Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL


Subject: Nudity Flag is there for a reason!!!

Kendra opened this issue on Dec 28, 2002 ยท 120 posts


bijouchat posted Sat, 28 December 2002 at 5:39 PM

and this gem of a story came in my mail yesterday ;-) -- NEW YORK -- For some people at Salomon Smith Barney, it seems that no nudes is good nudes. Last year, an employee of the Citigroup unit was offended by a piece of artwork portraying images of female nudes that adorned an elevator vestibule in one of the firm's downtown Manhattan offices. So he asked that it be taken down. The artwork, titled "Two Newds," was removed, but a few months later, it reappeared. This time, more workers asked that it be taken down again. It was -- then again put back up. And again it was taken down. The owners of the office building, a pair of septuagenarian brothers, strongly disagree that the artwork is offensive or that their tenants have a right to take it down. Melvyn and Robert Kaufman, who built the 26-story office tower just off Wall Street more than 30 years ago, believe it's a matter of principle that the artwork stay. They vow to reinstall it. "What is going to be left if we give in every time somebody makes one of these ridiculous complaints?" fumes Robert Kaufman, 75 years old. Melvyn Kaufman, 78, commissioned the black-and-white silhouettes when the building opened back in 1970. Two semi-circular plexiglass panels, each about five feet tall, are attached to two exit doors at the back of a hall of elevators that serves as a building entrance. To a casual observer, the two semicircles form what looks like a big round Rorschach inkblot whose inner edges are abstract swirls. But closer scrutiny reveals that each of the mirror images is really the shadowy figure of a nude female. Many viewers don't see the nude bodies, and the brothers say they've never received a complaint about it until now. Today, the naked ladies are pitting an old-time family real-estate firm against a pair of Wall Street titans: Goldman Sachs Group, which leases the building, and Salomon Smith Barney, which sublets four floors from Goldman and has allied with its rival for this feud. Of the "Two Newds" dispute, Susan Thomson, a Salomon Smith Barney spokeswoman, says it's not a judgment about art. "It's about our commitment to creating a respectful and comfortable work environment for all employees. We regret the building owner fails to understand and respect that right." For its part, Goldman says it just wants to meet its tenant's request. "Art is very much a matter of taste and people clearly have strong opinions," says Lucas van Praag, a bank spokesman. "I think that whenever possible, we like to keep our tenants happy." The latest ruckus started when a unit of Salomon moved to the building, which the Kaufmans now co-own, in October 2001. Before the staff arrived, Eugene Clark, an attorney at the firm, toured the building. When he saw "Two Newds," he thought it might offend women in the office and asked the building's management company, Jones Lang LaSalle, to remove it. By the time the employees moved in, the piece was gone. This spring, a Kaufman engineer noticed the nudes were missing. When he reported it to the brothers, they ordered Jones Lang to put the piece back up, citing a clause in Goldman's lease that prevents the tenant from changing "the basic design of the ground floor of the building." With the reappearance of the nudes, Mr. Clark started getting complaints from women workers. "It was the talk of the office," recalls Cindy Heller, a 51-year-old vice president of accounting in Salomon's legal department. "It was inappropriate for corporate America. It was embarrassing." Mr. Clark complained to managers at Jones Lang, who removed the artwork five days later. This time, the Kaufmans were steaming. Melvyn Kaufman called Goldman, demanding that the piece be reinstated. Goldman initially resisted, but a few days later, it ordered the building managers to put "Two Newds" back up. When Salomon's Mr. Clark complained again to Jones Lang, this time he was told the artwork couldn't come down because Goldman's lease prevented it. At that point, Mr. Clark called an attorney at Goldman Sachs directly. Two days later, the piece came down again. Source: Wall Street Journal