Dana Schutz's Elevator (left) in the 2017 Whitney Biennia
On the Biennial’s opening day, several protesters, including the African-American artist Parker Bright, blocked “Open Casket” from public view. Another black artist, the British-born, Berlin-based Hannah Black, circulated an open letter calling for the painting to be “destroyed and not entered into any market or museum” on the grounds that, because the artist is a white woman, “the subject matter is not Schutz’s.”
“White free speech and white creative freedom have been founded on the constraint of others, and are not natural rights,” Black wrote in the letter. “The painting must go.” Bright, meanwhile, wore a shirt with the words “Black Death Spectacle” to his own outraged act of censorship. “I feel like she doesn’t have the privilege to speak for black people as a whole or for Emmett Till’s family,” he said about Schutz on Facebook Live. Neither Bright nor Black questioned whether they had the right or moral standing to speak for Till or his long-suffering family.
Artist Parker Bright standing in protest in front of Dana Schutz's Open Casket (image: SCott W.H. YOUNG)
Stripped bare of arty jargon (Black attended the Whitney Independent Study Program and is clearly prone to a crudely puritanical version of identity politics) the iconoclastic demands voiced by the petition’s author and supporters neatly mirror the new global xenophobia. Put in the frame of #MAGA and Brexit: the European ethnocultural preservationists of the Right meet the identity politics Savonarolas of the Left.
Many members of today’s art world, and American liberals in general, may not be used to defending free speech or opposing censorship from their own tribe. As this case and others demonstrate, they’d better get to protecting. There can be no caveats when it comes to opposing the banning or the destruction of art. And the values of democratic openness and free expression must be fought for vigorously when facing attacks from the Right or the (putative) Left.