Art from Inside

The very word, "REHABILITATION" presupposes Habilitation ... If an individual was not habilitated in the first place, evidenced by his commission of a crime ....... how in hell does any sane, reasonable, intelligent person possibly hope to RE-habilitate him ???  Inquiring Minds Want To Know .............

This is a tough one.  There's a lot at play here and I neither know nor pretend to know all the answers.

Here's what I do know: A young person is dead before his time, a victim of violence.  That young victim's killer will now have his artwork deisplayed and celebrated in public.  That's as objectively as I know how to say it.  Any instinctual feelings that are brought about by the contents of that statement probably have real merit.

But... This is not the same as letting the killer loose.  No one is suggesting that the creation of good art is a criterion for letting the guy out of prison.  It is perfectly possible that he may yet hang himself in his cell just as the victim's mother hopes.

The question, I suppose, is "How much does it matter?"  If a painting or a sculpture is museum worthy, to what degree should we concern ourselves with the artist's other activities.  Ludwig Van Beethoven was known as an unbearably prickly and unpleasant man, Richard Wagner was a raging anti-semite, and Richard Strauss was a registered member of the Nazi party.  Does this decrease the quality of their music?  My first instinct is to say no but, even as I type, I keep remembering someone is dead who should not be.

Then, there is that sticky and troubling question of redemption.  Is it possible for a murderer to find redemption?  If so, how should he go about seeking it?  And how does one redeem oneself from so unreversable a crime as murder?  Stolen or damaged property can always be returned or repaired but there is nothing so permanent, so final, as death.

A long time ago, when I was seriously troubled with a guilty conscience of my own, a close friend said to me, "We are the sum of our actions."  She did not mean to suggest that my good traits could somehow negate my bad ones, but merely that they must not be taken as any less relevant.  If I take her at her word, I must acknowledge that Mr. McLaurin's paintings are a no less crucial aspect of his identity (though no more so either) than his crime and must, however uncomfortable it makes me, be judged by their own merits.

The Chicago Cultural Center certainly has the right to display these works.  And victims' families every every right to boycott (even to picket) if they so choose.

DPR:

"And that, said John,is that." 

As an interesting side note, Jean genet, the famous French author and libertine was arrested in the late forties. Becuase he had ten convictions for theft, lewd acts, prostitution etc, he faced a life sentence, but because of his talent and writing a group of French intellectuals including Sartre and Picasso gathered together and petitioned the French government. As a result all charges against Genet were dismissed, and he never returned to prison.

The story always seemed a little fishy to me, a little fishy but very, very French. Sometimes (well, for me often) I'm glad to be an old fashioned American.

On the slightest of parallel lines:
A nice looking, well spoken supermarket checkout girl interrupted my quiet admiration of her remarkably unblemished complexion:
"My sister is involved in an intense correspondence relationship with an imprisoned murderer."
"Who'd he kill?" I wondered.
"His girlfriend... in an argument over cigarettes, using a set of fireplace tools including the tongs and broom."
How odd, I thought. usually it was the poker.
This guy had a future more clear than most of us in which the day he finally got out, it would be in a bag, on a gurney, unaware.
"This sounds like a deal that can go nowhere," I suggested, "How do you explain her actions?"
"Well," she went on, "There are, in our backyard, a dozen graves of sick and dying animals that she adopted from the shelter knowing that it was a dead end proposition. The one dog that miraculously improved, I had to get out of there before something bad happened."
"So, she likes her relationships well defined, downward sloping, and not entirely open ended as to length?" "But, how does that explain the killer?"
"He is diabetic, HIV positive, with failing liver, kidney and heart issues, is going blind and his "religion" forbids most medical treatment." she responded.
"Wow, a match made in heaven. Is there," I asked, "room in the backyard?"
"That," she said, "Is not funny."
Who could argue...?

I went to grad school in Wyoming. Met my sweetie there (always have a soft spot for Laramie, forever, and little pink houses). But in Wyoming, there's a saying for how one deals with a criminal who's wronged you: "Shoot, shovel, and shut up. There's only two witnesses, and one can't talk." There's lots of empty prairie in Wyoming. Dig down far enough so the coyotes don't find your friend. Debt settled.

