You see them in gift stores, in movies, on television, on jewelry, or even on the baseball diamond. They are usually young, often children, and represent the picture of otherworldly health. And according to one Gallup poll, over 75% of Americans believe in them. What are we talking about? Angels. And they have been the cause of much discussion during the last two weeks.

And while the artist Mr. Pozorsky is interviewed at length in this edition of The Journal, it seems reasonable to tell the reader that he was inspired to create his version of an angel when close friends of his were diagnosed with cancer. While waiting in a room in a doctor's office, he looked around and noticed these "angels of healing" that his ill friend could not identify with. After that, Pozorsky set about creating an angel that would connect with his friend during his time of need.

As part of the second installment of the Village's Artist's in the Windows of Ellenville (AWE) exhibit, Mr. Matt Pozorsky, a resident of Cragsmoor, placed three statues for all to see. Two of them, a man and a woman, both nudes, reside in the front of Matthews Pharmacy, an Ellenville institution that has been around for nearly 150 years. The other statue stands atop the Hunt Memorial Building and overlooks Canal Street.

Since the new exhibition began, The Ellenville Journal has received several phone calls complaining about the artwork, calling it "indecent" and inappropriate. Beyond that, Ellenville Journal reporters have been stopped on the street by people asking if they had seen the three pieces and been part of several conversations where the issue was raised.

Ray Matthews, who runs the pharmacy with his father, has heard his share of complaints about the exhibit. He says, "I had a lot of people talking to me about it."

Generally, those that expressed their concerns were younger parents with children under five years of age. Mr. Matthews described their approach as "single-minded."

But even though there has been some discussion about the piece, Mr. Matthews made it clear that he would not be removing the artwork before it was scheduled to be moved at the end of the month. "Speaking for my father and I, we are committed to keeping it in until the end of the month." Mr. Matthews went on to explain how he received some "very good words" from a visitor to his store.

He recounts the story as follows, "I had a soldier come in the other night a few minutes before close. He said, 'I just read the new Ellenville Journal and it is my understanding that there was an issue with a piece in another window that was removed during the July presentation.' Then he said, 'Ray, I want to thank you for leaving it up and seeing it through because that's what America is all about.' Obviously, I was very moved." Positive words aside, Mr. Matthews did say that he was concerned about the issue of indecency as it pertained to the influx of people that come to the area for their religious camps. "We have a lot of religious camps. I am sensitive to that."

During his discussion with The Journal, Mr. Matthews suggested that the next time there was a large exhibition that the organizers require each artist to explain his or her feelings behind each piece. From his own experience, Matthews said, "I have always looked at the piece and then looked at the placard to see how close I was to getting the artist's idea." He thought that even though, "people's opinions might not be changed, misunderstandings could be avoided."

One local community member who is not likely to change his mind with regards to the statue's indecency is Rabbi Moshe Frank of Congregation Ezrath Israel who, even after describing the Matthews family as dear friends, was very much against the exhibition.

He called the pieces, "irresponsible and reckless," saying that artistic expression can and should have parameters. In his discussion with The Journal, the rabbi offered a journalistic analogy saying, "Everything you think, you would not say. Everything you say, you would not write. And everything you write you would not publish. Why should this be any different?"

Rabbi Frank went on to say that the pieces were sexually suggestive and when he was informed that most of the people who had registered complaints with the pharmacy were parents of young children, he countered that, "children aren't the only ones who need protection."

Rabbi Frank also said that he felt that the village's religious community was being tested by, what he felt, were a series of inappropriate artworks. The rabbi included, among others, the work of Eeo Stubblefield due to its graphic depiction of wounded Iraqi children; particularly when it first appeared around July 4 of this year.

When asked about whether he thought a famous nude like Michelangelo's "David" deserved to be called art, the rabbi countered, "David didn't walk around nude. Moses didn't walk around nude. I don't understand it."

Reverend Jay Vogelaar of the Ellenville Reformed Church took a walk down Canal Street and weighed in on the subject saying that as he went by he saw two teenagers strolling past the window and that they were giggling. After Rev. Vogelaar was informed as to what was the inspiration for the pieces, he said, "Knowing what it was about would have helped out a lot." He concluded by saying that it was appropriate that two works of art, inspired by sickness, be exhibited in a place where healing is hoped for and administered.

COMMENTS about this article (0 )