1950 - Miss Fertility

In the late summer of 1950, citizens and state officials gathered at the State Capitol building in Santa Fe to watch a bulldozer rip out nineteen trees shading the west capital lawn. Soon, the six marble pillars supporting the front portico would be taken down. Later, the capitol dome would be removed.

The removal of the trees was the first step by Santa Fe architect W. C. Kruger in preparation for the construction of an addition to the old capitol building, now more than a half century old. Built in 1900 after a fire destroyed the original capitol, the aging building was overcrowded and falling apart. The capitol steps to the grand entrance had been condemned and could not be used. So, in 1949, a weary legislature appropriated almost 3 million dollars for renovation of the building that Life Magazine called the eighth ugliest state capitol in the nation.

The new structures rose rapidly in the summer of 1950. One was a two story building set off by a courtyard across from the grand entrance of the old capitol building. On the north end of the smaller west addition, a 105-foot tower began to rise. Through the scaffolding, machinery and workmen, the new additions could be easily seen by all who passed by.

Over the course of a few days, a wide strip of canvas was laid in a band around the building just underneath the second story windows. What lay underneath the canvas was a mystery until the rough gusts of September tore the canvas free and exposed a sight that would occupy Santa Fe and the nation for the next few weeks.

Months earlier, architect W. C. Kruger had commissioned 27 year old Santa Fe artist William Longley to produce 24 terra cotta panels, called spandrels in the trade, each two feet by four feet, executed in bas-relief. Installed under the second-story windows, the panels were covered with canvas or paper, to be unveiled at the building’s grand opening. There were four panels each of six figures, each representing some aspect of New Mexico – a conquistador, a sun, a mountain lion, an Indian, a priest-builder and the earth. “Earth” was represented by a highly stylized nude woman reclining in a field of corn.

It was this panel whose canvas fig leaf was peeled away by the wind and it was this panel which was glimpsed by a passerby, a member of the Berean Baptist Church who was shocked and offended at the sight of nudity on a public building. He went immediately to the pastor of the Church, Reverend Robert J. Brown, who promptly gathered a small group of the faithful to inspect the sculpture still reclining on the wall of the new capitol building. They, too, were shocked and offended.

The next day, Reverend Brown, acting as pastor of his church and president of the Ministerial Alliance, telephoned Governor Thomas Mabry in his office and lodged a formal protest against the nude sculpture, calling it “extremely suggestive.” Governor Mabry, a lame duck governor in his last few months of office, had enjoyed a reputation for discretion during his term; there was never a fight from which he did not back away, quickly and quietly. Wishing to avoid controversy, Governor Mabry called Willard Kruger and asked him to take “Earth” down.

Longley, the artist, knew nothing about it until the local newspaper, the New Mexican, called for a quote. The piece had been on display at the last Fiesta art show without comment. “It is a stylized nude with the face almost archaic,” said Longley, “There is no sex appeal as far as I can see or as far as I intended. That anyone should take objection to it surprises me. The more I think about the matter and the arbitrary way it was handled, the more provoked I get.” The news swept through the artists community like wildfire and, in no time, a small committee of noted Santa Fe artists formed to protest the removal, including John Sloan, Will Shuster and Randall Davey – all artists of national reputation.

The New Mexican covered the growing controversy with undisguised glee, dubbing the challenged panel “Miss Fertility,” a nickname which quickly became so associated with the sculpture that the disputants, ministers and artists alike, began to use the term regularly.

Governor Mabry, faced with competing protests, seemed at a loss. Fortunately, Willard Kruger announced he had personally commissioned and paid for panels at no cost to the taxpayers. This allowed a grateful Governor Mabry to pass the decision to Kruger. The Governor called for a meeting between representatives of the Ministerial Alliance and members of the newly-formed artists’ delegation to try to work out a solution, with the final decision resting with Kruger.

