Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

The Continuing Saga of the Mapplethorpe, Part One

Posted by on Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:25 AM

In this week's art section, I write about the decision made in 1989 by the director of the prominent Washington, D.C. museum the Corcoran Gallery of Art, Christina Orr-Cahall, to cancel a scheduled traveling exhibition of Robert Mapplethorpe photographs in the nation's capital. (Orr-Cahall has just been named director of EMP in Seattle.)

On her blog Another Bouncing Ball, Regina Hackett questions whether Orr-Cahall was actually responsible for the decision, or whether she was the pawn of trustees. "I heard indirectly from a couple of Orr-Cahall's friends that she was trapped between big-money board members who insisted the show be canceled and the very real fear that the government would cut off all Corcoran funding if the Mapplethorpe show proceeded."

I'll admit that I didn't spend enough time describing the details of the situation in the story—I was concerned about doing too much rehashing of an old and overly familiar story. But Hackett's vague assertion of hearsay from Orr-Cahall's friends is the worst kind of doubting. (You "heard indirectly" from "a couple of Orr-Cahall's friends"? Is this what passes for reporting on your new blog?)

My first question in reporting the story was about this—and it was also on the minds of many reporters at the time. This is pretty well-combed territory. I went back into newspaper archives from The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Florida Sun-Sentinel (Orr-Cahall went to the Florida museum the Norton directly from the Corcoran). I paid out of my own pocket (since times is tough for newspapers, dontcha know) for archives from the Miami Herald.

What I could discern is: Jesse Helms was already on the warpath for Andres Serrano's Piss Christ. But nobody, on the record, had made any direct moves to challenge the Corcoran's upcoming Mapplethorpe show. Orr-Cahall, aware of the generalized climate of pressure, conducted a thorough study of all of the images in the Mapplethorpe exhibition in preparation for its arrival in D.C.

But instead of using that study to support the exhibition's arrival and beef up programing and dialogue around it, she (and trustees, of course) decided to take a vote on canceling it. The vote was put on the docket of a board meeting late, and some trustees were not at the meeting, not knowing this was on the agenda—later they would criticize the decision.

Orr-Cahall spent the months after the decision, until her eventual resignation, defending it strenuously, even as some of her board members didn't, and even as her high-level staffers—including a chief curator who was seen as the heart of the institution—resigned in protest.

Orr-Cahall may have felt that her hand was forced by circumstances, but there's no evidence of undue pressure from any single source. She never gave any indication that she did not fully support the museum's decision at the time. In fact—except in the sympathetic Washington Post feature I quote (believe me, I went looking for an apology!)—she didn't indicate that she thought it was wrong, only that it was ineffective. She told a reporter that she'd rather have taken the heat from the politicians than from the art community. Here's her talking to the Post on September 19, 1989, three months after she canceled the show:

"[T]he trustees and I do feel regret and felt that the approach we took did not work. It was a failed strategy and probably on my part naive."

In my story, I'm not sure I characterized dramatically enough how unheard-of it is for a museum to cancel an entire show that the museum has decided is important enough to have put it on the schedule in the first place. It's highly controversial when a museum decides to censor a single work.

Need an example? Let's turn to Hackett's own strong 2007 criticism of Seattle Art Museum deputy director/curator Trevor Fairbrother's 1999 decision to excise a Mike Kelley piece (including a work made by a serial killer) from a planned exhibition. Here it is.

When [Fairbrother] left in 2000 after 4 years, I wrote that he was "the most creative, open-minded and intellectually provocative modern-art curator in the museum's history."

What didn't impress me was his inability to back his own plays.

Well, Orr-Cahall backed hers. Here's her explaining the Mapplethorpe cancellation to the Philadelphia Inquirer:

"Our feeling is that, because the National Endowment for the Arts has said they want to begin the process of looking at their system for awarding funding (for controversial artwork) . . . we think by presenting the exhibit at this time, we would be involved in political discussions that really turn the exhibit not into an educational opportunity but into a political platform.

She emphasized that the museum did not edit the show.

"We didn't want to do any editing of the show because we felt that would be censorship."

Everybody knows that there's plenty of pressure inside every museum, and nobody's suggesting that these jobs or these decisions are easy.

Making things doubly difficult is that both Hackett and I—and any journalist covering the situation now—is looking at a distance. Was the Corcoran going to lose funding? Probably. Was Orr-Cahall feeling the pressure of the situation? I'm sure. But that's not the same thing as being pushed around by trustees. (If you want to see what happens when a museum director decides differently, all you have to do is look at Cincinnati, the next stop on the Mapplethorpe tour, where the director became the first in American history to be indicted for putting on a show. The formal charges were two misdemeanor counts of pandering and using minors in pornography. All charges were cleared.)

Now I can't say for absolutely sure what went on inside the Corcoran, but a lot of good reporters spent a lot of time trying to figure out just that at the time—and I've consulted what they did, and taken their lead, as well as listening to the words of Orr-Cahall herself.

Like those reporters—and like Hackett with Fairbrother—I did check. But the scent of scapegoat is just not anywhere to be found.


