Art

SO I CHRONICLESn•”Sfe5nW^itSg^nrtj:iy-.rJiiV.irt5^’- I’lrrr^^ntatives met at city hall with ActingnMayor Eugene Sawyer and 11 of thenaldermen. The board capitulated andnplaced full page ads (at the Art Institute’snexpense) in the Chicago Tribune,nChicago Sun-Times, and in then(black) Chicago Defender, apologizingnfor “the distress and concern that thenpainting caused the community.”nField swallowed an added affront bynagreeing with the aldermen’s demandsnthat the school should hire more blacknadministrators and enroll more blacknstudents. In a candid statement, Jonesnacknowledged: “When the aldermennsay there will be marches on the Institutenand bombings, I absolutely believenthem. We didn’t come out of it terriblynwell … It was frightening. I haven’tnbeen in anything like this before.nWhen you introduce that racial elementnit takes a much meaner andnferocious tone.”nPredictably, the mob was not appeased.nOn May 13, two days after thensecretary had sounded the alarm,n”One Hundred Pastors for Peace andnL^’Jata–n•^?.s^^ 9m^m-nTranquility in Our City” assembled atnOperation PUSH headquarters. ThenRev. Willie Barrow, executive directornof PUSH, vowed to impose unspecifiedn”sanctions” against the Art Institutenunless it adopted a review policy tonprevent offensive portraits from beingnexhibited by its students or contributingnartists. Her statement also demandedna written apology to the family ofnMayor Harold Washington and tonmembers of the city council.n”We will not tolerate that picturenhanging on the wall, Constitution ornno Constitution,” declared AldermannAllan Streeter, a leader of the raid onnthe art school. Asked on JohnnCallaway’s public television show, ChicagonTonight, “What was your idea ofndue process?” Streeter replied, “Take itn[the painting] down. The law of decencyntranscends the First Amendment.”nHe then rose to more rarified heights:n”We, as a race of people, should notnallow others to determine who ournleaders will be, who we’re going tondiscipline, who we’re going to re­nnnmove.” At this. Northwestern UniversitynProfessor Daniel Polsby burst out:n”For heaven’s sake, alderman, thinknabout what you’re saying! It shouldn’tnbe necessary for a white man to talk tona black man about mob rule. That’snnot American.”nOther Chicago liberals were equallynupset. Harvey Grossman, legal advisernfor the American Civil Liberties Union,nannounced that a civil suit forndamages would be filed against thenChicago Police Department for violatingnNelson’s freedom of speech and fornillegal search and seizure. (Six weeksnlater, the ACLU narrowed its focus tonthree of the leading aldermanic invadersnand unnamed police officers; itnsued for $100,000.)nProminent Art Institute fundraisersnhad their hackles raised. Bob Bergman:n”I had visions of Nazi storm troopers,nthe way the aldermen marched into thenschool.” Camille Oliver Hoffman:n”This is fascist. We are going to drivenall our artists to New York — or Europe.”nClaudia Luebbers: “They canncome into your office if they don’t likenthe poster on your wall.”nSome white aldermen seemed tonagree. “Harold Washington has becomenso sacrosanct,” said Richard Melln(33rd Ward, northwest Chicago).n”Those aldermen were not authorizednto go down there and seize the painting,”nbut “they were playing to theirnblack constituents.” Kathy Ostermann(48th Ward, north side of Chicago)nwent further: “It was outrageous. Theynsuspended the rules and stopped importantnCouncil business. . . . Theynmade a mockery of the affair.”nMost responsible black leaders werenreluctant to discuss the matter. John H.nJohnson, publisher of Jet and Ebonynmagazines, refused to comment on thenWashington painting affair, althoughnhe is known to be a generous contributornto the Art Institute. AldermannAnna Langford, who previously hadnstood up against claimants to MayornWashington’s presumed legacy, alsonrefused comment. Leroy Thomas, editornof the Chicago Defender, had thisnto say: “I don’t feel that I can make annobjective comment. I naturally live bynfreedom of the press, but I don’t believenin abusing it. I’m not saying thatnthe student [David Nelson] intendednto create all that publicity, but that’snwhat happened.”n