Geldzahler. In I960 Geldzahler workednin the Department of American Paintingsnand Sculpture at the MetropolitannMuseum of Art in New York as a curatorialnassistant, and his rise from that firstnpost has been nothing short of meteoric.nIn his essay on Geldzahler in The Scene:nReports on Post-modern Art (VikingnPress, New York, 1976) Calvin Tompkinsnwrites of his subject in I960: “Atthisntime . . . Geldzahler saw a great deal ofnAndy Warhol. Although Warhol wasnstill two years away from his first NewnYork show, Geldzahler never doubtednthat he was an important artist.” Tompkinsnalso says, “sometimes [Geldzahler]ngave Warhol ideas for paintings,” andnnotes that Geldzahler appeared in earlynWarhol films. Something in Gcldzahler’snbelief in Warhol smacks of self-fulfillingnprophecy: that a man who drewnshoe ads and decorated departmentstorenwindows “was an important artist.”nAnother figure emerges on the scene:nJean Stein Vanden Heuvel. WritesnTompkins: “Geldzahler and Mrs.nVanden Heuvel had met by accident inn1958, at the Barnes Foundation, innPennsylvania; she had seen him surreptitiouslynphotographing a van Gogh (thenBarnes Foundation does not allow photographs),nand they had both giggled.”nWho’s Elitist?nWe read in a recent statement releasednby the National Education Association (anlabor union, not a professional organizationnaccording to a recent court ruling)nthat the current administration is destroyingnpublic education through itsn”elitist philosophy.” However, on then”Letters” page of a recent issue oi NEAnToday, the association’s organ, we find anrather different picture: both lettersnunder “Creation, Humanism” spoke ofnthe frequent insensitivity of secularists tonthe religious beliefs of their students; fivenof the six letters under “Reagan and thenBudget” challenged the rabid anti-nReaganism of NEA leaders; and the onlynletter under “School Prayer” called NEAnlO^E^i^^i^^nChronicles of CulturenPartners in punk crime from the start.nMrs. Vanden Heuvel is, of course, JeannStein, the biographer of Edie Sedgwick.nAnother character must be added to thencast of this modern amorality play, onenwhom Andy Warhol—or someone elsenspeaking in his voice—calls in his Exposuresnhis “favorite date” and who wasninvited by Ronald Reagan to dine in thenWhite House: Diana Vreeland. Vreelandnhas been extremely influential innthe fashion world for a number of years:nHarper’s Bazaar. . . Vogue. .. the MetropolitannMuseum of Art’s CostumenInstitute—all of these, at one time ornanother, were under her imperium.nAndy, Henry, Jean, Diana. And Edie.nLIBERAL CULTURE |nlidith Minturn Sedgwick was born onnApril 30, 1943. She died November 16,n1971 as Edith Sedgwick Post of, accordingnto the Santa Barbara County (California)nCoroner’s Register, “Barbituratenover-dose,” which is classified in thenreport as “Accident/Suicide.” Duringnher short life—and especially now, yearsnafter it—she was best known as simplyn”Edie.” Whether Edie was just a misguidednyoung woman, the product of anfamily whose blood lines were weak, or anconniving tart who put her body on thenblock for kicks rather than cash is of littlenm\n”nartow-minded” in its opposition tonprayer in schools. Writes one of these disttessedncorrespondents: “While our organizationnis bemoaning the fact thatnparents are abandoning the publicnschools for private and paiochial institutions,nwe offer no compromise or incentivento keep the children in the publicnschools.” So—who’s elitist? NEA’snmembers, its leaders, or Reagan ? Dnnnimportance. What is important is whynJean Stein, with the able editorialnassistance of George Plimpton, exhumednthis woman and led her family, friends,nand acquaintances in a paean to hernmemory. The answer to the question is ansimple one, but it involves the otherncharacters already described: Warhol,nGeldzahler, Stein, Vreeland, and othersnof their ilk are, in a word, evil. Evil, ofncourse, is a very unchic word, one whichnis to be spoken only on one day of thenweek from a specific location: on Sundaysnfrom a pulpit. Modern people—atnleast those who are “with it”—don’tnthink that anyone existent today is actuallynevil, and if these people use thenword, it is only when applied to anCaligula or a Hitler. Yet even those twonare being cleansed in the waters of situationnethics, so the word may pass out ofnuse. However, what other word can benused to describe people who blithelynstood by and watched while an individualnwas being physically, mentally, andnspiritually destroyed?nWarhol wanted to be a star in the 60′ s;nhe became one. Part of his program tonachieve his goal included the making ofnwhat he and others termed “superstars”n—not Newman or Streisand, but PaulnAmerica and Viva. The rationale is simplen: if Warhol associated with superstars,nhe, too, must be one. One who gainednsuch status in Warhol’s stable/Factory/nrat’s nest was Edie, a passably attractivengirl in her early twenties who had largendark eyes and an unextraordinary figure.nAs for her “talent”—well, it seems tonhave been nothing more than the abilitynboth to be pliable enough to fit the situationnand, simultaneously, to mold thatnsituation to fit herself. It’s worth notingnthat she was, at the time, a veteran ofnmental hospitals. One thing cannot benoveremphasized: Warhol could notnmake himself—or anyone else—an importantnpublic figure by himself.nThomas Gray wasn’ t the first to point outnthat “Some mute inglorious Milton”ndidn’t make it because of a lack of whatnwould now be termed “media attention.”nWarhol got such attention, inn