Now art is in question and not only art but its interpretation as well. Where was the left when “The Holy Virgin Mary” was defended as free speech?
College administrators appear inclined to defend nothing as free speech. What cowards we have educating the next generation, which by the way, should spend more time being “students” and less time selectively looking under rocks for every conceivable interpretation of past racism.
Perhaps these students are just discovering racism existed and they are bored with their video games glorifying war. And yes, in its many forms racism still exits, has since time began and sadly will always exist. Worry more about your own actions to your fellow humans and less about the person in a Indian costume.
At Princeton they want to remove Woodrow Wilsons name from a building because he was a racist. Using that logic we should ignore the Declaration of Independence written by a slaveholder. We should ban Thanksgiving because it celebrates Europeans who cheated and murdered native Americans.
[The Holy Virgin Mary, a 1996 painting by British artist Chris Ofili, created a firestorm of controversy when it was exhibited at the Brooklyn Museum of Art in 1999. The painting depicts a black Madonna figure baring one breast, which is made from lacquered elephant dung and surrounded by butterfly-like formations of female genitalia (a play on the term putti, a type of cherub depicted in religious art).
Many Catholics – in particular Rudolph Giuliani, who was mayor of New York at the time – objected to the painting. Giuliani even attempted to withdraw the $7 million grant the city had given the museum, but the museum’s management successfully sued, citing free speech rights. Source: People]
University (of Kentucky) President Eli Capilouto said the fresco at Memorial Hall was shrouded last week to give the community time to debate what to do about it, in light of persistent complaints from students and others that the artwork presents an offensive and romanticized view of slavery and other aspects of the state’s racial history.
Kentucky alumna Ann Rice O’Hanlon painted the mural in 1934 on plaster laid by her husband, Dick O’Hanlon. Four slaves in what appears to be a tobacco field are central to the composition of the piece, with a scene of a passenger railway placed above them. Other images from the state’s history are arrayed in a work that is 38 feet wide and 11 feet tall.
The mural “sanitizes history, painting over the stark reality of unimaginable brutality, pain, and suffering represented by the enslavement of our fellow women and men,” Capilouto said in a message to the university community. “We can no longer allow that to stand alone, unanswered by and unaccountable to, the evolutionary trajectory of our human understanding and our human spirit.” Washington Post 12-2-15
I look at this painting (a small portion of it) and contrary to a view of romantizing slavery or santizing history, I see a clear picture of African Americans being isolated from whites and its unfairness and I see slaves toiling in the fields while whites enjoy themselves.
I see a clear picture of inequality and racism and not a hint the slaves are happy with their lot. And oh yes, take a look at that guy brandishing a gun … no doubt the painting is glorifying terrorism.
Categories: Observations on life