Freedom of Speech/Freedom of Ownership; B. Anderson

What followed was the predictable spate of news stories, editorials, and letters to the editors of our two local papers. One editor declared that the city's review board was violating our rights to free speech; the other said Oh! Calcutta!, which does have some graphic nude scenes, was obscene and should be banned. Some readers agreed with the city officials,while others blamed Christian funda mentalists and other "prudes" who were serving as self-appointed "nannies" to Chattanooga theater goers. However, no one dealt with the primary prob lem: government ownership of the theater in ques tion. The Tivoli is owned and operated by the Chattanooga city government, which means it is subsidized by tax dollars. Therefore, many taxpay ers feel they have a right to decide what the theater management should be permitted to schedule. One paper tried to get around this by declaring that the city should permit Oh!Calcutta! to play, and allow patrons to decide for themselves whether they wanted to attend. While that may seem a Solomon-like compromise, the editor for gets that there are many people in Chattanooga who would have to subsidize that production through their taxes-something they wouldn't do . Mr. Anderson is executive director of the Chattanooga Manufacturers Association.

if given a free choice. Thus, government encroach es upon their freedom in just as coercive a manner as it does when it engages in censorship. This controversy is reminiscent of a similar episode last year. The movie The Last Temptation of Christ, which many persons believed was blas phemous, came to a local, privately owned theater. Yes, there were peaceful protests, and, yes, some people paid to attend. While many persons on both sides of the issue weren't completely satisfied, those who wanted to see the film paid to see it, and those wishing not to see it weren't forced to subsi dize the showing. Whether it is Oh! Calcutta! or graphic "art" by controversial photographers, public funding of arts and cinema-or anything else, for that matter -places our society in situations in which one group experiences total victory while others face total defeat. Unlike in the private sector, govern ment decision-making is always yes or no; there is no middle ground. Simplyput, because the private market deals in proportional as opposed to abso lute outcomes, markets are better able to handle such matters.

Public tastes run the spectrum when it comes to "good" or "bad" art, which is why people should be allowed as wide a range of choice as possible. Publicfunding eliminates much of that choicewhile it invariably politicizes-and corrupts-art itself. The best solution to the question of whether Oh! Calcutta! is obscene would be to return the Tivoli to private ownership. While that might not satisfy everyone in Chattanooga, it would give people the choice of either supporting or ignoring the production. This would be "artistic free ex pression" at its best. D 354 Another World by Richard L. Lesher I f it sometimes seems as if Federal bureau crats inhabit a different world from the rest of us-it is because they do. A case in point is the Federal Energy Regulato ry Commission (FERC), an independent agency that among other things sets rates for transporta tion of natural gas, issues licensesfor hydroelectric plants, sets rates for sale of electricity; and also sets rates for transportation of oil by pipeline.