It is our society that has designed and enabled the legal system to determine the fate of those who are convicted of crimes of violence.

It is not determined by the victims of violent crimes, or in the case of those victims whose lives were cut short, their families, loved ones and friends, who are left with a hole in their heart that will never truly be healed.

I don't have a quarrel with this.

I do feel, and feel is the operative word here, that perhaps in regard to today's topic, maybe this is where the victims should have the only voice that counts. If the public display of their art or any form of public praise and recognition serves to quicken the pain of these victims, yet again; then perhaps they should be allowed to decide whether or not it happens.

If the victims can find it in their hearts to look past their pain, then so be it. If not; then I don't think any museum or program, regardless of their good intentions, has the right to hurt the victims of violence yet again.

Peter,

I like the sensitivity of your post but I can't go with you there.  Pain is a terrible thing but there are too many variables to make it the arbiter of rights.  What if there is more than one victim and half look past there pain while the other half doesn't?  What if a victim insists that all artwork from the prisoners must be burned in the public square or else his/her pain will be quickened?

I will grant that any exhibit of this type should be done entirely with private contributions.  If the National Endowment for the Arts or any other government fund is connected to this exhibit, then Janie Edwards' tax dollars are contributing directly to the celebration of the artwork of the man who killed her son.  That, I certainly find objectionable.

But, while I fully appreciate your emphasis on the word "feel", the very need to do so shows fully well how feelings and rights are a bad mix.

Stoney:
For some reason these Kimya Dawson lyrics seem relevant.
"I like boys with strong convictions
And convicts with perfect diction
Underdogs with good intentions
Amputees with stamp collections"

Don't say anything interesting for a week, I'm going to a rented cabin in Virginia. It's a great place to relax, take a break from hard physical labor, and forget about the rest of the world. If you don't have such a place, I highly suggest you get one.
Seriously though, no internet.
Bye kids.

I have a suggestion.......instead of allowing this killer to express himself as a painter why don't we encourage him to be a "performance artist"? we could give him a rope and teach him to make a very creative noose and then he could hang himself.  It would be a great show. Only one performance......

To: DreadPirateRoberts,

As to Central Park, as the Guest of Honor (at your "going away party") I'll let you choose the place. It's the civilized thing to do, don't you agree? My seconds will be Basil Rathbone and Errol Flynn. The former for his advise, the latter because it's going to be one hell of a going away party. 

Have a great weekend and stay well.........

DPR,

Let's agree to disagree on this one my friend.  I understand and respect your point of view but I'm feelin' a mite stubborn today.

Even if I put feelings aside, (which I'm painfully aware that I can't) I would support the rights of the victims, no matter how many or few there were, over the rights of the purpetrator.  

On the other hand, I believe the victim's rights end at the outside of the prison wall.

..... such a dark subject for a summer Saturday 

ExPat, DPR and Johnathan Eells,

I'd join your battle of Central Park but I've got this really bad papercut so I'll just hang out at that Deli we discussed a few weeks past.

    Sometime in the last 10-15 years, most states have enacted "victims bills of rights" constitutionally setting out the rights of victims of crime. The longstanding idea of "justice" sometimes now has the state-sanctioned sidenote of "revenge".  The two are not the same. Much depends on whose ox is being gored, but the notion of justice is that it is always society's ox first.  The usual result of the Victim's participation is some kind of public disply and how we feel about that usually has a lot to do with how we feel about public displays generally.

     If you look at who gets murdered ( and that is always the juiciest part of this topic, isn't it )  you get past the random victims pretty quickly. You get past the bank employees and law enforcement officers and the coeds plucked from parking lots. You even get past the overinsured spouses and the ones who just couldn't leave. And then you have a large population of guys with guns in their hands. They happened to lose the coin toss, but somebody was going to get killed and they knew it.

     Those guys generally don't have a chance. They are emotionally immature and mentally underequipped. But they know that what they are doing is wrong and risky, too. Their mamas are frequently blind to their shortcomings, or eager to put them aside, but these guys  have no business being surprised when they end up dead. The mamas are entitled to their public rage and their disappointment- everybody is somebody's child- but   what do they really mind, losing their sons or wondering whose fault it is they did?