With “Miss Fertility” propped on one wall of the Governor’s conference room, the amiable Governor opened the meeting by announcing he was no art expert and he could see nothing offensive about the disputed sculpture. At his age (Mabry was 65), the Governor said he was "no longer intrigued by the sight of an undressed woman." He noted that his recent issue of Finland’s national magazine (Finlandia) featured several photos of public parks with nude figures. “We all know the Finns are a moral people,” Mabry pronounced.

The two sides lost no time in squaring off. Artist John Sloan declared the Longley sculpture a fine piece of art, adding that all of us now what morality is, but few of us know about art but ignorance of art is no excuse in demanding the plaque’s removal. Randall Davey argued that if nudity were offensive, than most of the world’s statutes would have to come down as would all of Michaelangelo’s best works.

Reverend Brown, speaking for his own church and as president of the Ministerial Alliance, stated that the panel was “suggestive of immorality and indecency.” While it may be fine in museums, such displays did not belong on a public building paid for by tax dollars and where citizens transacted business. The other ministers present – Evangelist Roy R. Bease, Reverend M. E. Waldrum --quickly agreed

“I’m not an art critic,” Brown said. “The only thing I can interpret is morals. As a minister of God I feel that this thing is repugnant on a public building.” Because the female figure on the panel was reclining, Brown maintained the panel was “extremely suggestive.” He rejected Longley’s explanation of the symbolism of the figure, declaring, “Man is fertile and woman isn’t.” Longley responded to this declaration with an expression which, apparently, was not printable in a family newspaper.

Randall Davey said none of the works of the artists present had ever been attacked for being immoral. Will Shuster spoke up, saying none of the artists was as ignorant of morals as Mr. Brown was of art. “Evil be to him who evil thinketh,” quoted Shuster who opined that there was nothing about the “Earth” figure to cause any sensual excitement. Shuster then asked the minister if he got any erotic stimulus out of the plaque. Brown responded, “It’s repulsive and that’s all.”

Artist John Sloan joined in the fray, saying no jury of artists had ever suggested the sculpture was pornographic. “There are other people in the state besides artists,” Reverend Brown replied. “It’s up to us to educate these people,” responded Sloan. The minister shot back, “It’s up to us to educate you.”

Sloan told the attending ministers, “I can show you things in the Bible that would make this look like lemonade.” But the ministers were having none of it. “I can explain morals and you can’t,” Reverend Brown announced.

Throughout the debate, the architect Kruger sat silently until the end when he announced he would give his decision the next day and so the meeting ended. The photographer for the New Mexican, Pen Wilson, paused on his way out of the Governor’s office to snap a picture of a girly calendar posted prominently in the office of State Purchasing Agent H. H. McDaniel. The risqué calendar appeared in the newspaper the next day along with the editor’s comment that, apparently, no dispute had arisen over this particular decorative addition to the state capitol building.

The following day, Kruger told the press that he had decided to remove the controversial panels. Moreover, the panels would be auctioned off, with the proceeds to go to a state children’s hospital. Workmen set to work immediately. Three of the panels came off without difficulty; the fourth refused to budge and had to be removed in pieces.

Longley expressed his disappointment in the move but the other artists felt more strongly about the action. Meeting in the home of Dr. Rudolph Kieve, a number of Santa Fe artists formed a citizen’s committee. Their first official act was to seek a court injunction to prevent the removal of Miss Fertility on two legal theories: first, the removal was a violation of the artist’s constitutionally protected right of free expression; second, because the panel had become attached to a public building, it was the property of the state and Kruger had no authority to remove it. While the Committee sent the proposed pleadings around for review by committee members, the actual terra cotta subjects of the proposed suit were being transported by truck to a warehouse.

Meanwhile, citizens weighed in with opinions in letters to the editor. J. Robert Jones of Los Alamos disagreed that “theological prudery should be permitted to qualify the bounds of artistic expression.” While Jones personally thought the art work in question “looks like hell,” he maintained that “principles were principles.”

Victor F. Allen, also of Los Alamos, pointed out that classical statues and paintings of nudes were among the most acclaimed in the world, singling out “Venus of Milo” as an example. “Nudity,” wrote Allen, “is a state of fact; lewdity is a state of mind.”

