Jackson Pollock's Mural

"Passion looks like a painting
Jackson Pollock’s No. 5”
-The Stone Roses
1987

There are two things that I rarely touch on this blog: art and jazz. It’s not that I don’t appreciate either-quite the contrary-it’s just that my ignorance of each would be quite obvious the moment I start blabbing on and on about it.

I know what I like and I keep it like a secret.

Hint: Miles Davis’ Miles Smilesis my favorite jazz album and I dig the chaotic splatter of Jackson Pollock’s stuff.

This brings me to the drama that’s been knocking around my neck of the woods lately: the proposed sale of Pollock’s “Mural,” the piece that has been at the University of Iowa since it was donated to the university’s art museum in 1951.

No, this isn’t the drippy color stuff of his more famous works, this is a mural created in 1943, before Jackson got all Post-War crazy with his brushes. It was this work that indeed makes “Mural” so potentially expensive if someone were to consider buying it.

This is exactly what a Republican State Representative in our state is recommending we do with the piece. Evidently, the Republican leader feels that it is the U of I’s best interest to sell “Mural” and pocket the cash to fund future art scholarships. The University, like many in our country, is facing tough resistance to increased spending and is dealing with intense scrutiny from the statehouse to get a handle on costs. There are some unique ideas being tossed around from both our elected officials and university budgeters in trying to get a handle on costs while keeping services consistent, but this idea is not one of them.

First of all, “Mural” was donated by Peggy Guggenheim. This means the donate would inevitably come with the potential that the donators could simply “donate it back” if they felt the university was only interested in the financial gain the painting provide. Never mind that any reasonable executor would later view Iowa university with a suspicious eye in the future, potentially blocking the idea of donating anything to the institution dead in its track.

But the real concern is what isn’t being reported as this story gains traction: an underlying culture of suppressing liberal institutions that many Republicans feel are creating a population of free thinkers that will render them irrelevant as our state’s population moves from the rural landscape into more urban areas.

It’s not as far-fetched as one may think, particularly if one follows the money and sees how conservatives immediately look at our three public universities when brandishing budgetary carving knives.

It gets even more suspicious when you see which of the three universities they target first. My Alma matter, the University of Northern Iowa and another, Iowa State University, doesn’t get nearly the amount of scrutiny as the U of I, mainly because they are business and agricultural institutions respectfully, both viewed as colleges that typically graduate students who would be more in line with Republican ideals. The University of Iowa, on the other hand, is the kind of liberal leaning universities that can be found in nearly every state, and the progressive nature of the students and staff makes right wing conservatives extremely nervous.

Despite the twisted logic that the Republican committee has presented in explaining why such a sale is needed, they’ve successfully brought it out of the chambers and onto to floor of the House where a vote is expected. After it travels to the Senate (where Democrats hold a slim majority) it is expected to be blocked.