November 16 - Gender, Sex, and AIDS in the 1980's

The idealistic campaign of fundamentalists and conservatives in the U.S. led to actions against the National Endowment for the Arts. In 1989, it seemed that art works displaying sexual imagery influenced the House and Senate to drastically cut NEA budgets. Among the many works probably in question by fundamentalists during this time, Andres Serrano and Robert Mapplethorpe were artists that created work that initiated action against the NEA. Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ" is a photograph of a crucifix submerged in the artist's urine. Serrano's image seems to critique Catholic ideologies about sexuality. Bodily fluids related to sexuality are taboo and the dominant society is not accustomed to these ideas, which are not a part of their culture.


Piss Christ
Andres Serrano
Cibachrome print mounted on,1987
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

50 senators and 150 representatives had contaced the NEA about its funding and it was clear that artistic freedom would be put into question. Artists protested and formed anti-censorship organizations and creative alternative spaces to create and their work. The NEA was now pressured to fund more "folk art" or local projects that were more consistent with fundamentalist values. The conservatives were having a powerful influence on what was acceptable art.

This political debate on the arts in the late 1980's to 1990's seemed to have divided the art world into "Christian" and "un-Christian" works. It is interesting how much power an image can have, enough to change policies. For democrats and fundamentalists, the arts are significant in shaping public values. The public is highly influenced by the visual culture, which the arts plays a very significant role. I suppose the Democrats have a good point in protesting against certain art works not to be funded by the NEA since funding comes from taxpayers. On the other hand, it is unfortunate that conservative and fundamentalist values become imposed upon other cultural values because of their power and dominance in society. In accordance to "no public" funding towards un-Christian art, there were also a denial of federal funding for medical abortions and safe-sex education for AIDS. It seems that there is an denial of sexuality. Artists are denied of their artistic freedom and right of speech. It is unfortunate that many artists could not obtain financial support from major funders like the NEA, but artisitic expression seems far more important than financial support. Artists that have grouped together to fight for their individuality and expression are activists for artistic freedom. Perhaps there is a fine line between what is socially acceptable and sexually explicit images may need censorship especially when it is concerning violence. I think the real issue is media literacy and for people to be aware of what they are consuming or looking at. It is easy to look at a picture and for it to elicit some kind of emotion or thought, perhaps people need to start reading images and being educated on the artist or corporate motives.


http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/evian_mermaid.preview.jpg

This image of this Evian water advertisement seems to dehumanize women. A mermaid holds the water bottle in a seductive manner seems like a phallic symbol. Many corporate companies are not being asked to change their advertising methods, perhaps its because of the creatively executed subliminal messages which are not as blatant to the viewers. For me, this seems more deceptive and hurtful to the public, left or right-wing.