Kerry DoughertyIF ONLY I hadn't watched "The Godfather" last Saturday.
I keep replaying that scene where the Corleones are ready to make a move on Vegas and the spineless son, Fredo, stupidly sides with casino owner Moe Greene.
It went something like, "Freddie, you're my older brother. I love you." Michael hisses the minute Moe leaves. "But don't ever take sides with anybody against the family again."
Fredo nods dumbly. But we all know how that turns out.
Nevertheless, here I am, taking sides against my employer.
I feel like Fredo. In a skirt.
This is about the great naked debate, of course. The one that involves The Virginian-Pilot, its student art show and two talented young artists who were denied top prizes because the subjects of their works were portrayed au naturel.
Yes, Michelangelo spins in his grave.
First, some history. This year was the 36th annual Virginian-Pilot Student Gallery. Hundreds of budding young artists from the area submitted two works each for judging. The lucky finalists saw their pieces hung in the Chrysler Museum of Art and were eligible for cash prizes.
When the judge of the show, the director of an art museum at the College of William and Mary, selected a painting by 17-year-old Nancy "Beth" Reid of Portsmouth for first prize, the organizers from The Pilot gulped.
It wasn't just that Reid had submitted a painting of a nude, a colorful rendering of a teenage girl in the buff. This was a self-portrait. It said so right on the label.
The organizers checked with the publisher.
No paintings of unclad minors, he said.
I'm not just buttering up the boss of my family when I say Bruce Bradley's heartburn was understandable.
"The key point was that this is a minor," Bradley reiterated Wednesday.
We in the news business go to great lengths to shield minors. Slapping a blue ribbon on a picture of a naked high school senior, perhaps reprinting the work in the paper and using it in a slide show, goes against our protective instincts.
The first judge departed and a second was summoned.
Enter Scott Howe, director of education and public programs at the Chrysler. He studied the works and selected a sculpture of a nude pregnant torso as best in the show.
The representatives of the paper groaned. No nudes, they said.
"I was told I wasn't allowed to honor either girl in any way," Howe said.
If that was the case, Howe said he told the organizers, they should remove those off-limit items from the judging. They refused. So he, too, walked out.
This second decision is more puzzling than the first.
The work was not a self-portrait. It shows a swollen belly and two large bosoms. Its companion piece is a baby in a nest. The artist, Jasmine Childs of Chesapeake, told me she was trying to show the relationship between mother and child.
Look, the newspaper runs the show. The newspaper makes the rules. If nudes were unwelcome, they should have been banned from the start. They weren't excluded and nudes were entered in previous shows, so it seems unfair to penalize these talented artists.
Ultimately, two Pilot staffers judged the show. The nudes remain on display but are ribbonless.
There is an upside to this embarrassing ordeal. Private sources raised enough money to give Reid and Childs cash awards. Foot traffic at the Chrysler is up and the girls have become overnight sensations in the local art world.
"I'm not upset at all," Childs said when I reached her Tuesday. "I've been getting a lot of support."
Deservedly so.
And The Pilot?
Let's just say a family portrait of us right now would have to include some egg on our faces.
Kerry Dougherty, (757) 446-2306, kerry.dougherty@cox.net
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Upload Your Video
iTunes Podcast
Video Feeds
Watch The Dot
The impact of media hype
This is yet another side effect of media hype. People get the impression there's pedophiles on every corner, everyone is losing their house, the economy has been in a constant state of crashing for decades, and there's people with guns hiding in ever corner just waiting to open fire.
The reality is tiny fringe of disturbed people that consider children sexual objects and there's absolutely no logical reason to put that kind of restriction on art work.
a good newspaper nevertheless
I truly feel Mr. Bradley and Mr. Maurice Jones made the wrong decision in taking away monetary awards and recognition from both young ladies. Nevertheless, I need to say that the newspaper's dedication to Student Gallery for 36 years should not be forgotten. Student Gallery has been a success because of the generosity of SunTrust and The Virginian Pilot. It's not a cheap venture. I'm betting they spend over $30,000. to make this happen. Young artists are honored at either The Contemporary Arts Center in Virginia Beach or the Chrysler Museum in Norfolk. Professional artists wait YEARS to show their work in museums and galleries. What a great experience for these students. Let's us remember and support the Virginian Pilot for their support of the arts, even if we don't agree with the decision of these two men. Please keep Student Gallery alive and running for many years to come.
