San Diego Unseen: An Urban Portrait
"Large Nudes No. 5" by Anna Stump (64" x 52")
Earlier this week, I reported that an exhibition of nude paintings scheduled to go up at the Martha Pace Swift Gallery at the Naval Training Center Promenade had been canceled.
The gallery is actually owned by the NTC Foundation and contracted out to the Expressive Arts Institute. It's a unique, alternative-space gallery housed in the hallway, stairwell and lobby in one of the buildings at NTC. Wes Chester, co-director of the Expressive Arts Institute and curator of the Martha Pace Swift Gallery, has been organizing and installing the exhibitions without any problems or interjections from the NTC Foundation. But a problem arose when he sent Alan Ziter, executive director of the NTC Foundation, an email containing images from an upcoming solo show featuring San Diego artist Anna Stump.
Chester wanted to show paintings from Stump's Large Nudes series, but Ziter said he didn't think it was a good idea.
Ziter has every right to cancel a show at the Martha Pace Swift Gallery. His foundation owns the gallery and the contract with the Expressive Arts Institute does allow for a vetting process. He says these particular nudes were just too much for the public space where families and kids often pass through. He worried about the building's other tenants, some of which cater specifically to kids.
Chester, whose organization also works with kids and families, disagrees. He thinks the nudes would have been fine hanging in the hallways of the building at NTC. He argued that if nude paintings weren't going to be allowed in the gallery, he'd be left showing landscapes and abstract art, and he said he felt like his show was being censored for no good reason.
What do you think? My original post contained a misleading statement ("No nudes at NTC"). It also failed to mention that the gallery was owned by the NTC Foundation and that the space itself is more public than private, so there was definitely some initial outrage that may be unfounded. Nudes have been and will continue to be allowed in the private galleries at the NTC. But the question of whether Stump's large-scale nudes are appropriate for this public-space gallery (which has shown a few nudes in the past) is still up for debate.
A few of Stump's large-scale nudes were displayed in the street-facing windows of the Alexander Salazar Fine Art Gallery, which sits on the corner of Broadway and Seventh downtown, and nobody complained.
But is a building where more kids and families will be getting up close and personal with these nudes a different story? Did Ziter make the right decision in protecting the public and the building's fellow tenants? Is this an example of censorship? Is Ziter, the leader of an organization that's building a new arts district, being too much of a prude?
Below are a few of the comments that have come in so far:
The gallery is actually owned by the NTC Foundation and contracted out to the Expressive Arts Institute. It's a unique, alternative-space gallery housed in the hallway, stairwell and lobby in one of the buildings at NTC. Wes Chester, co-director of the Expressive Arts Institute and curator of the Martha Pace Swift Gallery, has been organizing and installing the exhibitions without any problems or interjections from the NTC Foundation. But a problem arose when he sent Alan Ziter, executive director of the NTC Foundation, an email containing images from an upcoming solo show featuring San Diego artist Anna Stump.
Chester wanted to show paintings from Stump's Large Nudes series, but Ziter said he didn't think it was a good idea.
Ziter has every right to cancel a show at the Martha Pace Swift Gallery. His foundation owns the gallery and the contract with the Expressive Arts Institute does allow for a vetting process. He says these particular nudes were just too much for the public space where families and kids often pass through. He worried about the building's other tenants, some of which cater specifically to kids.
Chester, whose organization also works with kids and families, disagrees. He thinks the nudes would have been fine hanging in the hallways of the building at NTC. He argued that if nude paintings weren't going to be allowed in the gallery, he'd be left showing landscapes and abstract art, and he said he felt like his show was being censored for no good reason.
A few of Stump's large-scale nudes were displayed in the street-facing windows of the Alexander Salazar Fine Art Gallery, which sits on the corner of Broadway and Seventh downtown, and nobody complained.
But is a building where more kids and families will be getting up close and personal with these nudes a different story? Did Ziter make the right decision in protecting the public and the building's fellow tenants? Is this an example of censorship? Is Ziter, the leader of an organization that's building a new arts district, being too much of a prude?
Below are a few of the comments that have come in so far:
- @twocitygirl @vosdscott Nobody should be shocked by nudes these days. The nudes in question are lovely. More about brush strokes than boobs.
- @Kinsee I agree that nobody should be shocked, but idiots often are. I'm just saying the timing is bad. NTC has bigger probs right now.
- @citybeatkelly @Kinsee f it's not even their space, & they needed permission to put the work on walls, this is a whole different discussion.
- @Kinsee but there's no harm in asking if they'll not do the show, right? Censorship would be if they forced them to or threatened, no?
