[ back ]
Law on side of uncensored art
(by Dave Lange - October 01, 2008)
COUNTY LINE, BY DAVE LANGE
Law on side of uncensored art
The 18th "People's Art Show" will open Oct. 24 at Cleveland State University. Billed as "a free, unjuried, uncensored exhibition celebrating creativity, diversity, imagination and freedom," the show has generated some controversy in the past.
It may be "free from elitist prejudices" and "taste police," as sponsors have claimed, but many people do not take kindly to the way certain "artists" depicted beloved Christian icons, the American flag and other respected symbols in the past.
In the "People's Art Show," just about anything can be "art." But in Chagrin Falls, not even "Art" is art.
Perhaps due to the "elitist prejudices" of the village's board of zoning appeals, the venerable Valley Art Center was denied its application last month to include 100-square-foot graphic depictions of the word "Art" on two exterior walls of the newly refurbished building. The zoning board decreed that, no matter how artistic the word "Art" might be and regardless of the credentials of the artist who created it, it would be a sign, not art. Thus, the board ruled that the village's commercial sign ordinance, which limits such signs to 12 square feet, expressly forbids "Art" on the art center.
Board members were unconvinced by the art center's argument that the "graphic flourish" of the word "Art" would make it an artistic expression and not a sign. Councilman James Watterson, who was in the audience, countered that, if that were true, he could open a law office in the village and design a mural for the wall with the word "Law" on it.
But where does reasonable control of commercial signs end and censorship begin? Interpretation of the First Amendment grants a lot more freedom for political speech than it does for the commercial variety.
Citing a 14-year-old U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the Pepper Pike law director recently advised City Council to liberalize the municipal ordinance's restrictions on the number, size and duration of political signs.
I suspect that, if the Valley Art Center were to depict the word "Art" within the context of a 200-square-foot American flag or across a 20-foot-wide crucifix on its wall, the village would stand on shaky legal ground in attempting to censor it. The point has been made quite clear by the "People's Art Show" and similar exhibits around the country that art is among the expressions afforded such great freedom by the First Amendment.
I would further Mr. Watterson's point by pointing out that equality under the law also is a fundamental tenet of our democracy. "Art" and "Law" may indeed be political statements.
Long before many people who live in Solon today had even heard of Solon, I did a stint with a weekly newspaper called the Solon Free Press.
Not quite so long ago, when we moved the Times into our present digs in South Russell, it took some time to get our business sign properly designed, approved and posted. My attempt to direct our customers to our new offices by taping poster board with the words "The Times" inside a prominent window quickly received a cease-and-desist order from the sign inspector.
A free press being guaranteed by the First Amendment, I may have been on firmer legal ground to resist the desistance on behalf of my earlier employer.
The Solon Free Press is long gone. But a free press, uncensored art and the rule of law are much more than signs of the times.
[ back ]
