Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
I have the choice to see the work or not. I have seen several exhibitions produced by SECCA; when in the area I try not to miss a visit; I am invariably stimulated, provoked, amused, angered, ho-hummed, and generally made to think about how other people see the world around them — I believe that to be the purpose of art.
In March of 1988, the Special Exhibitions Committee of the NEA awarded the Institute of Contemporary Art in Pennsylvania a grant of $30,000 to help defray the expenses of mounting a retrospective showing of Mr. Maplethorpe’s work. Again, it was not the NEA that made the choice of what exhibition to fund or not the fund. That was left to the Institute. As to the content, what I said above remains my view. The works in question are a miniscule portion of the works shown and were always shown in a separate room with signs indicating the content of the photographs. The viewer has the choice to see or not.
Are we so insecure that we should turn over to anyone the right to determine what we may see or hear? We are a democracy with all of its frustrations and imperfections and its freedoms, if we will protect them.
However, Mr. Dearing raises other questions which are far more important than how the money got from where to whom. “Why should the enslaved taxpayer be compelled to support some favored person’s (art)?” And “why are artists so favored over other Americans?”
We “enslaved taxpayers” — artists, farmers, ministers, laborers, computer whizzes, mechanics, and short order cooks, etc. — are all compelled to support all manner of things that we do not all support 100
95.6%