Buffalo Law Review Volume 39 Number 1 Article 6 1-1-1991 Turmoil at the National Endowment for the Arts: Can Federally Funded Act Survive the "Mapplethorpe Controversy" ? MaryEllen Kresse Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation MaryEllen Kresse, Turmoil at the National Endowment for the Arts: Can Federally Funded Act Survive the "Mapplethorpe Controversy" ?, 39 Buff. L. Rev. 231 (1991). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview/vol39/iss1/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Buffalo Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. COMMENTS Turmoil at the National Endowment for the Arts: Can Federally Funded Art Survive the "Mapplethorpe Controversy" ? If it is true that "one [person's] vulgarity is another's lyric,"' is it equally true that one person's obscenity is another's art? The United States Congress, caught up in the controversy surround- ing the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), has indicated that it is not true-at least not when the "art"/"obscenity" is federally funded. The National Endowment for the Arts has been in a precarious posi- tion since June 1989, when several controversial grants resulted in legis- lation to restrict its funding and study its grant making process.2 Tom between the artists who benefit from its grant money and the legislature that controls its funding and continued existence, the NEA struggled to maintain its equilibrium and a semblance of political independence 1.