Torn
I'm really torn on this entire subject.
The "official" winner is a young artist from Arcadia HS which is around the corner from my house. She is the first "winner" from the Eastern Shore in the contest history (according to what I've read.) I congratulate her for her achievement.
OTOH, the VP changed the rules in the middle of the game which is totally wrong.
Im sure it was some sort of
Im sure it was some sort of stupid statement from the judges. Espically the second judge. Liberals role in society is to slowly erode all morals and to raise taxes to give away. When you pay out more then you take in then that society is over.
and lets not forget
the "nude" self portrait showed NO PART of her body, other than the outline of her hip from what I saw of it. Nothing to be ashamed about, no nudity. Good grief, get a grip.
Ooops... Face Plant!!!
...THUD!
Nude figure studies are usually part of a college level, advanced arts curriculum & not part of general high school art classes. The fact that both of these young artists were able to produce works that were of a caliber that impressed the two different artistically knowledgeable adjudicators is a testiment to their high level of artistic skills.
However, like it or not... if the powers that be end up changing the rules in the middle of the game... even if the reasons for the changes are arguably valid & heartfelt... they will always end up looking & sounding like a gigantic doofus!! It's impossible to "stand" for your values, after you've publically put both feet in your mouth. Period!
The two young artists deserve a public apology from the organizers & should also receive a bursary of some amount towards the furtherance of their art education.
I have been impressed though...
that the Pilot's writers and editors tackled the coverage of this story head-on, even though it was bound to create a backlash. The paper didn't squelch potentially negative news about itself. That reassures me somehow.
One other thing bothered me
When the story ran in the newspaper, the photo of the torso was acceptable for print, but not the painting. It almost seems as if the part that makes everyone most uncomfortable is knowing exactly who is in the painting. If she'd painted a headless, armless torso, that would have been printable? Whole humans have heads and arms and are identifiable. Does knowing who it is make it obscene? Are anonymous parts less objectionable? (I don't even know how I would answer.)
chesschamp
It is about starting a precedent that could lead in a roundabout way down a slippery slope to public child nudity.
Too late...a small drive to Zuni will introduce you to Whitetail Park, a family nudist park. There is nothing wrong with children being nude, it's the 19th century thinking of individuals that make it a "bad thing"
"2 Pilot staffers ultimately judged..."
God - scary thought. What did they pick? Still life with fruit bowl?
If I were a young artist I would think twice about entering this Victorian era art contest next year. Perhaps the art community can create their own contest free of those puritanical constraints that seem to bind the Pilot at every turn.
Pilot - the NY Times you ain't! More like the Bucksnort Tribune with each issue.
Burn them, Burn them All
There are books at the public librarys and at the books stores with pictures of a naked underage sculpture of King David, and all kinds of other European child porno trash!! I say we burn it all!! YEEEEEH HAAAW!!! the South will rise again!!!! Come on Rev. Pat, lead us on!!!
What do commonwealth attorneys say?
I guess it's not against the law to display a portrait of a naked child to the public? What about all the hubbub over Abercrombie and Fitch a month ago? Can a woman paint pictures of her naked 12 year old children and have an "art show" at her own house, open to the public? I don't think these people at the show are considering the ramifications of allowing this kind of material. Everyone is missing the issue. It is not about freedom of expression, or morality. It is about starting a precedent that could lead in a roundabout way down a slippery slope to public child nudity. I am interested in seeing what the CAs say is the difference between a self portrait of a naked 16 year old and and the scenario above.
If The Pregnant Torso
Was real, it may soon be lactating. How long is this story going to "Milked?" lol
Some "what ifs."
What if the nude portrait had been of a twelve year old girl? Or a twelve year old boy? Or a nude self portrait of a seventeen year old boy? Any different opinions as to what should have been done?
Contest Rules
Kerry,
As usual, I agree.
Makes me wonder about this new publisher. Did he study at the University of Virginia?
Gosh I hate to agree......
I'm gonna need counseling for agreeing with Kerry, but when she writes:
"
Look, the newspaper runs the show. The newspaper makes the rules. If nudes were unwelcome, they should have been banned from the start. They weren't excluded and nudes were entered in previous shows, so it seems unfair to penalize these talented artists."
She is right...... there I said it and I'm off to my counseling appointment..... LOL!!