    Again, there are innocent victims and their survivors probably resent paying for lawyers and groceries and air conditioning for murderers, much less displays of their art, but our society's concept of justice demands that those things be bought and some crazy man, or some hopped up addict, or some Dirty Harry-called  punk is not likely to have the funds.  

     You pay for schools whether or not you have children.  You pay for cops and firemen you hope not to need. You pay for prisons.  In the long run, paying to display prisoner art is probably much cheaper than paying for a prison with no art. 

I confess to a somewhat biblical (as in Old Testament) take on justice, especially for the most heinous of crimes. It cannot be denied that Judge Parker considerably lessened the incidence of violent crime in a relatively lawless frontier by swift and final judgements on lawbreakers. However, capital punishment, which absolutely guarantees that the criminal will not commit further crimes, must be used with caution, since we now know that there are any number of public officials who have no problem putting people to death for career advancement, whether their guilt is clearly established or not. With that in mind, there ARE some cases where guilt is obvious and absolutely certain, and in those cases, where people have exhibited a disregard for the lives of others and made a conscious decision to operate beyond the bounds of all human decency, I see no good argument against their removal from the benefits of life. Humans are not an endangered species, except by their own inattention to the needs of their environment, and there is no shortage of people willing to treat one another well, so I can't see why we need to preserve the lives of bad people who kill. What REALLY confuses me are the cases of individuals who have serious mental disorders that cause them to murder others. Ok, he's crazy, AND homicidal? Sure! Let's keep him safe and warm for the rest of his natural life! That just makes no sense to me. So, if this criminal system is not going to deal decisively with this person, I'm with those who feel that at the very least, his therapeutic doodlings should not be allowed to cause his victim's family further pain.

To: Jeff Bristol,

You asked for an update on the Olympic fencing.

Women's Saber:  Mariel Zagunis - gold (U.S)

                         Sada Jacobson - silver (U.S.)

                         Becca Ward      - bronze (U.S.

Dang it I feel like the girl who came late to the dance! When I read the past ones, there's my two cents missing...SO, I'm going to catch up a little bit. Your indulgence is solicited, s'il vous plait.

Self-reliance. Hard work. Courage. (Hmm...might even apply to women.)

Ahem, Mr. Peterman-MIGHT? If your mother could comment on that...but then I'm sure she'd know you had your tongue firmly in cheek (or you'd BETTER)

I feel that JP and I might be very grand with one another, as Joyce would put it, because, for one thing, I'm thinking we share many of the same favorite movies-Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon certainly. AND, I'm the only lady I know who still wears hats and gloves with her dresses when she goes out, which is one reason I love the catalogs so much. Oh, and YES, I CAN manage riding boots with that skirt! You're welcome...(I like a man who knows how to use his ellipses)

Politics has devolved even more than style, I warrant, especially if John McCain thinks he's even half the man TR was.

Thanks for the book recommendations JP-Suite Francaise is on my list now.

Maybe that was more than two cents, but one can always use the spare change.

Okay, one more comment and I'll pipe down for the day. I joined on The Dog Days of Summer, and my comment never would post! While I was reading everyone else's literate, erudite, and just plain interesting posts, an odd paraphrase of a William Carlos Williams poem burst fully formed from my brow, but the comment thingy wouldn't take it. so, here it is, with all immodesty but huge apologies to WCW...wait, isn't he dead? Oh, well.

so much depends

upon

a red halter

dress

shaded by a sun

hat

beside the white

pickets

Peter,

If you wish to agree to disagree, I can certainly respect that.  I only want to make sure we each fully understand the position with which we have chosen to disagree.  Your last statement will get no argument from me at all.  I am certainly happy to agree that the rights of the victim outweigh the rights of the perpetrator.  The only question at hand is, what exactly are those rights?

ExPat,

I'll bring Tyrone Power and Cornel Wilde as my seconds.  Tyrone Power was the only swordsman in Hollywood of whom Basil Rathbone admitted to being afraid.  My fencing teacher had dinner with Rathbone the year he was a finalist in the Basil Rathbone Invitational Tournament.  Rathbone had said that Tyrone Power could have eaten Errol Flynn alive and spat him out again if they had ever been pitted against each other.

