NPR: The official White House newsletter has posted an article titled "President Trump Is Right About the Smithsonian." It calls out some of the institution's artwork, exhibitions, programs and online articles that focus on race, slavery, immigration and sexuality. That includes works at the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, The National Portrait Gallery, and The National Museum of the American Latino.
9 comments:
What is art, if not a way to force us to see life from a different perspective? For too long in America, art has been told from the viewpoint of the conqueror rather than the conquered. In recent years, DEI initiatives have made space for new voices—voices that tell stories outside of the traditional “white” narrative. Around 2015, we began to see a shift: art and storytelling that offered a different vision of what it means to be American. This opened the door to deeper conversations about race and the examples we project onto the global stage. Now, as political priorities shift, regulations are tightening and government funding is being directed away from works that challenge dominant perspectives. Art is where change begins, and limiting it is a way of silencing progress. Take Rigoberto González’s Refugees Crossing the Border Wall into South Texas. Its purpose is not to glorify illegal crossings, but to show the immense struggle of leaving one’s life behind and starting over. For immigrants, this art validates experiences of loss, resilience, and hope—stories millions of Americans can relate to. Yet this inclusive perspective is precisely what the current administration seems determined to suppress. Removing such works from public view is not just censorship; it is erasure. And that is deeply unsettling.
Many of the artists in this article compared the current time to historical periods with similar fascistic art censorship. I think that drawing those connections helps us to see how we can move towards liberation and away from fascism. To me a large part of that is in art making. Any act of joy is resistance in trying times. Art making is so joyful for the artist and the people who experience the art and that is revolutionary. Art brings people together more than it pushes people apart and that is how you build community by bringing people in. I think when a working class is particularly divided, such as right now, it can feel easy to look for ways to push people out but it's important to remember that together we do more than we do when separated. Sometimes art does push people apart when we don’t keep an open mind, some people would consider all the art in this article art that pushes people apart but I think by talking about art and politics it can bring people together. It simply requires an open mind and a desire to lift up the community you are a part of.
What constitutes free speech has always been a divisive topic, but even more so with the start of the Trump administration’s term. Protesting and using political or offensive speech, while possibly hurtful, is protected. “Fighting words”, speech that could provoke a listener to violence, is unprotected. The boundary between these is blurry and hard to enforce. In this way, arguments about what constitutes free speech can often devolve into basic ideological differences.
It would be extremely hard for the administration to censor museum art completely, because they cannot abridge an artist's first amendment right or their artistic expression. But the administration can reserve funding from museums, essentially censoring art that doesn’t align with their platform.
This article quotes the Trump administration as standing against “ideologically driven” art. But in my opinion, censorship of art- the administration’s idea of standing up- is ideologically driven. The pieces outlined in the newsletter deal with political topics. They are intended to trigger reactions and create discussions; to question the viewer’s current ideological standing. Censorship shuts down any dialogue, and furthers a single belief.
The topic of self-censorship is an interesting one, and something to keep in mind as an up-and-coming artist. Until it was put into words in this article, it has just been an idea that I have been struggling with as an artist. Not only will I be proactive about combating this in my artwork, I will take notice of how other artists manage their composure in the face of censorship.
Art matters, stories matter, and the creation of artwork is so inherently human. Even in the face of censorship it is more important than ever to see such strong figures and their responses. Despite clicking on this article and preparing to just be sent in a downward spiral of despair as a young artist, I find myself uplifted and empowered at the thought of continuing on and speaking out through my artwork.
With the current state of the world, this article brings to light how art keeps getting seen and objectified because of the different messages being shown through race and culture. Art is supposed to be a form of expression and creation about the artist's perspective or about a real issue. Putting these paintings under review and claiming that they are objectionable and not historically accurate creates multiple problems in the future. If these paintings get removed from the museum, their stories and perspectives are going to be hidden from the public, which shields the public from the various issues occurring to these people and to the nation as a whole. Also, stating that these are historically inaccurate is wrong, because the articles provide evidence of these artists and their speaking out about the meaning of their paintings. By preventing these from being seen, we are not telling the full stories of racial and cultural issues occurring.
So from the NPR article, I navigated over to the actual official White House news article “President Trump Is Right About the Smithsonian” and it was literally one of the dumbest things I have ever read. Literally it is just a list of art pieces with pretty much no explanation as to why “President Trump Is Right About the Smithsonian” which is not only stupid but lazy. I think it goes to show the White House currently has no actual marit in the assumptions they are complaining about. It also shows a complete lack of media literacy and inability (or possibly) unwillingness to look at art through a critical lens. I mean, art is supposed to challenge our views and make us actually think. However it is clean absolutely no thought went into this list posted by the White House. I think their opposition to the piece about Anthony Fauci is especially telling. Regardless of political view, his career had a significant impact on America and to want to completely censor that is so gross.
The attacks on the works within the Smithsonian seem to reflect the Trump Administration’s larger goals to fundamentally change the narrative within America. One way they seem to be doing this is by censoring any dissenting, or really any alternate, voices speaking on topics the administration seeks to control, such as immigration, race, and LGBTQ issues. The silencing of certain voices allows history to be controlled exclusively by those that remain. If these attacks on our institutions continue, the depth of the destruction of our history will be limitless. Even our most recent histories, such as the COVID-19 Pandemic and the January 6th Attack are being rewritten, as Dr. Fauci is scapegoated and domestic terrorists are pardoned. It all seems to be quite Orwellian, as our once-trusted independent institutions crumple under the pressure. The end of the article is the most haunting to me, as self-censorship by artists is discussed. That really speaks to both the fear and gravity of this situation, as people’s livelihoods are on the line, just as much as any historical destruction.
I think it is absolutely unconstitutional for white house officials to feel the need to approve the Smithsonian's exhibitions. Why should the government have a say in what pieces of art and history we have access to? Along with asking for social media content is insane and a huge infringement of the first amendment. Trump's "cultural directives” are efforts of censorship and control, nothing more. The president shouldn't have a say in anyone's culture for he is not our god or king. “Anti-American propaganda” should be allowed. It in fact should be embraced if the sole point of this country is for the people to have the power to change it. Personally, I think this is another sign as to why we need to uplift and fund independent and diy museums, theaters, venues, galleries, and artistic spaces. This is because they are made by the people for the people, and will cover whatever topics and information they deem culturally important for the culture that they serve because it is theirs.
Our current administration seems dead set on its commitment to revising history and erasing the horrible things it's done, not because it is an inaccurate depiction of history, but because it is easily accessible proof that this country, like all others, is imperfect and has done wrong. This history they’re trying to censor directly contradicts the notion that the US is the “greatest” and that by keeping its population oblivious to the past, it can repeat these previous atrocities. Just now, there are articles circling about an old Japanese Internment (Concentration) Camp being used the exact way it did in World War Two, just now, for the current race (Lantines) being targeted in America's long tradition of containment and extermination/deportation. We were taught that those who don’t know history are bound to repeat it, and the White House is using it as a tactic to keep the public ignorant of their current wrongdoing. A clueless crowd is a complacent crowd when someone claims they know what to do, with no easily accessible evidence to prove them wrong. This censorship is fascist, and there's not much more to say about it. I hope this motion is blocked by the Supreme Court, considering it will fall under the violation of the First Amendment, but who knows.
Post a Comment