Sensation exhibition

The show generated controversy in London and New York due to the inclusion of an image of Myra Hindley and the Virgin Mary respectively. The show consisted of work from the collection of Charles Saatchi. It was criticised for attempting to boost the value of the work through being shown in institutions and public museums.^who?

Works

The artworks in Sensation were from the collection of Charles Saatchi, a leading collector and publiciser of contemporary art. Norman Rosenthal, the Royal Academy of Arts exhibitions secretary, helped to stage the 110 works by 42 different artists. Many of the pieces had already become famous, or notorious, to the British public (for example, Damien Hirst's shark suspended in formaldehyde titled, The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living, and Tracey Emin's tent titled Everyone I Have Ever Slept with 1963–1995). Others had already achieved prominence in other ways, such as a successful advertising campaign using an idea from Gillian Wearing's photographs. Sensation was the first time that a wide audience had had the chance to see these works en masse. The Royal Academy posted this disclaimer to visitors on entry:

London

The opening of Sensation at the Royal Academy caused a public furore and a media frenzy, with both broadsheet and tabloid journalists falling over themselves to comment on the show’s controversial images, and unprecedented crowds queuing up to see for themselves what all the fuss was about. Around a quarter of the RA's 80 academicians gave a warning that the exhibition was inflammatory. They and some members of the public complained about several other exhibits, notably the installations by Jake and Dinos Chapman, which were of child mannequins with noses replaced by penises and mouths in the form of an anus.

However, the biggest media controversy was over Myra, an image of the murderer Myra Hindley by Marcus Harvey.¹

The Mothers Against Murder and Aggression protest group picketed the show, accompanied by Winnie Johnson, the mother of one of Hindley's victims,² who asked for the portrait, made up of hundreds of copies of a child's handprint, to be excluded to protect her feelings. Along with supporters she picketed the show's first day. Even Myra Hindley, herself, sent a letter from jail suggesting her portrait be removed from the exhibition, reasoning that such action was necessary because the work was “a sole disregard not only for the emotional pain and trauma that would inevitably be experienced by the families of the Moors victims but also the families of any child victim.”³⁴ Despite all the protest the painting remained hanging. Windows at Burlington House, the Academy's home, were smashed and two demonstrators hurled ink and eggs at the picture as a result, requiring it to be removed and restored. It was put back on display behind Perspex⁵ and guarded by security men.

The show was extremely popular with the general public, attracting over 300,000 visitors during its run,⁵ helped by the media attention which the strong subject matter had received. The BBC described it as "gory images of dismembered limbs and explicit pornography"^{citation needed}.

Berlin

Sensation was shown at the Berlin Hamburger Bahnhof museum (30 September 1998 – 30 January 1999) and proved so popular that it was extended past its original closing date of 28 December 1998.

New York

The exhibition was shown in New York City at the Brooklyn Museum of Art from 2 October 1999 to 9 January 2000. The New York show was met with instant protest, centering on The Holy Virgin Mary by Chris Ofili, which had not provoked this reaction in London. While the press reported that the piece was smeared^{citation needed} with elephant dung, Ofili's work in fact showed a carefully rendered black Madonna decorated with a resin-covered lump of elephant dung. The figure is also surrounded by small collaged images of female genitalia from pornographic magazines; these seemed from a distance to be the traditional cherubim.

Guiliani, who had seen the work in the catalogue but not in the show, called it "sick stuff" and threatened to withdraw the annual $7 million City Hall grant from the Brooklyn Museum hosting the show, because "You don't have a right to government subsidy for desecrating somebody else's religion."⁵ John O'Connor, the Cardinal of New York, said, "one must ask if it is an attack on religion itself," and the president of America's biggest group of Orthodox Jews, Mandell Ganchrow, called it "deeply offensive".⁶ William A Donohue, President of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said the work "induces revulsion".⁵ Guiliani started a lawsuit to evict the museum, and Arnold Lehman, the museum director, filed a federal lawsuit against Guiliani for a breach of the First Amendment.⁶

Hillary Clinton spoke up for the museum, as did the New York Civil Liberties Union.⁵ The editorial board of The New York Times said, Guiliani's stance "promises to begin a new Ice Age in New York's cultural affairs." ⁷ The paper also carried a petition in support signed by 106 creatives, including Susan Sarandon, Steve Martin, Norman Mailer, Arthur Miller, Kurt Vonnegut and Susan Sontag.⁶ Ofili, who is Roman Catholic, said, "elephant dung in itself is quite a beautiful object."⁶

There was intense pressure to remove federal funding for the Museum and The House of Representatives even passed a nonbinding resolution to this effect on 3 October 1999. New York City then stopped funding to the Brooklyn Museum. On 1 November, Judge Nina Gershon ordered the City to not only restore the funding that was denied to the Museum, but also to refrain from continuing its ejectment action. The debate continued, involving the Cardinal of St Patrick's Cathedral, the First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, the American Civil Liberties Union and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Protesters outside the museum variously said the rosary, handed out vomit bags and threw manure in protest. On 16 December 1999 a 72-year-old man was arrested for "criminal mischief" after he smeared white paint on this painting. The graffiti was soon removed.

The museum produced a yellow stamp, saying the artworks on show "may cause shock, vomiting, confusion, panic, euphoria and anxiety."⁶ and Ofili's painting was shown behind a Plexiglass screen, guarded by a museum attendant and an armed police officer.⁷ Jeffrey Hogrefe, New York Observer art critic, said, "They wanted to get some publicity and they got it. I think it was pretty calculated."⁵ The editor-in-chief of the New York Art & Auction magazine, Bruce Wolmer,said: "When the row eventually fades the only smile will be on the face of Charles Saatchi, a master self-promoter."⁶

Australia

The show was scheduled to open in June 1999 at the National Gallery of Australia, but was cancelled, the director, Brian Kennedy, saying that, although it was due to be funded by the Australian government, it was "too close to the market", since finance for the Brooklyn exhibition included $160,000 from Saatchi, who owned the work, $50,000 from Christie's, who had sold work for Saatchi, and $10,000 from dealers of many of the artists.⁸ Kennedy said he was unaware of this, when he accepted the show; Saatchi's contribution, the largest single one, was not disclosed by the Brooklyn Museum, until it appeared in court documents.⁸ When the show opened in London at the Royal Academy, there had been criticisms that it would raise the value of the work.⁸

Notes and references

^ ^a ^b Dalrymple, Theodore. "Trash, Violence, and Versace: But Is It Art?". City Journal, Winter, 1998. Retrieved on 25 February 2008.
^ Blanchard, Tamsin. "Arts: Sensation as ink and egg are thrown at Hindley portrait", The Independent, 19 September 1997. Retrieved from findarticles.com, 17 October 2008.
^ Lyall, Sarah. "Art That Tweaks British Propriety". New York Times, 20 September 1997.Retrieved on 25 February 2008.
^ Young, Alison. "Judging the Image: Art, Value, Law". Routledge, January, 2005. p. 34. ISBN 0-4153-0183-1
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f "Sensation sparks New York storm", BBC, 23 September 1999. Retrieved 17 October 2008.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Davies, Hugh; Fenton, Ben. "Whiff of sensation hits New York", The Daily Telegraph, 2 October 1999. Retrieved 17 October 2008.
^ ^a ^b Rapp, Christopher. "Dung Deal - Brooklyn Museum of Art's "Sensation" exhibition", National Review, 25 October 1999. Retrieved 17 October 2008.
^ ^a ^b ^c Vogel, Carol. "Australian Museum cancels controversial art show", The New York Times, 1 December 1999. Retrieved 17 October 2008.

Contents