It is well known that Rathbone was a better competitive fencer than virtually any of the leading men to whom he had to lose in the choreographed duels of the movies.  Ironically, he only won a grand total of one swordfight on film.  In Romeo and Juliet, he wins the duel with John Barrymore before losing to Leslie Howard.  But Power and Wilde were among the few who could match him and he actually sustained a couple of injuries while shooting the final duel in The Mark of Zorro.

DPR,

I do believe we are at a point where we can sing Kumbaya together on this topic.

Be well.

To: DreadPirateRoberts,

Sounds like a great party shaping up in Central Park......we'll party likes it's 1799.

To: oliviapowers,

Welcome to our group......we have grown in number lately.  This is the best place for intelligent and witty conversation among civilized people. Last week we had over 70 comments on one subject (or off-subject as sometimes happens).

We all share a love of the J. peterman Owner's Manual......and an occassional challenge to a duel in Central Park.

Greetings:  Well, I got a new charger and I'm back.  I would really like to come to the party in Central Park.  My swords are a bit rusty so I guess I'll bring my cannon.

Lovey,
Loved that.
My wish for you in VA.:
Summer tanned shoulders in white strappy dresses
wild and wind blown, sun bleached tresses
a big thick pad on the porch settee
a book, a ball game and a G &T

Thank you ExPat, everyone save a few strokes and just call me Olivia if you like. I'd be honored to stand by in a velvet gown and hold someone's coat at the big Central Park Slashfest! I'm handy with a needle and catgut, too, if it should come to that...

I've spent hours and hours lately reading the history of JP's posts and all your wonderful responses. My only regret is joining so late! He is a man after my own retro heart. I'm a Hopeless Romantic *head held high* and une femme d'un age certain, however still healthy as a horse and spry as anything. Actually I prefer to think of myself as almost grown up. Now I must sort out my profile, I suppose...

Oh, and I also commented yesterday, too, should anyone wish to peek.

I'm going to party like it's 793, if nobody minds - Lindisfarne!

And my oldest friends' daughter is named Olivia. If I remember properly, doesn't Olivia mean "Elfin Army"? It's a lovely name, and my youngest daughter was almost Olivia (but Sydney won out).

Sir, you have the right of it! I have read in the history of the name that it was first used by, and its origin attributed to, a Mr. William Shakespeare. I'm fine with that :)

Sydney's a lovely name...

Lindisfarne is an interesting place. Similar to Mont St. Michel off Normandy, its monastery founded by a distant relative of mine, St. Aidan from the auld sod, Those pesky Vikings! Sir Walter Scott had a nice poem about it:

For with the flow and ebb, its style

Varies from continent to isle

Dry shoo'd o'er sands, twice every day,

The pilgrims to the shrine find way;

Twice every day the waves efface

Of staves and sandaled feet the trace.

Makes me want to get out the wellie boots again.

Did somebody say we're partying like it's 1799? Oh. . .My. . .God. I love this group. Stoney, Olivia. Unbelievable. I've decided to resign from my day job so that I may read each post and savor. And, by the way, my day job is getting the right people together, so we will all so be doing that soon.

 Okay, so this is my process. I read the article. I chew. Then I come back and read all you brilliant people, and change my mind as many times as there are eloquent posts. Love changing my mind. Keeps me flexible.

DPR and PeterLake, loved the friendly dispute.

And here's what I've been chewing. I'm an American-ist. Meaning that's what I studied in la literatura. And so I'm thinking of 'spectacle.' I'm thinking of the Elephant Man and Wild Bill Hickock's side show. I'm wondering why in the entire article, we're hearing more about the criminal and the crime and the victim, and not the ART. And I fear it's the horrible thing we call 'spectacle.' And in some crazy, uber-liberal way, the convict becomes the victim.

Here's the rub. The art is probably sub par. Right? It's not being exhibited for its quality, it's because we want to SEE INTO THOSE HEADS. We want them to dance and show us their darkness, because it makes us feel, somehow, less dark.

