Takedown power: Art and Power in the Digital Age with Farah Nayeri
By Amy Cope
Farah Nayeri, a journalist for the New York Times, author of Takedown: Art and Power in the Digital Age, and host of a podcast series — CultureBlast — featuring deep-dive interviews with personalities from the world of culture. Farah talked us through three case studies featured in her book that explore the impact that contemporary social movements have had on the world of art and museums.
1.
“The Perfect Moment” was an exhibition featuring the work of Robert Mapplethorpe at the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., in 1989. The exhibition featured 150 images taken between 1969 and 1988 as part of a retrospective of Mapplethorpe’s life work. The exhibition was, however, cancelled before it even opened. This was a time when the AIDS epidemic was rife and Washington and the Senate were already in an uproar over Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ photograph, which had scandalized conservative lawmakers in 1987. The Corcoran Gallery, keen to steer clear of politics and worried that their own federal funding could be cut, announced that the exhibition would not go ahead.
Farah explains that despite the controversy around particular artworks and their religious and sexual themes, “censorship of the arts in the contemporary Western world is essentially pointless - times change, mentalities evolve and minds open.” Farah continues: “What shocks and horrifies people today, is likely to be tolerated and accepted tomorrow. So there is really no point in banning art.”
2.
The next case study was Dana Schutz “Open Casket” painting. This painting depicts 14-year-old African American Emmett Til who was murdered in the 1950s after speaking briefly to a white female store owner. The painting was exhibited at the Whitney Biennial, and sparked a peaceful protest in front of it. The protest, led by Parker Bright, was recorded and streamed on Facebook. The argument was that “Dana did not have the privilege to speak for Black people as a whole or for Emmett Till’s family.”
Farah explains that the activist Parker Bright also protested the Whitney admission fee of $22 which he said few African-Americans were willing or able to pay, and said no one should be making money over a black dead body. Immediately afterwards, the British artist Hannah Black wrote an open letter, calling for the painting’s removal and destruction.
Whoopi Goldberg, without ever naming Hannah, scolded her, saying: “You may be an artist, but you need to grow up…If you are an artist, young lady, you should be ashamed of yourself. Because if somebody decides they don’t like your art, then what?” This quote captured a lot of the feelings that were prevalent among many other African-American figures who reacted.
Farah concludes stating her view that “Parker Bright had every right to stage a peaceful demonstration in front of the painting…his protest was peaceful and respectful… museums are public forums where discussion is free and open and these people should and can stand up and protest about a painting.” But Farah continues, and admits many others feel the same: “Dana had every right to paint that painting. Her skin colour did not disqualify her from delivering a profile of Emmett Till.”
“No artist’s work, no matter how sensitive or how offensive or controversial it is to one or more people, should ever be threatened with destruction or destroyed.”
3.
The final case study was of Sam Durant’s “Scaffold” created in 2012. The work was a monumental wood-and-steel composite of 7 gallows used in US government-led executions between 1859 and 2006. Durant intended the work to be a reflection on America and its brutal history, criminal justice system and capital punishment.
“Scaffold” was installed in 2017 in Minneapolis where the largest mass execution in the US took place. It was a hanging of 38 Dakota Indian men in Minnesota in 1862. Protestors objected that a white LA native was exhibiting a symbol of Native American tragedy and pain. The controversy was heightened because the site in Minnesota was once owned by Dakota people. Protesters also objected to the fact that no Native American was consulted in the installation as it was “not your story” and “not in my ancestors names.”
The decision was that the installation needed to be taken down. Durant handed over the intellectual property of his work and it was dismantled and later destroyed. Durrant’s intention was to denounce the violent excesses of America and he “felt awful the work was traumatizing to Native Americans… the protests needed to be deescalated, so he made the gesture of handing over the copyright to his work.”
Farah points out that the museum learned that they “need to be in tune with their local communities, and they should have staff from those communities to be aware of culture sensitives to avoid triggering reactions of the ‘Scaffold’ kind.”
Final comment from Farah:
When asked “can or should art overcome injustice,” Farah replied, “Artists are very exercised by injustice.” But it is a delicate balance, because of “when art becomes nothing but politics, it becomes propaganda. And propaganda art is not the best art.”