Four pieces of art were removed from the walls of the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth this week and the Fort Worth Police department is investigating after allegations of child pornography.
Tarrant County Judge Tim O鈥橦are and The Dallas Express are among those objecting to the images, which are part of an exhibition called 鈥淒iaries of Home.鈥�
Spokespeople for the museum and the police department wouldn鈥檛 say who directed the removal of the photos or where they were taken.
Sally Mann's work
The images at the center of the inquiry were made by Virginia-born photographer Sally Mann. Mann had 21 pieces included in the 鈥淒iaries of Home鈥� exhibition, including a handful that featured her naked children. One photo centers on her naked daughter jumping onto a picnic table. Another is a frontal portrait of her son with popsicle drips running down his torso, legs and genitals.
These portraits have been displayed frequently and lauded and lambasted since their debut. The museum declined to comment Wednesday but released a short statement alluding to this:
鈥淭hese have been widely published and exhibited for more than 30 years in leading cultural institutions across the country and around the world.鈥�
A label inside the gallery acknowledges the controversy surrounding Mann in the 1980s and 1990s. A separate sign at the beginning of the show warns, 鈥淭his exhibition features mature themes that may be sensitive for some viewers.鈥�
鈥淚n the media, some images were presented in isolation from the series, becoming touchstones for moral and political debates about art and censorship,鈥� the tag reads. 鈥淪ince then, the knee-jerk controversy has faded.鈥�
But controversy began anew in Fort Worth with a series of posts by The Dallas Express, which is published by a hotel magnate and Republican mega donor. The conservative website questioned whether the museum violated pornography laws by displaying the photos and published comments attributed to public officials who objected to the images.
Tarrant County Judge Tim O鈥橦are was one of the officials quoted in The Dallas Express.
"The images of children reported in the media at the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth are deeply disturbing. Sexual exploitation of a minor, including under the guise of 鈥榓rt,鈥� should never be tolerated,鈥� O鈥橦are posted on X, formerly known as Twitter.
鈥淚 have full confidence in law enforcement to thoroughly investigate this matter and take appropriate action. I will always be committed to protecting the most vulnerable members of society, our children." A spokesperson for O鈥橦are declined to comment further.
Second incident
This is the second time in recent months that a Fort Worth art museum has received blowback shortly after opening a new exhibition. The Amon Carter Museum of American Art, a neighboring institution less than a mile away from the Modern, without explanation.
That exhibition promised to 鈥渄isrupt the homogeneous ideal of the cowboy as a White, cisgender American male. It reopened shortly after with a mature content warning, but the museum never indicated which works the placard referred to. The exhibition featured a painting of two cowboys kissing as well as a saddle made of barbed wire.
To determine whether a portrait falls under protected speech or is considered pornographic, the law has a three-pronged approach, said Peter Steffensen of the First Amendment Clinic at Southern Methodist University.
The criteria essentially boils down to three questions: would the average person say the work appealed to prurient interests; does it depict or describe sexual conduct in a 鈥減atently offensive鈥� way; does the work as a whole lack serious artistic, scientific, political or literary value.
鈥�You can probably imagine the importance of that third prong in protecting works of art like photography because of that long known fact that art often pushes boundaries,鈥� Steffensen said. 鈥淎nd so it is not sufficient that the work contains sexual content. Work that contains sexual content can be defined as obscenity. It also has to lack all serious artistic value 鈥� for it to fall outside of the protections of the First Amendment.鈥�&苍产蝉辫;
Using this rubric, Steffensen and Thomas Leatherbury, director of SMU鈥檚 First Amendment Clinic, said Mann鈥檚 work falls under the category of protected speech. (Leatherbury has also served as 四虎影院鈥檚 lawyer.)
鈥淎rt has sparked controversy, and I'm all in favor of people who disagree with art saying they disagree with it 鈥� voicing their opinions about it,鈥� Leatherbury said. 鈥淐riminally prosecuting it is a completely different and unconstitutional reaction.鈥�
Regardless of the outcome of such an investigation, both scholars worry that these actions could have a chilling effect on speech.
鈥淲hen public officials even just threaten to wield their power to restrict First Amendment rights, people receive the message that they may not be free to express themselves in the ways that they wish to or to share their identities or to express unfavorable opinions,鈥� Steffensen said.
鈥淥ne of the most important tenets of the First Amendment is to protect viewpoints and means of expression of all forms and to protect people of all backgrounds, to be able to share those opinions in public without fear of retaliation and retribution.鈥�
Arts Access is an arts journalism collaboration powered by The Dallas Morning News and 四虎影院.
This community-funded journalism initiative is funded by the Better Together Fund, Carol & Don Glendenning, City of Dallas OAC, Communities Foundation of Texas, The University of Texas at Dallas, The Dallas Foundation, Eugene McDermott Foundation, James & Gayle Halperin Foundation, Jennifer & Peter Altabef and The Meadows Foundation. The News and 四虎影院 retain full editorial control of Arts Access鈥� journalism.
