Art the Brooklyn Public Library Doesn't Want You to See Redux
(A Note From GL: We never re-run a post, but we put this item up on Saturday morning and things go to the bottom of the pile quickly here because of the number of daily posts we do. In case you don't read us over the weekend or if you have some reason to wander over here today for the first time, we wanted to place it in today's rotation as well. If you've seen it, we apologize--it's pretty much a once in blue moon thing. If not, then here it is).
Thecensors officials at the Brooklyn Public Library have decided that some art from the Footprints show can't be shown at the library. Is it gay-themed art or something overtly sexual? Nah. Just a depiction of Atlantic Yards as a toilet bowl, a portrait of Develop Don't Destroy's Daniel Goldstein and that sort of thing. The Library issued a bizarre statement explaining that they're publicly-funded when The Real Estate asked them about the censorship the choice they made to exlude six works. That's Donald O'Finn's censored excluded work to the right. (Horrifying, isn't it? Are those turds sky boxes floating in the crapper?) You can see the portrait of Daniel Goldstein that that Library won't show here and one of Amy Greer's photos here. (You can see DDDB's statement here.)
Censorship, particularly crass and brainless politically-motivated censorship, is one of our hot button issues. We could even vaguely understand if they were keeping something awful and offensive from their walls, but they're not exactly trying to spare the people of Brooklyn a depiction of the Virgin Mary surrounded by little vaginas and dung. No, this is self-interest and stupidity of the highest order. The Library, in its statement to The Real Estate, even vaguely tries to blame local gallery owners and artists for participating in the decision as part of a "selection committee."
In deciding to ban these works, the Brooklyn Public Library is behaving like a little village library in 1980s Transylvania refusing to show a portrait of Nicolae Ceausescu wearing one of those funny noses with eyeglasses and mustache. Actually, we're overstating the case--the backwoods Transylvanian Communist censors would have had a better excuse, either because they were true believers or because they were afraid of being dragged out into the forest by the Secret Police and shot for mocking Ceausescu. The people at the Brooklyn Public Library, on the other hand, are said to not want to offend Bruce Ratner as they are trying tosuck up to him do some fundingraising development work so that he'll bankroll their floundering BAM Cultural District project. (Perhaps as a follow-up they can block internet access to DDDB and other websites that are deeply critical of Atlantic Yards. It could be worth an extra four or five hundred G's, minimum.)
Guess this means the "Free Speech Zone" installation the library hosted in 2004 was only an abstract idea? Well, yes, actually. The BPL has had some censorship issues with actual books in the past. For instance, this case, which made waves in September.
You can say we're overreacting or that our knee just jerked up, but our opinion of the BPL has fallen because of this. On the positive side, we haven't had a case of Brooklyn art censorship to mock and rant about in a while, and we haven't been able to invoke Nicolae Ceausescu in a blog post before and truly miss writing columns about police state East Bloc countries, so in that sense the library has our gratitude.
The
Censorship, particularly crass and brainless politically-motivated censorship, is one of our hot button issues. We could even vaguely understand if they were keeping something awful and offensive from their walls, but they're not exactly trying to spare the people of Brooklyn a depiction of the Virgin Mary surrounded by little vaginas and dung. No, this is self-interest and stupidity of the highest order. The Library, in its statement to The Real Estate, even vaguely tries to blame local gallery owners and artists for participating in the decision as part of a "selection committee."
In deciding to ban these works, the Brooklyn Public Library is behaving like a little village library in 1980s Transylvania refusing to show a portrait of Nicolae Ceausescu wearing one of those funny noses with eyeglasses and mustache. Actually, we're overstating the case--the backwoods Transylvanian Communist censors would have had a better excuse, either because they were true believers or because they were afraid of being dragged out into the forest by the Secret Police and shot for mocking Ceausescu. The people at the Brooklyn Public Library, on the other hand, are said to not want to offend Bruce Ratner as they are trying to
Guess this means the "Free Speech Zone" installation the library hosted in 2004 was only an abstract idea? Well, yes, actually. The BPL has had some censorship issues with actual books in the past. For instance, this case, which made waves in September.
You can say we're overreacting or that our knee just jerked up, but our opinion of the BPL has fallen because of this. On the positive side, we haven't had a case of Brooklyn art censorship to mock and rant about in a while, and we haven't been able to invoke Nicolae Ceausescu in a blog post before and truly miss writing columns about police state East Bloc countries, so in that sense the library has our gratitude.
1 Comments:
lost in the controversy is that Donald's work is quite stunning.
some of his exquisite non-AY paintings are on view at Freddy's Backroom right now. check 'em out.
and, if this isn't censorship, some other word needs to be invented.
Post a Comment
<< Home