Click Here to return to the

Blue Collar Politics Blog.

To a Directory of Mr.Lederman's Essays

Top 10 Reasons
Giuliani Decency Panel
is Absurd

by Robert Lederman

robert.lederman@worldnet.att.net
April 4, 2001

In his 4/4/2001 press conference announcing the Art Decency Commission New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said:
"The panel will examine situations in which there is perceived or in reality an affront, an attack, a debasement of religion, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, gender."

Giuliani has repeatedly called the Brooklyn Museum's recent exhibitions, anti-Catholic bigotry. Let's assume for the sake of argument that the Mayor is absolutely right.

Also for the sake of argument, let's further assume that the Mayor is right that tax dollars should never be used for any art or any cultural work, film, live performance, television show or museum exhibit that is or can be perceived as, "...an affront, an attack, a debasement of religion, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, gender."

Here are ten of countless possible examples of well-known works of art on display in NYC museums that receive tax dollars from the City and that can be readily perceived as an affront by one or more ethnic, racial, religious or sexually-oriented groups.

• 1. The Ten Commandments prohibit the making or displaying of any "graven image", i.e. all depictions of the human body, God, pagan deities or any object intended to be worshiped such as a crucifix, or statue of a saint. While the Jewish Old Testament has been the inspiration for much of Christian religious art, such works directly contradict a basic tenant of Judaism and of the Ten Commandments. That's why synagogues never have paintings or statues. Should religious Jews, who make up a very large minority group in NYC and a very significant portion of the tax base, have their tax dollars used to display images of Christian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Assyrian, Central American and African deities? The Brooklyn Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art have two of the world's largest such collections. The City significantly funds both.
• 2. Most NYC museums have paintings and/or statues about Columbus "discovering" America. What we now know from journals written by eyewitnesses on those journeys of exploration was that Columbus enslaved and murdered the native inhabitants wherever he landed. Paintings and statues by artists such as Frederick Remington depicting the conquest of the West and of American cavalry killing Native Americans are on display in many NYC museums. Native American activists have made it known over the past 25 years that they find such depictions insulting and offensive. Should their tax dollars pay to maintain the images of conquerors like Columbus or of General Custer and other genocidal "Indian fighters" in NYC museums?
• 3. The Museum of Modern Art, The Metropolitan Museum and the Brooklyn Museum have vast collections of religious and burial artifacts from Native American, Middle Eastern, African, Oceanic and Central American cultures. Many if not most of these artifacts were obtained by dubious means, often stolen or smuggled out of their native countries. Some, like the Egyptian mummies, are actual human remains stolen from their burial sites. How do the millions of New York City taxpayers descended from these cultures feel about their ancestral remains and cultural heritage being stolen and put on display in New York City museums?
• 4. The Met has a number of paintings depicting Plato, a Greek philosopher who advocated man-boy love-a felony crime in NY State. The Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) has a number of paintings of prepubescent girls by Balthus, a well-known German pedophile. MOMA also has numerous paintings by Salvador Dali, a surrealist well known for bashing Catholicism. In one, his wife hangs crucified on the cross instead of Jesus. Should MOMA's 65 million-dollar gift from Giuliani be withdrawn? Shouldn't Giuliani's Decency Commission remove all these paintings?
• 5. If tax dollars can be removed from a museum that allegedly attacks religion why not remove funding for museums supporting religion? Using government funds for supporting religion is a direct violation of the First Amendment. Why should Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Taoists or atheists pay for the exhibition of thousands of paintings created specifically in order to convince people that Jesus is God?
• 6. A satirical portrait of Oscar Wilde could be a perceived affront to gays. An unflattering painting or news photo included in a documentary exhibit about Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton could be perceived as an affront to African-Americans. Should such works be banned?
• 7. A fundamentalist Christian might find the statues of Egyptian, Greek and Roman gods which fill NYC art museums to be an abomination. The Met in particular is filled with paintings and sculptures of nudes depicting sexual situations, homosexuality, rape, incest etc. Should they all be removed? How about the hundreds of African fertility sculptures on display depicting exposed genitalia which are far more explicit than the works in the controversial Brooklyn Museum shows? Are statues and paintings of nude children, the nude putti and angels popular in so many Greek, Roman and Renaissance works of art, child pornography? Isn't child pornography a felony crime in New York?
• 8. The Rockefeller family's MOMA shows a number of paintings stolen from Jews by the Nazis, which have been the object of civil lawsuits. The Rockefeller family were major supporters of Hitler. Their company, Standard Oil, owned 1/2 of IG Farben, the Nazi chemical and munitions cartel which built and operated Auschwitz. MOMA has received hundreds of millions of tax dollars from the Giuliani administration. Isn't that an affront to all Jews and a desecration of the Holocaust?
• 9. Some feminists might find the thousands of erotic female nudes in NYC museums (almost all of which were painted by men) to be sexist and exploitative. Women are more than 50% of NYC taxpayers. Should all female nudes be removed if a few women complain that they were offended?
• 10. Many sects of Protestants and Baptists consider the Pope and the Catholic Church to be the anti-Christ. Millions of New Yorkers are members of these Christian sects. Should all Catholic-influenced Renaissance art be removed from all the museums based on it offending these taxpayers?

Be assured, I'm not advocating the removal of any of these works. The point is that all art can be perceived as offensive by someone and more than likely has been perceived that way at some time or another.

The Catholic Church censored Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel murals by painting fig leaves on the figures despite this masterpiece having been commissioned by a Pope. The French rioted over Impressionism. Many Americans still consider Picasso and Mattise, let alone the Abstract Expressionists, to be non-artists with less talent than their own children have.

As the archetypal example of a cultural lowbrow, Rudy Giuliani has repeatedly said, "if I can do it it's not art". Should some taxpayers' wishes be followed and all modern paintings be removed from taxpayer funded NYC museums?

Is Giuliani a prude, a cultural philistine, just plain crazy or is there a perfectly logical governmental agenda to his Decency Commission? For a detailed explanation of the real agenda behind this seemingly absurd effort see my articles, Giuliani Decency Commission Exposed and Giuliani on Art, Hitler on Art

To a Directory of Mr.Lederman's Essays

Robert Lederman is an artist, writer and activist and is also the President of the street artist advocacy group, A.R.T.I.S.T.
Click here for an archive of A.R.T.I.S.T. related news articles on the Freedom Forum website

His essays and Op-Eds have appeared in hundreds of alternative publications as well as the Daily News, Penthouse, Africa Sun Times, Street News and The Shadow.
Lederman was falsely arrested 41 times for his anti-Giuliani activities and was never convicted of any of the charges. As a result of the arrests, he's won four Federal lawsuits and overturned three laws.
He is best known for having created hundreds of paintings of Mayor Giuliani as a Hitler like dictator which were carried in demonstrations throughout the eight years of the Giuliani administration. Images of his paintings and articles about his arrests and lawsuits have appeared on all of the major television networks hundreds of times as well as frequently appearing in the NY Times, Daily News, NY Post, Newsday, Newsweek, People, The Washington Post, LA Times and NY Magazine.

Robert Lederman,
President of A.R.T.I.S.T.
(Artists' Response To Illegal State Tactics)
robert.lederman@worldnet.att.net

For a detailed exposition on the West Nile issue
http://www.nospray.org/
For an article on the Manhattan Institute go to
http://www.konformist.com/2000/rudyg.htm

If you would like to help oppose the spraying,
please write to the
No Spray Coalition
PO Box 334
Peck Slip Station
NYC, NY 10272-0334
or call the No Spray hotline at (718) 670-7110.

Any funds you can send to help continue the lawsuit
and this work are greatly appreciated.

Important Note:
Mr. Lederman has explained that his articles posted here are not to be taken as official statements by the No-Spray Coalition of which he is a member or of the "No-Spray" lawsuit in which he is a plaintiff.

Blue Collar Pundit Essays

Searching for the Breach in
Alice’s Looking Glass World

My America

Oh Say, Can You See?

FREEDOM!

War isn't Hell!

God is Starting to Scare Me!

It's All Part of the Plan!

Turning the World Wide Web Into
a Tower of Politically Sanitized Babel

And by clicking here, you'll see an old suggestion (May 2003) of how Democrats could/should have protested the Republican convention and G.W. Bush.

This site is under construction

Contact: Jack Ballinger at: Pundit@BlueCollarPolitics.com

Click Here to Join the Discussions
in the
Blue Collar Blog!

For a great source of general tenant information,
visit the Tenant Net Home Page |

Click here to view City Limits Magazine

©2005 Baltech Productions. All rights reserved.