Page 24 - Studio International - June 1971

trustees. The eventual cancellation was made with Correspondence of people's functions and real interests; but
their full knowledge and concurrence. perhaps later it will develop from the
I do not consider that Mr Haacke's work has nervousness that shows up in places about the
been ' censored' . The analogy with totalitarian initial conception. It could be interesting to .
practices is absurd if only because a society in hear, if the term 'artist' could be erased
which institutional multiplicity and Art and Technology somehow, what kind of alternative noise would
decentralization prevails leaves the artist free to Interesting to see how the relationship between be thrown up to cope with the manifestations.
present his project under other or his own artist and commercial organization is picked out John Latham
auspices. On the other hand, the judgment from a museum angle ['Art and Technology' by apg
whether or not a particular activity is Maurice Tuchman, April issue]. The sensation- 22 Portland Road
appropriate for a given institution is part of that or object-orientated objective is not seriously London WII
institution's public responsibility and freedom. The questioned in the framing of the procedure
president and the trustees of The Solomon R. (though it is denied), and this is natural enough Information on Vorticists requested
Guggenheim Foundation upon my perhaps —but one could require more room for I am engaged in some research into the
recommendation have judged Hans Haacke's divergence than is evident, even from Claes Vorticist period of English art, and would
show as outlined to be unsuited for presentation at Oldenburg. welcome any information from owners of works,
the Guggenheim Museum. Both the title of the exhibition, which is photographs, letters, etc., by any of the
also excused, and the recurrent feeling that the following artists : Laurence Atkinson, David
artist is being used as a rhetorical device by all Bomberg, Jessie Dismorr, Jacob Epstein,
parties, gloss over the opportunity offered to set Henri Gaudier-Brzeska, Cuthbert Hamilton,
The following statement by Mr Messer was up something quite new in the picture we have Wyndham Lewis, Christopher Nevinson,
sent to Studio International subsequent to his
exchange of 5 April with Mr Haacke
A drawing by David Hockney, donated by the including Henry Moore, Ben Nicholson,
The issues that developed around the
artist to the 'Homage to Maurice de Sausmarez' William Scott, Allen Jones and Patrick Heron,
cancellation of the projected Hans Haacke show
exhibition (Upper Grosvenor Galleries, London have given or lent works.
at the Guggenheim Museum are complex and
15 June to 3 July), Twenty painters and sculptors,
their reduction to such topics as 'artistic freedom
of expression' or 'censorship of political and
social subject matter' are simplistic, misleading,
and untrue. Haacke proposed to use a real estate
survey to expose alleged malpractices by pointing
out individuals and groups whose names and
identities would have been part of the display.
Since these individuals would have been held up
to public scrutiny and condemnation without
their knowledge or consent, Haacke's work
would have involved the Museum in extra-
artistic issues and would have established a
precedent for social activism which is contrary
to present Museum policies.
In particular, the transference of implicating
data from the neutral Public Record to a public
art exhibition would place the responsibility for
the verification of each detail upon a museum
staff unqualified to deal with such matters. The
individuals who were slated for identification
and embarrassment are not public figures and
have not chosen to take public stands. There is
no dependable museum method to judge their
acts and motives nor can the Museum offer a
forum for their rebuttal and defense. The staging
of the exhibition as conceived would therefore
have placed the Museum in the position of
becoming a vehicle through which the artist
could take aim at individual targets. The
predictable result of such an engagement would
be the eventual reduction of the Museum to a
battleground upon which causes unrelated to its
basic purpose would be contested.
The issue therefore is not the acceptability
of socio-political content in a work of art but our
conviction that the Museum's active engagement
in socio-political causes is in direct conflict with
its legitimate presentation of creative endeavors.
Thomas M. Messer,
Director
The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum
250