A couple weeks back Artnet reported that conservative media outlets in New York were raising a ruckus over one panel from A Glimpse of What Life in a Free Country Could Be Like, a 14-foot-long illustration featuring thousands of words of dialogue. The panel in question featured a drawing of the iconic hooded prisoner from the Abu Ghraib photographs, but the real controversy was caused by the fact that the Drawing Center—the space in which Wilson's work was exhibited—seeks to move to facilities at Ground Zero in the new World Trade Center.
Not so much any more, it seems. What with Governor George Pataki reportedly threatening that "[w]e will not tolerate anything on the site that denigrates America, denigrates New York or freedom or denigrates the sacrifice and courage that the heroes showed on September 11," the Drawing Center is reconsidering whether it wants to relocate to the new facilities.
It goes without saying that freedom of speech from political suppression is one of America's most cherished values, and it's probably beside the point to note that a work celebrating freedom of speech from political suppression does not, in fact, denigrate America, New York, freedom, or anything else, except perhaps the torture of detainees at Abu Ghraib.
I'm sympathetic to Wilson's complaint that Drawing Center chiefs aren't putting forth a robust defense of artistic freedom in light of these attacks, but the attacks themselves certainly come as no surprise. If the Drawing Center's board does decide to go through with the move to Ground Zero facilities, they had better build a bunker—anthing more controversial than a Crystal Bridges gift shop will be subject to constant shelling from those who neither understand art nor freedom. Lots of foot traffic, yes, but hardly worth the stress the artists or programming directors will surely endure if the Drawing Center isn't willing to go to the mat over the work it exhibits.
Posted by Kriston at July 25, 2005 2:20 PMyou are right on.
Posted by: mark at July 25, 2005 9:44 PMYou are completely wrong, and arrogant.
"..from those who neither understand art nor freedom." There's a time and a place for everything. Art critical of the treatment of palestinians would not belong at a holocaust museum or memorial. Set up shop down the street. But then most of the elite poseurs who call themselves artists possess neither common sense nor sensitivity.
Don't confuse the WTC commercial space with the September 11 monument, JSB. Plans for the new WTC include space for a museum and performing arts center along with massive commercial square footage, so something's going in—why not a decent museum and a worthwhile performing arts space? The WTC is clearly not intended to solely host a monument space. Only NY Republicans looking to score points on 9/11 are threatening the Drawing Center; reasonable New Yorkers recognize it as a valuable and perfectly respectable institution.
Posted by: Kriston at July 26, 2005 11:01 AMPerhaps...all that. But would the curators know better than to put Abu Graib paintings up? ...I heard that the Freedom Center plans struck the inclusion of a mural of Iraqi women showing off their purple thumbs because it might be too favorable to the Bush/Hitler/Halliburton crowd.
There are families of victims, "reasonable" by any measure, who are opposed to any politicization of the site on or near the memorial. Down the street. That's where it belongs.
Posted by: j.scott barnard at July 26, 2005 11:13 AMIs the drawing in question to be a permanent exhibition, or is it a rotating work currently on display in the Drawing Center's present location? Are they being pre-emptively punished for what they display today?
Posted by: susan at July 28, 2005 9:37 PMThe NY Times editorial board has published its institutional opinion on this topic.
Somewhere in the ill-conceived campaign to "take back the memorial" at ground zero, false impressions have managed to triumph over facts. This week, Debra Burlingame [...] and others called for a boycott of fund-raising for the memorial until the International Freedom Center and the Drawing Center have been banished from ground zero.
[...] But this is not really a campaign about money or space. It is a campaign about political purity - about how people remember 9/11 and about how we choose to read its aftermath, including the Iraq war. On their Web site, www.takebackthememorial.org, critics of the cultural plan at ground zero offer a resolution called Campaign America. It says that ground zero must contain no facilities "that house controversial debate, dialogue, artistic impressions, or exhibits referring to extraneous historical events." This, to us, sounds un-American."
You can stick a fork in it, because it's done. With its final word, the NY Times editorial board may have succeeded in giving the "Take Back The Memorial" project the push it needed to put it over the top. It's for very good reason that NFL players are told never to speak ill of their opponents. (And I write this as someone who isn't all that sympathetic to moving the Drawing Center to the WTC in the first place.)
Posted by: Henry at July 30, 2005 11:02 AM