Bush Shuns Role of Censor Over Arts Funded by U.S.

The Bush Administration told Congress today it would not seek to control the content of art supported with federal tax dollars. The decision seemed sure to anger right-wing Republicans.

Controversy over whether to restrict content of federally financed art received extensive publicity last year because of two photographic exhibits supported by money from the National Endowment for the Arts.

One, by Robert Mapplethorpe, included depictions of sadomasochism and homoerotic acts. Another, by Andres Serrano, depicted a crucifix in a jar of urine.

As a result, this year’s spending bill contained restrictions, inspired by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), on financing obscene works and gave a definition of obscene within limits set by the Supreme Court. The restrictions were effective for one year only.

In submitting legislation today to extend the existence of the arts endowment another five years, starting Oct. 1, the Bush Administration chose not to include “content restrictions” similar to those that apply this year.

John F. Frohnmayer, chairman of the arts endowment, spelled out the Administration’s reasoning in testimony before the House Education and Labor subcommittee on post-secondary education.

He said the content restrictions in effect this year caused “much concern and confusion” within the arts community.

“After much careful thought and discussion, it is our conclusion that the legislation proposed here which contains no content restrictions, along with measures discussed earlier, will best serve the American public,” Frohnmayer said.

The other measures mentioned by Frohnmayer include ways to improve the system for evaluating grants. The NEA will develop a “grid” to assure that all geographic areas are represented and that as many cultures as possible are represented. The makeup of the evaluation panels also will be diversified.

“Will these modifications in the panel process eliminate controversy?” he asked. “Probably not. I do not see as a desirable goal that the art which the federal government supports be so bland that no one even notices it.”

Anne G. Murphy, executive director of the American Arts Alliance, which opposes content restrictions, said she was pleased by Frohnmeyer’s comments but cautious about whether the Administration will succeed in keeping NEA free of such restrictions.