Controversial Art Show

Re “Art in 20th Century Has Always Been ‘Shock of the New,’ ” Opinion, Oct. 9:

Art shows, plays and movies have long striven for the bottom line by advertising “controversy,” “shock” and “insult.” It now appears necessary to add the caution that one might vomit, in order to bring in the crowds. There may be some worthwhile creations in the current Brooklyn Museum of Art exhibition, but most of those interviewed on TV admit to having been attracted by the promise of carcasses, maggots and dung.

Is interest in art in contemporary America at a low ebb? Or has the art itself become so bad that even maggots, dung and the likelihood of vomiting seem interesting by comparison?

MARGARET FINLEY

Banning

*

I wonder if Mayor Rudolph Giuliani would have changed his mind about the painting of the Virgin Mary if he had been informed that cow dung and urine were used by painters throughout Europe from the 11th through 13th centuries for the creation of their colors. This means that some of the most celebrated religious art--paintings and frescoes by Giotto and Cimabue, for example--used materials not so different from those used by Chris Ofili, who painted the controversial Virgin Mary.

CONSTANCE

STOTHART BONGI

La Jolla