Comments (18) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
It is SOOO good to know that a couple people might care.
Posted by reinforcement labels on April 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM · Report this
Nice job, Jen. I care, and so does everyone who was watching in 1989. I'm not interested in a witchhunt of Orr-Cahill, and neither is anyone else; I just want to hear her admit some culpability.
Posted by Fnarf on April 7, 2009 at 10:41 AM · Report this
This is a big deal, even if EMP is not.
Posted by Jim Demetre on April 7, 2009 at 10:48 AM · Report this
Jen Graves, thank you for writing this. I enjoyed reading it. The part about censoring one piece compared to a whole show really put things in perspective for me.
Posted by ak47 on April 7, 2009 at 11:05 AM · Report this
Yay for no witchhunt - after all, that's what the Corcoran helped the fundies do, and see how well that turned out - but it's a fascinating story. Thanks for staying on it so diligently.

It's more than a little cheering to see the slide from the Corcoran to the (yawn) Norton to the (yeesh) EMP/SFM&HF.
Posted by gloomy gus on April 7, 2009 at 11:25 AM · Report this
Thanks for this, Jen. Living over here in the land of PC can get a bit challenging for the avant garde. Did you hear about our little porn fiasco this week?…
Posted by DC Girl on April 7, 2009 at 11:46 AM · Report this
She needs to go. Seattle should not welcome the likes of her. Thanks Jen!
Posted by Vince on April 7, 2009 at 11:51 AM · Report this
Looks like she got what she deserves; a job at EMP.
Posted by It's the Experience Mapplethorpe Project now on April 7, 2009 at 12:18 PM · Report this
Would someone at Slog please teach Jen how to use the jump feature?
Posted by your posts are way too long on April 7, 2009 at 12:26 PM · Report this
This would be much easier to read if it had fewer bold characters. You and the Stranger staff should have a meeting to discuss the overuse of bold. That much bold usually means that the other capacities of language — such as accuracy, concision, clarity — are not functioning well enough, so you need the help of bold.
Posted by Matthew Stadler on April 7, 2009 at 12:38 PM · Report this
Did Mapplethorpe ever get that whip out of his ass?
Posted by Stupid White Man on April 7, 2009 at 2:34 PM · Report this
The political echos of Orr-Cahall's surrender are still reverberating. The banning was an inflection point in the artistic culture of the U.S., as the conservative backlash against the post-war trend toward greater sexual liberality reached full tide for the first time.

It's frustrating she hasn't been willing to speak openly and at length on what happened then. There is, it seems, an aura of personal shame and guilt which builds up around her in her silence which is projection, doubtless, but also of no use in understanding that moment in history. She would have much to offer everyone by publically owning those events, even guiding our collective grasp of them through her own words and experiences.

Perhaps, in time, she will speak. I hope so.

Posted by PD on April 7, 2009 at 3:24 PM · Report this
" post-war trend toward greater sexual liberality reached full tide for the first time."

....and then washed everyone out to sea in the AIDS epidemic.
Posted by Stupid White Man on April 7, 2009 at 3:53 PM · Report this
Did I read that the mapplethorpe was projected on the building at night? Since when is art being shoved in people's faces an issue for only "the right?"

Poor mapplethorpe.
Posted by chlo on April 7, 2009 at 7:54 PM · Report this
Jen, this is the most interesting I've ever read. Amazing. Absolutely amazing. You are the first arts reporter I've ever learned a thing from.

Still, while I'm throwing down praise, I'll still be fair that the rest of the normal art posts just don't do it for me.

But I think this type of reporting is getting me more interesting in the world of art.

Frankly, I feel like I'm simply not smart enough to get art in the way you get art. Is it possible to make art easy for people like me? I don't know.

But if any reporter can do it, I have faith it's you.
Posted by Sam on April 7, 2009 at 8:03 PM · Report this
OK, I'm sorry, I know Mapplethorpe was controversial and shocking and outre and all that.

But does anybody think his work was any damn good? If so...why?
Posted by Lee Gibson on April 7, 2009 at 9:33 PM · Report this
Thanks, Jen, for sticking with this story.

It's not a surprise that someone like Orr-Cahill is next in the swinging-door lineup of CEOs. That's what happens when you put Josi Callan in charge of hiring her replacement: She picks a person like herself, who doesn't understand either music or science fiction, but thinks it would be "fun" to dabble.

Josi took a bloated salary just like she did at the Museum of Glass to run the place into the ground and make life a living hell for the people who worked for her. There was no oversight from any kind of board, and she turned that place into the Madness of King George (or, if he had been more involved, King Paul). The P-I and Times posted puff pieces on her, and treated her like someone who might have known something, instead of the ridiculous fraud that she is. I'm glad the Stranger at least is willing to see through the PR.

I feel sorry for the people who work there and try to do good work under absurd circumstances brought about by an insane has-been...or, like her upcoming replacement, never-was. Josi Callan is a horrible person, and her final treacherous act was picking someone equally ridiculous to carry her torch.
Posted by Mappletree on April 7, 2009 at 10:15 PM · Report this
Hi Jen. I didn't write the story. You did. I was responding to your post with questions it left, which you have now answered. In full. Well done. Regina
Posted by regina hackett on April 7, 2009 at 10:27 PM · Report this

Add a comment


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy