For his work, Serrano had received $20,000.00 and the letter set off a series of controversies that lead to the eventual castration of federal funding for the arts in the United States. The 1990 exhibition of Robert Mapplethorpe's show (which included seven sadomasochistic portraits) in Cincinnati resulted in the unsuccessful prosecution of the Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center and its director Dennis Barrie on charges of "pandering obscenity".
In 1992, the NEA Four (Karen Finley, Tim Miller, John Fleck, and Holly Hughes) were denied grants for performance art, on the basis that the proposed work (including Finley's proclivity to smear chocolate over her naked body) was considered profane and sacrilegious. They sued and were awarded the grants in 1993 which ultimately resulted in the NEA, under pressure from Congress, ceasing to fund individual artists. As we sit here, smack dab in the beginnings of the 21st century, the ripple effect of these actions is still apparent.
As a character in the recent premiere of Aaron Sorkin's declares, "The war between art and commerce has always been there, but frankly art is getting its ass kicked." In February of 2004, Janet Jackson flashed her right breast on national television during the Superbowl. Through early October, 99.
9 percent of indecency complaints were brought by the Parents Television Council, according to the FCC analysis. The PTC was founded by L. Brent Bozell III, who, in addition to being the chief fundraiser for Pat Buchanan's unsuccessful presidential campaign, is the nephew of William F.
Buckley, and since 1996 has been instrumental in the fight to eradicate the Public Broadcasting System. In March of 2004, National Public Radio was fined $6 million for repeated mentions of Democratic candidate John Kerry. In a "Morning Edition" broadcast on March 19, NPR news anchor Bob Edwards used the name twelve times in the course of a half-hour.
A complaint was filed with the FCC alleging that "John Kerry is an obscenity and an offense to America." Apparently, the FCC agreed. In October of 2004, federal regulators proposed a record indecency fine of nearly $1.
2 million Tuesday against Fox Broadcasting Co. for an episode of its reality series "Married by America" that included graphic scenes from bachelor and bachelorette parties. Thus is the environment that artists are encouraged to create.
Much like the Masscult co-opting of terms like "alternative," "independent,' and even "innovative," the term "experimental" in regards to theater has become muddied by marketing gurus both large and small. For most Americans visions of bullwhips protruding from asses, crucifixes in urine, and pretentious Germans in unitards spring to mind when approached with the term. Given the state of most live theater, who can blame them - the term is so ill-defined by the artists and arts journalists that the most lauded or vilified definition is bound to stick.
In speaking with theater artists, "experimental" can mean everything from setting in the 1980's business world to the use of improvised, interactive environments to merely saying "fuck" a lot. Many assume that absurdist and surrealist techniques equate experimental until it is considered that these techniques were begun in the first half of the last century. In many ways, the "experimental" theater scene in Chicago has become the very definition of Peter Brook's , that is it uses "old formulae, old methods, old jokes, old effects; stock beginnings to scenes, stock ends.
.." and appeals primarily to an audience who come to the show to feel that they are in the elite, cultured part of society simply for showing up.
In the scientific method, the experiment is a cornerstone in the empirical approach to acquiring deeper knowledge about the physical world. For the theater, we can then surmise, the experiment is a cornerstone in the empirical approach to acquiring deeper knowledge about the theatrical world and that, without experimentation, we are doomed to be stuck in the stagnant swamp of the archaic. True theatrical experimentation must therefore strip away convention and attempt to ascertain new results, must therefore seek deeper knowledge, must therefore attempt to create a fresh and unique experience for both artist and audience.
It's a difficult concept to accept, the stripping away of all convention and building a piece from the ground up, so it isn't a huge surprise that so few do it. There isn't any money in experimenting, so what's the fucking point, eh? It Boils Down to Commerce and Fear When I was in high school, Ronald Reagan equated those not winning in business with universal losers.
Thus began my generation's obsession with winning the commercial wars fought on a daily basis with little regard for the consequences. We, seemingly without irony, view those theaters that are commercially successful as somehow being winners and those less so as being losers. This view, combined with the culture of outrage with those things that challenge and rebel against tradition, has created an institutionalized timidity in the theater artists of today.
The culture of the nonprofit theater gently suggests conformity over diversity - if Victory Goodwolf Theatre gets $500,000 per year in grants, then it follows that if artists copy the styles and artistic choices of Victory Goodwolf Theatre, the free money will begin to flow downhill. The culture of most arts journalism likewise suggests artistic safety over risks - if a major publication features Looking Lane Theatre in article after article, then it follows that if artists copy the styles and artistic choices of Looking Lane Theatre, the free ink will begin to flow downhill, as well. This sad trend continues until the only diversity in the artistic choices available are narrowed down to the intimacy of the space and the size of the budget.
Simply put, the current state of affairs leads artists to live in fear of being left out of the game if they don't "wise up" and do some Neil Simon or Henrik Ibsen. This isn't a new thing, though. The fearmongering didn't start with the regime of George W.
Bush - traditionalists of all stripes have used fear to quash new ideas and free thinking for all of recorded history. The traveling troupes of actors in the Middle Ages were required to perform only morality plays derived from the Bible or be branded as heretics and burned alive. The fear having no health insurance, of having no sense of financial security, of being sued or shut down or arrested has slowly transformed our artistic community into a group of sheep, cautiously toeing the line of established conventions and popular expectations, waiting to be rewarded for mediocre work disguised as "cutting edge.
" In truth, the vast majority of live American theater is no different than when Lincoln saw (most of) in 1865. It looks the same, sounds the same, and creates the same dull, braindead effect on its audience. There are exceptions, of course.
Groups like the Wooster Group, Neofuturists, Curious Theatre Branch, 500 Clown, Akropolis Performance Lab, and Theatre of the Two Headed Calf (as just a few examples) consistently break the rules in order to expose the flaws in conventional theater and are regularly doing our research and development for us. For his work, Serrano had received $20,000.00 and the letter set off a series of controversies that lead to the eventual castration of federal funding for the arts in the United States.
News RSS