ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, November 20, 1996 TAG: 9611200043
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
DATELINE: RADFORD
SOURCE: LESLIE HAGER-SMITH STAFF WRITER
In the spring, a bomb dropped on the Radford University campus. A sculpture of a bomb, that is.
A sculpted bomb, a hinge, a prism, a pendulum, a compass and a parabolic reflector, to be precise.
"Speculations on Nature," as the mobile-like artwork is called, has produced not a few speculations on the nature of scientific inquiry, artistic metaphor, freedom of speech - even economy and politics.
Faculty from the school's three science departments have circulated a petition calling for the sculpture's relocation, though the budget for installing it has been spent and no funds remain to move it.
For more than two years the sculpture, which measures 14 feet by 12 feet, sat ticking in the university's sculpture courtyard among half a dozen other pieces of art.
The piece by Deborah La Grasse, a Florida architecture professor, wiped out nine competitors to win Radford University's Sculpture Purchase Award two years ago. Not until it was placed in front of Reed and Curie halls did the conflagration ensue, however. Those connected buildings house the university's science departments.
"We are not iconoclastic here. We are no ivory tower," said geology professor Ernst Kastning in defense of those opposed to the placement of the sculpture. "In this building we teach science and responsibility. To have a bomb out front there irks me every day I go to work."
Director of University Galleries Anna Fariello recalls with chagrin that she "naively" thought the scientists of Reed and Curie halls would appreciate the piece of work. "I saw it as very scientific and I thought they would appreciate that. I didn't want to malign any department. I want people to appreciate sculpture."
The artwork, paid for with student activity fees, is subtitled "In Honor of Sir Isaac Newton" and his words are inscribed on the inflammatory bomb which Fariello describes as "the smallest but the most central element in the piece."
"The piece addresses the responsibilities and implications of technological advances in Newton's day and ours. This sculpture, like all good artwork, is meant to open up a dialogue about its subject," Fariello said.
Even detractors acknowledge the sculpture has been a smashing success at that.
The war of words has been waged primarily in the pages of The Tartan, Radford's student newspaper. It reached a new level of intensity Friday when The Tartan published a letter in support of the sculpture's placement written by John Bowles. Bowles is a patron of the university whose family donated 376 acres in Montgomery County this decade to create the Selu Conservancy, a planned retreat center.
Partisans have hurled references at each other from British physicist and writer C.P. Snow, Thomas Jefferson and no less a Saturday-morning cartoon insect than the venerable Tick, himself.
"It has become a philosophical debate, which misses the point," said Stephen Lenhart, department chairman for geology. "If anyone is offended it should be moved. Most of the science faculty in this building are offended, so why do they keep it here?"
While many close to the controversy share Lenhart's ire, reactions have ranged widely from the humorous to the ho-hum. A professor of philosophy and religion saw it one day and recalls only his mild pleasure at having sculpture on campus.
A science department secretary challenged, "Is this really news?" She referred the reporter's call to a gentleman who declined to give his name and wished, moreover, not to be quoted.
Department chairwoman Judy Niehaus quipped, "Since our field is biology, perhaps we should plant some kudzu next to it."
It was biology professor Charles Kugler's initial conversation with Fariello that prompted the drive for signatures. She asked him how widely his negative views of the sculpture's placement were shared and he determined that a petition would answer the question. It's a move he has come to regret since the debate appears to pit the sciences against the arts and humanities on campus.
Seventy-seven students and professors signed the petition, requesting the artwork be relocated. Thirty of them are from the biology department, but all three science department chairs were among the signatories.
Science faculty members uniformly praised the university's sculpture project, which is strongly supported by Radford President Douglas Covington and considered a model by academics and artists beyond the campus.
"It's not the sculpture itself, and it's not a freedom of expression issue. It's the position of it in front of the science building. This sculpture, with the prominence of the bomb in it, placed in front of our building makes it appear that the university is making a statement about science in society and our role in it," Kugler said.
He summarized the view of colleagues by pointing out that politicians, journalists, artists and business people, as well as scientists, have been involved in war and arms production.
Fariello was uncertain if she would respond to the petition, which has been in her hands for a month. "After all, how do you you respond to a petition?" When tempers have cooled she anticipates a face-to-face meeting with the all parties concerned.
Though she has found the episode trying on a personal level, Fariello said, "This is the role of having sculpture on campus. It's about dialogue, it's about inquiry, it's about debate. On that level, I'm delighted."
"What we really agree on is that this controversy is healthy for the university and healthy for the students," Kastning said. "These are the kinds of issues and exchanges that universities thrive on."
LENGTH: Long : 108 lines ILLUSTRATION: PHOTO: NHAT MEYER Staff. 1. & 2. Faculty from Radfordby CNBUniversity's three science departments have circulated a petition
calling for the controversial sculpture's relocation, though the
budget for installing it has been spent and no funds remain to move
it. color.