The gun was part of my art. UH said no.
I am an artist. I make art. In my work I examine the concepts of pride, power, and patriotism, especially as it relates to art.
Having recently moved back to my native Texas to obtain an M.F.A. through the University of Houston, I have been fascinated with the discourse about guns — especially the loaded (pun intended) topics of concealed handgun licenses, licenses to carry, and campus carry.
I wanted to create a piece of art that took a neutral stance on the controversial subject, while at the same time commenting on the omnipresence of guns in American culture. I quickly learned that getting a gun in Texas is much easier than getting an MFA.
For the annual exhibition of student art at UH’s Blaffer Art Museum, I created a piece called “ARTGun”: A real .22 revolver, not loaded, in a glass frame, with a cartoon-like “Bang” flag protruding from its barrel.
People familiar with art history will see that I was drawing on a long list of artists who’ve gone before me. I used the same caliber of gun that artist Chris Burden used in “Shoot,” the famous 1971 performance in which he had an assistant shoot him in the arm. I referenced Marina Abramovic, who in a 1974 performance laid out a table with 72 items, including a loaded gun, and invited artists to do as they saw fit. Then there’s Andy Warhol (with his famous portrait of a gunslinging Elvis), Marcel Duchamp (and his exploration in the beauty of the readymade), Roy Lichtenstein (with his comic book approach to Pop Art), and even Mel Chin (who has exhibited works of art relating to both firearms and ammunitions at the Blaffer Art Museum).
When I proposed this piece for the show, I was advised by the UH police and legal departments that “the gun is not to be allowed on campus … (and) the matter is closed.” Despite my efforts, and those of the museum, the piece was forbidden from being exhibited in its original form.
I have chosen to include the piece in the show anyway — only without the gun that was central to its original conception.
The situation brings up an interesting question:
Is it freedom of expression or is it public safety?
Ultimately, this piece was not created to be pro or anti-gun, but pro-art!