Calling for a Show-and-Tell in Art Funding

The Times continues to distort the art funding dispute, implying, as Charles Champlin did, that it centers on a question of censorship or suppression (“Suppression Can Be a Dirty Word, Too,” Aug. 24).

Curiously, though Champlin seems to defend federal funding of the late Robert Mapplethrope’s controversial photographs, he says, “ . . . I’ve not had access to them.” The Times can print photos of an American swaying from a rope in Lebanon, but its arts editor has not had access to a government-funded art exhibit. Come on; who’s engaging in suppression now?

Is it suppression to say that I should not be forced to pay for something that The Times appears unwilling to print? To quote a bumper sticker: “Eschew obfuscation.” Show the photos. Let those footing the bill decide.

JOHN PAUL ARNERICH, Los Angeles