting supposed threats to artistic expression. > > “Look! The Philistines are at the gates! Send money!!!” Yep - this is the type of controversy that can work for both sides. They both get their base riled up, neither side actually does anything, and the cash rolls in. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/74 "2010-12-01T17:02:18Z")
A lot of the problem is that the media and the right wing complaint factory presents the offensiveness of the art without actually showing the art in context. I had always thought that the piss Christ was stupid and offensive, but I never had actually seen it until just now. I assumed it was just a picture of a cross dumped in a beaker of unrine. After reading this thread I looked it up on wikipedia and after seeing it I think its amazing, and I don’t think that the message it conveys to me would be at all offensive to Christians. Similarly, it should be pointed out that the ant/crucifix segment was 11 seconds out of a 4 minute work, while the public may believe that the entire work is the ants crawling. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/75 "2010-12-01T17:07:51Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > And the vast majority of those were done long ago. These days public art tends to be some complete crap. Try and sneak a realistic statue of Washington or anyone else for that matter into a museum these days. Who needs to? You want to see a heroic statue of Washington, all you have to do is walk for a few blocks, and there it is. Why do we need more of that shitty jingoistic crap, if not to prevent me from seeing any other kind of art that may offend you almost as much as the omnipresent patriotic theme offends me. Or are you the only one in this discussion who has a legitimate right to avoid seeing seeing art he considers offensive? ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/76 "2010-12-01T17:19:18Z")
Does anybody think the Smithsonian would show an exhibity where the Quaran was covered in ants? I am as liberal as they come, but I get why it is offensive and this is the NATIONAL ART GALLERY, cutting edge, controversial art should be for other museums. I realize this is not a popular opinion, but so be it. I just think it was a dumb thing for them to show, to be honest ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/77 "2010-12-01T17:21:34Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > Does anybody think the Smithsonian would show an exhibity where the Quaran was covered in ants? Probably not. Does you think if it did these self same politicians would be calling for investigations into the funding of the Smithsonian, or praising it for standing up in the face of threats? ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/78 "2010-12-01T17:23:05Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > Does anybody think the Smithsonian would show an exhibity where the Quaran was covered in ants? > > I am as liberal as they come, but I get why it is offensive and this is the NATIONAL ART GALLERY, cutting edge, controversial art should be for other museums. I realize this is not a popular opinion, but so be it. I just think it was a dumb thing for them to show, to be honest I expected it to be at the Hirshhorn - that is where I have seen crappy edgy art in my previous visits. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/79 "2010-12-01T17:23:26Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Probably not. Does you think if it did these self same politicians would be calling for investigations into the funding of the Smithsonian, or praising it for standing up in the face of threats? Of course not, there is hypocrisy on both sides. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492/80 "2010-12-01T17:24:39Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Probably not. Does you think if it did these self same politicians would be calling for investigations into the funding of the Smithsonian, or praising it for standing up in the face of threats? Only those from Michigan (with its high Muslim population) and other areas with enough offended constituents to trigger a response. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-want-to-dictate-art-in-smithsonian-gallery-jesus-plus-ants-not-ok/562492.md?page=5)