Fractured Fairey Tale

In one of the more recent public controversies to hit the NCAC’s arts advocacy radar, two murals from a series commissioned for a Cincinnati Arts Center (CAC) exhibition were recently destroyed – one vandalized by unknown actors, the other whitewashed by a disgruntled site owner.

The two murals, by former street artist Shepard Fairey (whose best known images include the ubiquitous Obey Giant and the likewise ubiquitous Hope poster of Barack Obama), were commissioned by the CAC to be mounted in and around Cincinnati on the walls of buildings offered by their owners. However on May 18th, less than 48 hours after Fairey and his team had mounted one particular building-sized image of a child soldier with a rifle, building owner Michael Claypool had it whitewashed.  Said Claypool: “We had no clue what they were going to put up…we were not advised in advance. When it went up, we were the first to think it was offensive.”


Among the justifications cited by those against the image of the child soldier was the presence of an elementary school across the street. Members of the community, including Claypool, also argued that property rights afford him the privilege of whitewashing to his heart’s content.

(In a second episode later that week, another powerful Fairey mural was anonymously destroyed shortly after it was mounted. Residents had complained about images of police with nightsticks and the phrase, “I’m gonna kick your ass and get away with it.”)

The NCAC deplores the destruction of public art and argues those who claim to protect children by censoring controversial images are misguided in their efforts.

A bit more detail is in order here. It turns out that CAC’s early outreach to potential mural hosts – who had to apply to host a mural in the first place – made quite clear that hosts would not have editorial input into the artist’s work and “would not [have the right to] modify the murals or remove them without written approval from the CAC before the Fairey exhibit closes Aug. 22…” (italics added). If he agreed to these terms at the outset, Claypool cannot claim a right to control the mural’s image; his destruction of the public displays amounts to little more than a vigilante form of censorship.

Moreover, the argument used to buttress the destruction of the muralthat the image was inappropriate because of its proximity to a local school – may be well meant but is misguided.  To ban images which contain guns or which comment on the existence of guns and war in the world threatens to silence important political speech, to which our society affords the highest constitutional protection. The ubiquitous images of guns and weaponry in our society (not to mention in the videos, games and news media that children consume), makes Fairey’s achievement all the more remarkable: he has managed to take images we all consume daily, to which we have mostly become inured, and reawakened their power to trouble, to provoke, to elicit a visceral reaction.  Rather than applaud the whitewashing of the mural, teachers and parents might have used it as a valuable teaching opportunity about war and how it affects children around the world.

About these ads

About Blog of the National Coalition Against Censorship

Blogging Censorship is where National Coalition Against Censorship staff weigh in on the censorship issues on their minds.
This entry was posted in Joshua Olesker: Author and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Fractured Fairey Tale

  1. Nicolas Perkins says:

    This article makes it seem like the name of the institution that commissioned the murals is the Cincinnati Arts Center, which it is not. You should at least give the full name of the institution, the Contemporary Arts Center (CAC) somewhere in the article. Thank you, Nicolas Perkins

  2. Dan Kleinman says:

    Regarding art censorship, please consider the case of the Menomonee Falls Public Library censoring out the art of Christian children, though it eventually reversed its position. I am hoping the NCAC will address the issue.

    Quoting now:

    In 2010, Teacher Leslie Granberg says 15-20 pieces of her student art never made it on display. She says the apologetic library staff telling her, “You can not have crosses we have called the other school and told them to take down their work.”

    Granberg says she was never given an official reason, but when asked if the township was concerned about blurring the lines of church and state. She replied, “Yes they probably don’t want us pushing religion.”

    —-

    Click on the link under my name to learn more.

  3. Pingback: LA MOCA whitewashing – is it censorship? « Blogging Censorship

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s