Never mind the financial burden a state takeover of the horribly mismanaged SECCA would place on the taxpayer. The real challenge, according to the Journal would be –gasp– attacks from conservative politicians:
But maybe politicians, out for sound bites and headlines, would occasionally attack exhibits at SECCA. Nothing would be banned, but SECCA might tend to go for tamer exhibits to avoid such trouble. That might not happen, but it is a chilling scenario to consider.
Tamer exhibits? Like the mechanical snow machine it had on display a couple of years ago? Of course the irony here is if SECCA only had controversial exhibits right-wing politicians could criticize, then it might pay for itself. The Journal editorial describes SECCA as one of many art galleries that need to “enhance their cutting edge reputation.” It couldn’t be that modern art has gotten a bit too “cutting edge” for its audience, could it? Too many times I’ve looked at exhibits that weren’t pleasing to the eye, didn’t send a clear message and weren’t controversial. They weren’t anything. Kind of like the snow machine, which took up an entire gallery in SECCA.
There’s probably considerable competition for quality exhibitions such as the Gordon Parks photographs SECCA had a few years ago. I would think attracting quality exhibitions will only get harder as word of the building’s condition spreads. So when, and if, SECCA’s finances are settled, it will have to work even harder to restore its “cutting edge reputation.” Perhaps it will have a slightly different view of what constitutes “art.”
