The Seattle Times October 31, 1992, Saturday, Final Edition ARTISTIC LICENSE -- ANTI-SINEAD CROWD GIVES CENSORSHIP TREMENDOUS Editor, The Times: The Oct. 22 op-ed column by Lee Krenis More comparing Sinead O'Connor to Madonna was a very timely and thought-provoking piece. However, there are two key issues which More failed to mention. First, the most significant difference between Madonna and Ms. O'Connor, at least in the eyes of the entertainment world, has nothing to do with shrewdness, humor, self-righteousness or walking the thin line between shock value and offensiveness. The real difference is in physical appearance. Just look at the article - illustrated with a gross caricature of Ms. O'Connor - and compare that to your recent harsh review of Madonna's latest work - illustrated with a sexy photograph. Madonna's sexuality gives her a license, in most people's eyes, to do things that would normally be considered bad taste. A lot of the same people have been just looking for an excuse to hate Sinead O'Connor ("that skinny chick with the bald head"), and now they have found one. The second point is in the nature of each star's gestures. In spite of the fact that Madonna's defenders will try to tell us that there is actually some substance behind what she does, in the end, rubbing a crucifix against her crotch was something done for shock value and entertainment only. On the other hand, Ms. O'Connor's tearing up the Pope, which certainly has shock value, was a form of individual expression of the sort that we Americans are said to value so highly. It is a sad sign that the crowd at Madison Square Garden (which, I suppose, resembled a group of '80s yuppies more than a group of '60s radicals) has effectively given censorship the kind of boost that even Jesse Helms would envy. - Ken Jones, Bellevue