Censorhip case studies
1 like416 views
The document discusses a case involving the removal of a painting from a Capitol building by Congressman Hunter. The painting by David Pulphus Jr. depicted a scene from his neighborhood that was deemed too sad or objectionable by some. Robin Hirsch-Steinhoff, director of Art St. Louis, states that the painting was selected based on its artistic merit alone by the judges. However, artwork in the Capitol must adhere to policies against contemporary political controversy or sensationalistic subjects. There is a debate over whether representative artworks should meet certain conceptual standards beyond just artistic skill.
Censorhip case studies
- 4. Denna Lawson, Sons of Cush, 2016
- 5. Denna Lawson, Ring Bearer, 2016
- 7. HenryTaylor, Ancestors of Genghis Khan with Black Man on Horse, 2015-17
- 8. HenryTaylor, A Happy Day for Us, 2017
- 10. #1
- 11. David Pulphus, Untitled #1, 2016 MO-1, Rep.William Lacy Clay
- 14. Was it right for Congressman H u n t e r t o r e m o v e t h e painting? W a s t h e p a i n t i n g t o o objectionable to be hung in a capitol building?
- 20. “As far as David Pulphus, Jr.'s work, along with the 60 or so other artworks that were submitted for judging by myself and two other area artists/art professionals, we were given the criteria to simply select the 5 pieces we felt were the best in the exhibit and to select only one artwork for Best of Show. That Best of Show hands- down by us three Jurors/Judges went to that artwork. What he depicted about what was going on in his own neighborhood and city was sad--he was at the time, just a teenager, and had seen too much already. It was a really great artwork and really was Best in Show for that particular judging.“
- 21. “Firstly, our choice was made on artistic merit. That was what we were asked to do. Also, understand that we were not told that we could not select an artwork -- nothing was censored--so that artwork was up for consideration with all of the others presented to us. Nobody knew that there would be aftershock, basically--we simply thought that it was the best artwork. I was a Judge again for this year's show and we had a couple of artworks that could be conceived as controversial, the one that we selected was basically about hair, specifically the hard work that goes into keeping a young woman of color's hair braided or straight, and how that can be physically painful. The work was wonderfully done, again, this was based on creativity and the skill of the artwork.The second thing that adds to the skill and technique is the imagery and what it means. All of those things made this piece and David Pulphus, Jr.'s work the best in the exhibit.” - Robin Hirsch-Steinhoff, Director of Art St. Louis
- 22. Artwork must adhere to the policy of the House Office Building Commission (the Commission). In accordance with this policy, exhibits depicting subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature are not allowed. Each Member of Congress will be required to submit a Letter of Support confirming that the Member has determined that the winning artwork adheres to the Commission’s policy. However, if another Member of Congress requests review of any artwork for compliance with the Commission’s policy, the final decision regarding the artwork’s suitability for display will be made by the Commission. While it is not the intent to censor any artwork, we do wish to avoid artwork that is potentially inappropriate for display in this highly travelled area leading to the Capitol.
- 23. Do you agree or disagree with the court’s ruling? Should the representative artworks meet a certain conceptual standard, not just based on artistic merit or skill?