• the217
• Arts
• Why do we censor art?

Related Media

• See Slideshow (4 images)

See More About these Events

Opening reception for Censored »

• Event has already occurred
• Illini Union »
  1401 W. Green St. Urbana, IL 61801
  (Show on map)

Related Articles

• Artist's Corner

Brian Sullivan’s solo exhibition, “Censored,” at the Illini Union Art Gallery raises a number of questions. Appropriately enough, every piece in the exhibit was censored at least once before by “groups such as the KKK, woman libbers, conservative Christians or other fanatics,” according to Sullivan’s artist’s statement.

Why they were censored is not entirely clear. An online search for “Brian Sullivan” and “Censorship” brings up only one recorded instance of censorship: a retro-futurist piece called “Rocket Patrol” that was taken out of an exhibit at Algonquin Area Public Library because of apparent nudity.

Some pieces have fairly obvious reasons why someone could want them removed. A painting called “Lucky Strike,” which juxtaposes the famous cigarette package with an image of John F. Kennedy, was in poor taste. Others have less obvious causes for offense. “Box Lady” featured an American flag with the words “freedom, liberty, justice, tolerance, equality” printed on it with the superimposed image of a ’40s pin-up girl. The only reason I can see for that to be censored is over-sensitivity on the part of the gallery owner.

The most important question Sullivan raises is, “Why do we censor art?” Despite our commitment both as a country and, by and large, as individuals to the concept of free expression, censorship happens. Sullivan posits both creeping political correctness and a fear of legal actions. To an extent, I agree.

I also think, however, that non-governmental censorship (the most common kind in America) is a byproduct of the marketplace of ideas of which we’re so proud. Sullivan was able to take pieces that had been censored elsewhere, put them together in an exhibit, get them displayed and offer them for sale. I think that the Illini Union did the right thing in hosting this exhibition by giving art that was taken down elsewhere a place to be seen.

Having said all that, however, I have to question the effectiveness of Sullivan’s work. Several pieces clearly had messages, but they were unclear. A piece called “King George” shows teddy bears, playing cards, broken pearls, hairbrushes, a silhouette of the World Trade Center and a banner that reads “Mission Accomplished.” While this was clearly a political statement, and it seems to have some connection with the ideas of the 9-11 truth movement, its ultimate message is unclear. I am not asking Mr. Sullivan to lead viewers by the hand to his conclusions, but I am questioning the effectiveness of jamming a painting with so much surrealistic imagery that any possible political point gets lost.

Mr. Sullivan’s work is best when it is simple, allowing his high technical standards and keen eye towards modern culture to come through. “Innocence,” which places a lipstick-wearing Gerber baby opposite of pixilated image of Marilyn Monroe, was smart and thought-provoking. Moments like that were far too rare. “Censored” is an amusing