Should historically "significant" art be removed from public display if some people find it racially offensive?
11 Comments
nick said:
The art should not be removed. Historic pieces help us remember the past, sometimes these memories are not pleasent but they are necessary.
Cynthia Johnson said:
The truth is that this country is racially offensive - we were built on a foundation of oppression(and thats putting it very mildly) to Native and African people- the artwork is offensive but should be placed in a museum so that we do not forget the past. More and more we are hiding the past from our children and this is a mistake, we need to own up to the past and stop pretending it never happened, denial is a very dangerous thing, hiding the art will just serve to help those who choose to perpetuate the myth of our "glorious" past.The people on the broadcast were right- it shouldn't be in an building where public policy is made, but it should be preserved somewhere.
Ann said:
As a native American, it is highly offensive, the past is hard to believe, we have come along way as a Indian Nation and will continue to- just visit your local casino and see the progress we have made, providing jobs, helping our own native tribes, etc. Art is very controversial at times- the past should be preserved, perhaps a musuem would be the best solution, the portrayal in a public bulding of that magnitude, is simply outrageous.
Ryan Firey said:
Having art in which displays the "lynching" of a native american, is a part of our past and as a native american i take no offense in the art piece. My offense comes from knowing that this art is a trophy of how the settlers came upon the native americans and are proud of taking the land and pillaging our people. The best analogy i can muster is the building in which it stays is acting almost as a trophy case for the artwork. think of how fast that painting would have been removed had it been a african american in the picture rather than a native american. this is an outrage. Remove the painting, put the painting in the native american exhibit in the tacoma museum so all of my children will know what really happened to our people.
Ryan said:
Having art in which displays the "lynching" of a native american, is a part of our past and as a native american i take great offense in the art piece. My offense comes from knowing that this art is a trophy of how the settlers came upon the native americans and are proud of taking the land and pillaging our people. The best analogy i can muster is the building in which it stays is acting almost as a trophy case for the artwork. think of how fast that painting would have been removed had it been a african american in the picture rather than a native american. this is an outrage. Remove the painting, put the painting in the native american exhibit in the tacoma museum so all of my children will know what really happened to our people.
es said:
something offensive that needs to be removed is the bronze statue of marcus whitman just inside the front doors of our capitol building in olympia. i took the tour several years ago and they paint such a glowing picture of what a great man he was and it just ainte so.
the statue needs to be removed and the state needs to apologize to the indian people for misleading the public for what this man really did.
this isnt any different than what just happend to jessica lynch, they made up all these heroic stories and now she is saying it was all just a lie.
personally id trust some wino in a alley rather than a preist or our government. start telling the truth then we can talk about trust.
Quinn said:
It's important to understand the problems the U.S. had in the past. The art represents a time that has not passed however. We're still causing the same problems now, except we're bringing it to the doorstep of the rest of the world. Keep the art. Blaming art on society's problem is EXACTLY what we SHOULD NOT DO. Marilyn Manson was blamed for Columbine, lack of parenting and putting 'god' all over the place is the real problem. This country has a problem with finding scapegoats.
walt said:
why does everyone have to be so PC and sensitive to everyone? the indians of today are DISTANT relatives of the indians in the painting. and i dont see the indians refusing all the government help they get just for being indian. do you think there is anywhere else in the world they would get treated as good as the american government treats them? no. what would have been if the white man didnt come take over? alot more houses with broke down cars in the yards filled with garbage. blame whoever you want indians but you get free houses better fishing and hunting rights food stamps and money just for being born indian. thats not equal rights. im white and i work hard and i dont get the things indians get for being born fat and ugly.
omg said:
Walt - you are also clinically retarded. Hope that wasn't too PC for you.
es said:
walt-the so called help you are talking about came after the killing slavery and theft of thier native lands then those who were still alive got to sign treaties. the benefits they recieve today are a result of that. if the white man or anyone else for that matter hadnt come here there wouldnt be broken down cars garbage drugs prostitution or corporate rip offs just to mention a few.
fishing and hunting rights are a part of the treaties, also because of things like discrimination and high unemployment rates on reservations they need food stamps or starve, dont forget the millions of non indians across this nation that also collect food stamps.
as for being born fat and ugly, indians in the past didnt have mc donalds in thier diets so as a people these high fat diets are especially hard on them leading to things like diabetes.
as far as you being white and a hard worker try being indian, you will have to work twice as hard to get half as far and along the way have to put up with idiots like you.
