From Aesthetic Integration to Applying Art: Arnold H. Maremont, the EPEC seminar, and the Planning of SIU Edwardsville

Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society, Spring 2004 by Kerber, Stephen

Not until 20 February 1963, did the Madison County Board of Supervisors finally approve a county zoning ordinance. The measure gained approval by a 27-19 vote.85 Immediately following passage of the zoning ordinance, Morris authorized issuance of invitations for bids by contractors on the first two campus structures, the library and the general classroom and office building.86

Once the zoning logjam disappeared, University Architect Charles Pulley began to press Morris for a decision regarding the allocation of funds for implementation of a plastic arts program. Pulley reminded Morris that the sum of $100,000 for each campus had been discussed in previous meetings.87 Finally, on 2 May 1963, Morris agreed to the $100,000 figure.88

Despite Morris's decision to make a budgetary commitment to the plastic arts concept, implementation of the concept remained undefined and unaccomplished for many more months. As John Randall had observed, Gyo Obata's preference for assignment or placement of art works differed substantially from Harold Maremont's insistence upon integration. In an attempt to bring at long last some level of definition and focus to the plastic arts program, the interested parties turned to an outside consultant-Katharine Kuh.

A student of art history, a pioneering former private gallery owner, and the first curator of modern art at the Art Institute of Chicago, Kuh had long known Maremont. After leaving the Art Institute in 1959, Kuh had become the art critic for the Saturday Review.89 Kuh met with Randall and Charles Pulley in Chicago on 31 March 1964, to discuss various aspects of the plastic arts program. Essentially, Randall and Pulley inquired whether Kuh might care to act as an art selector or purchasing advisor for the university and under what circumstances she might consider such an offer.90

Kuh indicated that she might enjoy such a role but only under certain conditions. She insisted that "more business-like" arrangements would have to be made. In this context, Kuh referred to previous difficulties in obtaining responses from Gyo Obata and to alledged misunderstandings in communications between Arnold Maremont and various artists.91

Kuh refused to work for a committee. She insisted on a direct expression of interest from and a reporting line to Delyte Morris through the university architects. Because of other pressing commitments, she asked for a personal letter from the president within one week. For her consulting work, she would ask a fee of $3,000 for each campus for a two year period, plus travel expenses.92

Significantly, Kuh told Randall and Pulley that no new works of art should be commissioned for Edwardsville. She reasoned that the "period of co-creativeness" had long since passed. She willingly agreed with the two campus architects that the works she would identify should not be exhibited on a permanent, unchanging basis.93

The hiring of Kuh as a consultant marked a definite and irrevocable departure from Arnold Maremont's original concept of integration of art in the campus planning. To some extent, the time delays resulting from the demand for county-wide zoning may have contributed to this departure. However, the amorphous and ambitious nature of the original Maremont proposal would under ideal circumstances have been very difficult to realize.