This is a PRISON exhibit, not an art exhibit. And people are profiting from it, rest assured. And people are having to rehash old, horrible wounds because of it, rest assured.

Let's invent a solution. Because, here, we can do that. Let's part out the questions, rather than conflate them into one. Should convicts paint? Hell yes. I'll send brushes. Should they exhibit? If they're really fecking good, yes. But after they are dead, like their victims. They have been disenfranchised from life. That's the rule. No voting, no parading about town, no appearing on American Idol, no matter how they can belt it out. And, finally, should we parade around PRISON EXHIBITS, behind bars, like the bearded ladies of old, just for spectacle? Have we not come further than that?

If it was my son in that picture, the victim, I would be filling gas cans. But you all know that about me.

MackDaddy!!!

 Much lighter note. Please, please email me on my site with your email address one more time. Got your note. Have to respond. Am coming to France to find you if you don't. Might do so even if you do.

Olivia,

Just when I was about to ask Missive to run away with me, you come along and steal my heart by quoting Walter Scott!  Please be my velvet gowned lady and hold my coat.  Jonathan won't need you because he'll be wearing a suit of armor.

*demurely* M'sieur Robert, I will gladly hold your coat while you lads settle your differences in civil fashion. We'll keep by a chilled bottle of Veuve Cliquot to toast our amity after. In such wise will come to sweet agreement, milords.

Oh, oh, oh, DPR. That hurt. Really. It's a good thing I have a major new crush on Olivia and salute your preference. I'll just have to bring my game up a notch. Great debate today, all.

You are all too sweet in welcoming me so warmly. I have a high bar to measure up to, I already love this forum as my favorite place to talk to people who are actually intelligent, literate, witty, and civil!

You cad, how dare you cast aspersion on my Berserker ethic by suggesting I would wear something so degrading as armor. I fight naked, painted blue, with a wolfskin over my head and shoulders just to keep the gore from importunately splashing into my eyes.

Take THAT image to tea with you, eh?

If this lifer at the Stateville Correctional Center has the energy to paint anything then he obviously does not have enough to do.

Olivia - I love a hopeless romantic and confess to being one myself. These folks here can say some very fine things, straight off, without much study, but, alas, I find that I am, in comparison, dull minded, with a wretched memory, above all for quotations. They may come to me in the middle of the night, but not at command.

You will, however, see me wading into the melee at Central Park (foil in one hand, JP catalog in the other), and I will give you a secret nod. I may even pull the button from the end of my foil before it's all over.

Afterwards, over Madeira (I know a wine merchant nearby), as we survey the carnage, and the sad, dirty, worn out people on either side, you might enlighten me as to who said,

"Next to a battle lost, the greatest misery is a battle gained."

I know it will come to me, but more likely later (in the middle of the night) than sooner.

The Dog star may yet loom large in our histories.

Olivia - Yes, of course, The Duke of Wellington. Thank-you very much. My mind was blocked thinking of the battle and all.

As long as I'm being shot at with steel bullets, I'm fine. The Sagas report that the Berserkers are those "whom steel cannot bite".

But if you're shooting lead, which would be very conventional of you - how droll - then I am toast.

I know that in Njall's Saga they referred to the steel, meaning a sword...mainly because those drugged (such are the theories) battle monkeys didn't feel it when they were injured. I hope, Jonathan, you never have to find out. Berserking is one of those jobs I think got phased out a while back, and good riddance I say. I thought you lot were discussing the swinging of steel, not shooting it? Or any other metal, please. Just putting in a word for the innocent bystanders, and I'll be sure and make that velvet gown a burgundy one, just in case!

This is getting increasingly interesting.  First Jonathan insists on a shield and then he thumbs his nose at armor!  Oh well.  The insistance on the shield already indicates his weapon's lack of self-sufficiency.  I'm feeling more confident every moment.

Old jobs like berserking get phased out when brute strength gets replaced by art, finesse, and panache.

Missive,

I shudder at the thought that I have hurt you.  Perhaps, after I make short work of this fellow who's trying to juggle his shield with that big metal club he calls a sword, I shall have to turn my blade upon myself in recompense.