Wolf Was Censored

The staff's blithe condemnation and dismissal of Cameron S. Wolf, ("a self-described artist") and by extension, his work, astounds me. The editorial remains silent on an important issue, namely the outrageous conflict of interest which obtains when a House Artist-in-Residence--who presumably is a practicing artist (the medium is irrelevant) is given substantial power to determine whose work and which pieces will be exhibited.

I concede, reluctantly, that the lines of authority as currently drawn provided Dudley House Master. Daniel S. Fisher with the final decision in determining the content of "The Mirror of the Plague." However, I am uneasy with this. There should be a more democratic process to determine the choosing of exhibits. While Fisher and A-Raki may very well be competent in this area, why should their aesthetic judgements be inflicted upon the community, especially given the Dudley House population? What's to deter future conservative, authority figures from even more chilling decisions, say the decision to show only Norman Rockwell prints during a particular year.

I am also chilled by the staff's unquestioning acceptance of Fisher's claim that "certain, particularly graphic, works...be removed" because "a group of small children were scheduled to use the Dudley House space." Why should children's sensibilities be privileged?

Although the staff does not say it outright, it implies that Wolf's work is pornographic. Definitions of pornography are tied to community standards. The Harvard community is an atypical one. Most people here are capable of analytical rigor in dissecting complexities. By pulling selected pieces from the ongoing exhibit at Dudley, the community was denied the chance to make its own decision.

Ultimately, Wolf made a strategic error in allowing his work--or more accurately, parts of it--in Dudley House. This meant exposure to a limited audience. He should have sought to have his work displayed in Ticknor Lounge or in the mezzanine in Widener. This would have provided him with a broader audience for his innovative treatment of an important issue.