Friday, May 18, 2012

"Satirical" Painting of a Nekkid Stephen Harper Causes a Ruckus in Kingston

It looks like something that might have hung (no double entendre intended) at the Sex show in Ottawa--which is posing something of a problem for the library where it's on display:
"When the [painting] went up, we also had quite a few bookings with children's recitals during the same month," she [Enright the librarian] said. "And so the library, in terms of looking at the policy, had also said that the library retains the right to determine the suitability of any proposed exhibit, and they must be reviewed within a context of the public space and its users."
The library then contacted the arts council and explained their conundrum.
Enright said the programmer spoke with [the artist] Sutherland to explain they would take down the painting when programs with children were being held in the room.
Sutherland was unable to be reached late Thursday.
But in a comment on the website Kingstonist, Sutherland said she is "ticked off" at the library because it keeps covering or removing the piece, particularly if children are in the room where it's being shown.
"I've now provided them with a cloth to cover the painting to lessen the chances they will damage it taking it down and putting it who knows where to sit who knows how long. However, with this kind of behaviour I have little confidence they will actually use it," Sutherland said in her comment under a story about the opening of the art show.
On the plus side, at least taxpayers didn't have to pay for it.

The Prime Minister's privates go public (when they aren't being "redacted" for the sake of the children)


Brian said...

"at least taxpayers didn't have to pay for it."

You mean the Kingston Library is a private library? Bottom line, it's "edgy" art, we always pay one way or another.

scaramouche said...

No, I mean that while we paid the "sexologists" who put the Sex show together, as far as I know we didn't pay the painter.

Al the Fish said...

My interpretation of the art, is the painter wants us to believe Harper screwed the pooch. Not buying that, or the painting, but I do have the urge to buy a double, double now.

Minicapt said...

Rather than fussing about the treatment of this painting, perhaps the 'artist' should consider returning to school to brush up her knowledge of the human anatomy.
Aside from that it achieves 'edginess' through being an untidy composition featuring a naked human body with the intent of being displayed in a public place. As art, it's quite a dog.