Ann Liv Young vs. MoMA P.S.1

This current mess between artist and institution illustrates once again the weakness art faces when confronted by law.

P.S.1 is currently deciding whether or not they will allow one of their exhibiting artists to include an element of her project in her installation. This time, the element is neither material or text, but rather another artist.  Let’s call it a medium then (but not the telepathetic kind).

Artist A.L. Steiner (s0 many abbreviations) intends to invite Ann Liv Young, a P.S.1 persona-non-grata, to be part of Steiner’s installation. Obviously P.S.1 is having a bit of a problem with this given  Young’s previous P.S.1 charade which escalated to near-violent confrontations with other artists. Allegations of censorship have been hurled at P.S.1 curator Klaus Biesenbach, accusing him of castrating young artistic expression.

Aside from the fact that we have seen this before (read: Futurists), what makes this story interesting is not the art or performances themselves, nor the accusations of censorship. No, what makes this story interesting is that it raises the legal concerns an institution such as MoMA P.S.1 had, has, and will have, when confronted with possible legal action from parties related and unrelated to the exhibition.

Young has acknowledged seeking legal advice as to Steiner’s contractual agreement with MoMA P.S.1, which clearly reflects the concerns MoMA P.S.1 has in protecting itself, its employees, staff, agents, attorneys and, well, you get the picture. So perhaps at the end of the day the question is not, will P.S.1 censor or liberate? The true question is, will P.S.1 abide by its contract?

Once again, art as art has shown to bow before law, the mighty monster.

UPDATE: August 31, 2010

The paper of record reports that P.S.1 has agreed to allow Young to perform. Details here.

Tags: art institutions and law, Art Law, artist agreements, censorship, legal issues for museums, performance art