C said:
I find the quality of some newsstations offensive .. does that mean we can demand them from being on public display ? That would rock!
The art should not be removed. Historic pieces help us remember the past, sometimes these memories are not pleasent but they are necessary.
The truth is that this country is racially offensive - we were built on a foundation of oppression(and thats putting it very mildly) to Native and African people- the artwork is offensive but should be placed in a museum so that we do not forget the past. More and more we are hiding the past from our children and this is a mistake, we need to own up to the past and stop pretending it never happened, denial is a very dangerous thing, hiding the art will just serve to help those who choose to perpetuate the myth of our "glorious" past.The people on the broadcast were right- it shouldn't be in an building where public policy is made, but it should be preserved somewhere.
As a native American, it is highly offensive, the past is hard to believe, we have come along way as a Indian Nation and will continue to- just visit your local casino and see the progress we have made, providing jobs, helping our own native tribes, etc. Art is very controversial at times- the past should be preserved, perhaps a musuem would be the best solution, the portrayal in a public bulding of that magnitude, is simply outrageous.
Having art in which displays the "lynching" of a native american, is a part of our past and as a native american i take no offense in the art piece. My offense comes from knowing that this art is a trophy of how the settlers came upon the native americans and are proud of taking the land and pillaging our people. The best analogy i can muster is the building in which it stays is acting almost as a trophy case for the artwork. think of how fast that painting would have been removed had it been a african american in the picture rather than a native american. this is an outrage. Remove the painting, put the painting in the native american exhibit in the tacoma museum so all of my children will know what really happened to our people.
Having art in which displays the "lynching" of a native american, is a part of our past and as a native american i take great offense in the art piece. My offense comes from knowing that this art is a trophy of how the settlers came upon the native americans and are proud of taking the land and pillaging our people. The best analogy i can muster is the building in which it stays is acting almost as a trophy case for the artwork. think of how fast that painting would have been removed had it been a african american in the picture rather than a native american. this is an outrage. Remove the painting, put the painting in the native american exhibit in the tacoma museum so all of my children will know what really happened to our people.
something offensive that needs to be removed is the bronze statue of marcus whitman just inside the front doors of our capitol building in olympia. i took the tour several years ago and they paint such a glowing picture of what a great man he was and it just ainte so.
the statue needs to be removed and the state needs to apologize to the indian people for misleading the public for what this man really did.
this isnt any different than what just happend to jessica lynch, they made up all these heroic stories and now she is saying it was all just a lie.
personally id trust some wino in a alley rather than a preist or our government. start telling the truth then we can talk about trust.
It's important to understand the problems the U.S. had in the past. The art represents a time that has not passed however. We're still causing the same problems now, except we're bringing it to the doorstep of the rest of the world. Keep the art. Blaming art on society's problem is EXACTLY what we SHOULD NOT DO. Marilyn Manson was blamed for Columbine, lack of parenting and putting 'god' all over the place is the real problem. This country has a problem with finding scapegoats.
why does everyone have to be so PC and sensitive to everyone? the indians of today are DISTANT relatives of the indians in the painting. and i dont see the indians refusing all the government help they get just for being indian. do you think there is anywhere else in the world they would get treated as good as the american government treats them? no. what would have been if the white man didnt come take over? alot more houses with broke down cars in the yards filled with garbage. blame whoever you want indians but you get free houses better fishing and hunting rights food stamps and money just for being born indian. thats not equal rights. im white and i work hard and i dont get the things indians get for being born fat and ugly.
Walt - you are also clinically retarded. Hope that wasn't too PC for you.
walt-the so called help you are talking about came after the killing slavery and theft of thier native lands then those who were still alive got to sign treaties. the benefits they recieve today are a result of that. if the white man or anyone else for that matter hadnt come here there wouldnt be broken down cars garbage drugs prostitution or corporate rip offs just to mention a few.
fishing and hunting rights are a part of the treaties, also because of things like discrimination and high unemployment rates on reservations they need food stamps or starve, dont forget the millions of non indians across this nation that also collect food stamps.
as for being born fat and ugly, indians in the past didnt have mc donalds in thier diets so as a people these high fat diets are especially hard on them leading to things like diabetes.
as far as you being white and a hard worker try being indian, you will have to work twice as hard to get half as far and along the way have to put up with idiots like you.
I find the quality of some newsstations offensive .. does that mean we can demand them from being on public display ? That would rock!