A Certain Level of Denial (performance): Difference between revisions
RachelShuman (talk | contribs) |
RachelShuman (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====Date: [[:Category: | ====Date: [[:Category:1994|1994]]==== | ||
====Region: [[:Category:North America|North America | ====Region: [[:Category:North America|North America]]==== | ||
====Subject: [[:Category:Nudity|Nudity | ====Subject: [[:Category:Nudity|Nudity]]==== | ||
====Medium: [[:Category:Performance Art|Performance Art | ====Medium: [[:Category:Performance Art|Performance Art]]==== | ||
---- | ---- | ||
'''Artist:''' Karen Finley | '''Artist:''' Karen Finley | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
'''Location:''' Chicago, Illinios | '''Location:''' Chicago, Illinios | ||
'''Description of Artwork:''' | '''Description of Artwork:''' The performance piece confronts the government's role in the AIDS epidemic and women's rights to control their own bodies. Finley begins on stage wearing only a hat and shoes, eventually dressing while offering a monologue and social commentary. <P> | ||
'''The Incident:''' Chicago's Metro Club booked Finley to perform | '''The Incident:''' Chicago's Metro Club booked Finley to perform ''A Certain Level of Denial'' one year in advance. The club's attorney read a preview of the show one week prior to it's performance and warned the club owner, Joe Shanahan, about a local ordinance prohibiting nude dancing in venues that serve liquor. The city attorney agreed that Metro Club was not exempt from the law. Shanahan asked Finley to remove the nudity from her show. When Finley refused Shanahan cancelled the performance and refunded the 200 tickets that had been sold. <P> | ||
'''Results of Incident:''' One day prior to the show's anticipated performance the city attorney's office reversed its decision, suggesting that the show did not violate the law, however, it was too late to reschedule the performance. <P> | '''Results of Incident:''' One day prior to the show's anticipated performance the city attorney's office reversed its decision, suggesting that the show did not violate the law, however, it was too late to reschedule the performance. <P> | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
'''Source:''' Artistic Freedom Under Attack, 1995 | '''Source:''' Artistic Freedom Under Attack, 1995 | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:1994]] | ||
[[Category:]] | [[Category:1990s]] | ||
[[Category:]] | [[Category:20th century]] | ||
[[Category:North America]] | [[Category:North America]] | ||
[[Category:]] | [[Category:United States]] | ||
[[Category:]] | [[Category:Illinois]] | ||
[[Category:Chicago]] | |||
[[Category:Nudity]] | [[Category:Nudity]] | ||
[[Category:Performance Art]] | [[Category:Performance Art]] | ||
[[Category:Karen Finley]] | [[Category:Karen Finley]] | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="font-style: italic;">A Certain Level of Denial</span> (performance)}} | |||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
Latest revision as of 21:11, 2 August 2011
Date: 1994
Region: North America
Subject: Nudity
Medium: Performance Art
Artist: Karen Finley
Confronting Bodies: City attorney's office
Dates of Action: 1994
Location: Chicago, Illinios
Description of Artwork: The performance piece confronts the government's role in the AIDS epidemic and women's rights to control their own bodies. Finley begins on stage wearing only a hat and shoes, eventually dressing while offering a monologue and social commentary.
The Incident: Chicago's Metro Club booked Finley to perform A Certain Level of Denial one year in advance. The club's attorney read a preview of the show one week prior to it's performance and warned the club owner, Joe Shanahan, about a local ordinance prohibiting nude dancing in venues that serve liquor. The city attorney agreed that Metro Club was not exempt from the law. Shanahan asked Finley to remove the nudity from her show. When Finley refused Shanahan cancelled the performance and refunded the 200 tickets that had been sold.
Results of Incident: One day prior to the show's anticipated performance the city attorney's office reversed its decision, suggesting that the show did not violate the law, however, it was too late to reschedule the performance.
Source: Artistic Freedom Under Attack, 1995