Adelina O. Hill wrote that Miss Fertility might be better suited to placement on Kruger’s own modern building on Palace Avenue, recently completed in 1950, than on the “pueblo architecture” of the new capitol building addition. Actually, the new addition was executed in Territorial Revival style and not Pueblo style at all but Mrs. Hill, formerly Ortiz, was a frequent correspondent in The New Mexican. She was among those self-described descendants of “Spanish” conquistadors, quite common in Santa Fe even today, who appoint themselves guardians of the city’s traditions, notwithstanding that the tradition may have been one created wholly for the tourist trade in the 1920’s.

Artist Ely de V. Whitman wrote to suggest that the ministers might find the reclining Miss Fertility more acceptable if the sculpture were placed upright, thus appearing to place Miss Fertility on her knees, a more suitable pose for females among Berean Baptists.

Meanwhile, the artists’ committee which was temporarily formed to protest the removal of Miss Fertility became permanent after a number of prominent artists and professionals met at the Camino del Monte Sol home of Dr. Walter Taylor. The group, now called the Committee for the Preservation of Cultural Freedom, consisted of Gesha Kurakin, Ely de V. Whitman, William and Bernique Longley, Pierre Menager, photographer Wyatt Davis, Lewis Penner, Mrs. Rafael Alfau, Al Rosenfeld, Martin Beck, Will Shuster and its officers, psychiatrist and writer Dr. Rudolph Kieve as president, Dr. Eliot Porter as vice-president, Mrs. Rohn Hawke as secretary and Rafael Alfau, treasurer.

Will Shuster and Oliver La Farge, both of whom wrote weekly columns in the local paper (ostensibly on art and literature), used their soapboxes to sputter against censorship of Longley’s art. The new artists’ Committee for the Preservation of Cultural Freedom took to the airwaves, appearing on KTRC radio, to state their case. Committee president Rudolph Kieve argued that the artist William Longley’s “right of expression” had been infringed upon, a right which should be regarded “in the same light as free speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion. “Censorship by any self-appointed pressure group,” declared the Committee “is incompatible with the principles of American freedom.” There was no rebuttal as the Reverend Brown declined an offer to join the radio debate.

The New Mexican offered another solution, publishing a photo of the contested Miss Fertility panel, altering it so that Miss Fertility sported a bra and a polka-dot skirt. The photo’s caption asked, “How’s this?” for meeting the objections to Miss Fertility’s appearance.

The debate caught the imagination of the nation, with amused articles on Miss Fertility appearing in such diverse publications as New Hampshire’s Portsmouth Herald and Time magazine. But, after a few weeks, the issue died quietly. No more was heard from either the Berean Baptists or the Committee for the Preservation of Cultural Freedom. Sloan, Shuster and Davey continued to enjoy national reputation. William Longley disappeared into obscurity although his wife, Bernique, kept a studio on Camino De Monte Sol and is today a respected fine artist whose prints are still popular.

Tom Mabry left office in 1951 and returned to Clovis to practice law until his death in 1962. In 1952, the capitol addition was largely completed and an auditorium on the north wing of the new building was dedicated to Governor Mabry. Mabry Hall is part of what is now called the Jerry Apodaca Education Building. Below most of the second story windows on that building one can see terra cotta panels or spandrels depicting five distinct bas-relief figures, repeated four times.

Four panels are absent. The panels of “Earth,” or Miss Fertility as the popular press dubbed the art work, have long since disappeared – all but one. Interestingly, art historian Elaine Bergman found one of the panels set into the wall of a garden courtyard of a house on Camino Del Monte Sol purchased by friends in 2002. They were told that the panel was designed by the home’s original owner, William Longley.

These days, while Miss Fertility does not grace the state’s capitol building, she reclines comfortably in the nude, dreaming amid terra cotta corn stalks in the Santa Fe sun, apparently unaware or unconcerned that she was exiled to her garden for the crime of public immorality.