Which is to say, "Ook ook ook ook ook, ook ook, ook ook ook:"
A portrait of President Bush (news - web sites) using monkeys to form his image led to the closure of a New York art exhibition over the weekend and anguished protests on Monday over freedom of expression.
"Bush Monkeys," a small acrylic on canvas by Chris Savido, created the stir at the Chelsea Market public space, leading the market's managers to close down the 60-piece show that was scheduled to stay up for the next month.
...
"We had tons of people, like more than 2,000 people show up for the opening on Thursday night," said show organizer Bucky Turco. "Then this manager saw the piece and the guy just kind of flipped out. 'The show is over. Get this work down or I'm gonna arrest you,' he said. It's been kind of wild."
Hot damn, that "Bush looks like a chimp" thing is still funny, even now...four years and one lost election later. Kudos to this courageous artist, who had the steely resolve put his work together in the face of overwhelming apathy and disinterest, only to be thrust into the spotlight by a gallery manager whose knee-jerkery prevented him from realizing how famous he was about to make the offending painting and its creator. Good job.
Surely Savido's reaction was one of gratitude for the instant notoriety his work would otherwise never have received:
The Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania-bred artist said he was happy for all the attention paid to his work but said the decision to shutter the exhibit was "a blatant act of censorship." ... "This is much deeper than art. This is fundamental American rights, freedom of speech," Savido said. "To see that something like this can happen, especially in a place like New York City is mind boggling and scary."
Hey Chris, you might want to get off the cross before Andres Serrano dunks you in a big jar of urine.
A private gallery manager telling you you can't show your clever picture is not "censorship" (I wish it was, so I could make similar accusations against every editor who ever shot down a query letter or proposal of mine). If you'd really wanted to stir up some shit, you should've made a portrait of Bush out of penises, or images of the World Trade Center, or dead American soldiers.
The monkey thing, on the other hand, has already been done. And it wasn't really that funny the first time around.
Why was the guy threatening to have the artist arrested?
Technically, it IS censorship. It's just not infringing on his right to free speech under the law.
Sorry, just think it's funny that his quote was confusing, and then you actually made an untrue statement.
At any rate, I bet the artist was quoted out of context... he probably said a lot more - like how obviously this gallery manager apparently doesn't support free speech or whatnot. And then they just picked the most sensational thing he said.
I say this because it's happened to me before. Being quoted out of context. Have to be careful about that when you talk to the media. Very careful to make every sentence complete, even out of context. (Almost impossible.)
At any rate, the monkey thing is, yes, kinda old.
But I think it endures a lot because Bush apparently does not believe in evolution. And that continues to be an issue, sadly. At least that's what I've always kind of associated it with, and thought that's how it started. Though I really don't know.
And one thing that occured to me. The same people who get all twisted up about people making jokes about Bush...
Are the same people who had a million & one jokes about Clinton... and who are STILL lacking new material, and STILL harping on jokes about Hillary Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.
I mean, come on people. That's REAL old.
Technically, it IS censorship. It's just not infringing on his right to free speech under the law.
Sorry, just think it's funny that his quote was confusing, and then you actually made an untrue statement.
I was thinking more of censorship as a tool of the government, not one gallery owner with a bug up his ass, which doesn't quite measure up to the institutional level I was thinking of, but no big deal.
At any rate, I bet the artist was quoted out of context... he probably said a lot more - like how obviously this gallery manager apparently doesn't support free speech or whatnot. And then they just picked the most sensational thing he said.
I work with what I'm given.
I was thinking more of censorship as a tool of the government
Yeah, everyone's monkey'd up with the WORDS free speech and censhorship. They're 2 different things. Censorship is not always bad. Unless you think it's bad to keep your kids from watching pornography, that is. The connotation has gotten so f'd up anymore.
I work with what I'm given.
Yep... That's why half the nation is all screwed up on the facts half the time. Everybody's working with what they're given in sensational media blurbs.
And the fact that you weren't clear with choosing your words in commenting on the issue... Just goes to show how easy it is to be taken out of context and misunderstood.
That stuff was made in NYC. NYC?! Gitta rope!