Objectives:
• Learn about the First Amendment to the Constitution and US obscenity law
• Examine historical and current incidents of Censorship in the US and their relationship to
public funding for the Arts
• Learn about the National Endowment for the Arts
• Explore the relationship of cultural values to free speech and tolerance
The most interesting aspect of the website “Response to the Rundquist Murals” was its opening critique of themes illustrated in the paintings that send outdated and potentially offensive messages about the history of civilization. The author of the website states, “The murals also portray notions from the 1930s we may no longer find acceptable…today, the messages in this artwork might not be found in pieces chosen for public spaces. The murals also depict figures and ideas about race and ethnicity that reflect the social norms of the time they were created”.
I chose to respond to this critique by creating a work that resembled the historically themed panels posed in the Rundquist brother’s works: Development of the Arts. I recreated this mural in a way that challenges the stereotypes put in place by the panels on each of the eight levels and redefines each era through a more modern lens. Please see my work below (click on image to enlarge).
Reflecton:
My post this week responded to the art that is displayed in the University of Oregon’s Knight Library. However, the larger topic at the focal point of this week’s discussion is that of censorship and public art. The reading for the week did an expert job at breaking down the relationship between the law and art. Erika Doss explained, “Conflicts over public art at the local level often persuade community leaders, elected officials, funding agencies, and artists themselves that public art is simply “too hot to handle.” But these heated debates also suggest that the American public, often typecast as apathetic and uninformed, is keenly interested in cultural conversations about creative expression and civic and national identity” (1). This statement explains that that which provokes attention on a national scope, is getting closer to its purpose as art.
Learning Goals:
My response to the Rundquist pieces only accomplished the last of the four objectives listed. My future learning goals are to learn more about censorship in the U.S. The topic became hot-button several years ago when censorship laws threatened to take away a variety of freedoms of expression. I think it is important to know the limits to which our culture and nation defines expression of freedom because it is often the job of art to walk that line. For example, some could consider some of the protests that have taken place in recent times including the Occupy movement as a form of art, and therefore expression. I hope to focus on the law as it applies to freedom of expression and art in particular.
Bibliography: