Isn’t Sarah studying law though? Does that have crossover with political science?
ktbear
Wait, if its political science doesnt that mean he’ll be Beckys tutor?
UrsulaDavina
There is alot of crossover between the two. Alot of students who want to study law start out as an undergrad in poly sci some schools political science departments offer specializations in public law. Also they often offer constitutional law as poly sci class also many international relations courses are in Human Rights and international law. Also polticans tend to be Lawyers or business owners, so often they choose political science for a BA, before going for an MBA or JD. So political science degree is just as good or better then declaring oneself pre law. Also there nothing stopping poly sci students from taking law courses.
I tried both this link and the one below.
My computer refuses to load it because my security programs don’t trust “indystar”.
I choose to believe that my computer is like “content from Indiana? No thanks!” And is thus protecting me from it.
The mural is pretty unavoidable if you’re in the classroom, particularly as a student.
woobie
What the hell?
Demoted Oblivious
Thank you for sharing the link! That is … something else. It may be a weakness of image resolution, but the only African-American respresentation I see in there are the presumed targets of the cross burning and the child on the hospital-bed. As if it were impossible to portray them as anything other than victims of white people or being saved by white people. I understand people’s grievances with it. Who is the artist?
Demoted Oblivious
Ah. It’s Thomas Hart Benton, and I feel it’s worth reproducing here a key piece from the article about the controversy.
“””Hart prevailed in keeping it in his work because he wanted it to be an honest portrayal of Indiana’s history — “even the ugly and discomfiting parts,” as Robel’s letter said.”””
Apparently it can’t be moved, and they don’t want to censor it. What it is supposed to show is the horror of a klan burning and a sign of hope that people can be better. Yet it still reveals the internalized biases of the period when it was made.
Thanks Dara and Yumi for the links.
Borg
I’m not sure if it’s fair to judge biases based on seeing only one panel out of a 22-panel work. Quite possibly it does display internalized biases, but we can’t honestly tell when we’ve seen less than 5% of the work.
Psychie
Wow, I really failed my perception check when I had a class there a few years ago, as I definitely remember that painting, but I somehow failed to notice any of the KKK stuff in it, granted I don’t tend to pay much attention to art and it is in a higher part in the background, but still…
GutterChick
Huh. I mean intention behind the mural aside, isn’t that kind of a distraction? I’m all for aesthetics in a learning setting to improve mood, but this kinda seems like it screams at you from across the room, at least to my ADHD brain
Yeah uh. Even in its intended context decrying the racism, I would not want to sit in that classroom for an hour or so several times a week and try to focus on… well, literally anything else in said room.
It’s like trying not to think of a pink rhinoceros, only in this case it’s a depiction of a hate crime. In the room. Just… right there.
two kinds of people, those who get art and those others. I get it I also recognize the era it’s from. 🙂 There is a lot of WPA art work that’s been painted over by the hypersensitive of all sides. Art isn’t just to be pretty, it makes you uncomfortable with yourself, with others etc and so on and so forth. I’m no qualified to give this dang art class okay? I can’t even do stick figures. I prefer Dada to baroque and find most Low Brow better than anything Pollock ever did.
Huh, when I went to IU ~10 years ago they still used the room! In fact I think it was the room used for my freshman orientation. I definitely had at least two classes in there over the years. It was definitely controversial then too, though.
Noting from the linked article that this occurred in 2017 (in the real world). So we now know that as of this particular strip, Dumbing of Age is taking place during the past four years.
Which means we can reasonably expect references to things that have happened at least up to that point (such as Trump’s run for POTUS).
I mean… we know the strip takes place in a floating timeline comic book time setting where it’s always “this year” (but, like…not this year this year.)
Geneseepaws
2020 is its own IRL Dumbing of Age, it doesn’t need to be lampooned, that would be self referent.
Not a Hoosier, a New Yorker, but the same guy lived here 20 years so we know about him too. Thomas Hart Benton did a bunch of murals depicting the social, economic, and cultural history of Indiana through the 1930’s. This includes a mural about the 1920’s which depicts the Klu Klux Klan in the back. In the foreground is a reporter at a typewriter, (in the late 1920’s newspapers began attacking the clan as a whole), and there is also depicted a nurse administering to both a black and a white child, which in the 1930’s would be a pretty big statement on integration of health care. (In short, it’s not a pro-klan painting)
To summarize the Smithsonian article google pulled up, it’s controversial for the same reasons as Huckleberry Finn. It depicts racism, but doesn’t glorify it. So its a question of either rubbibg that dark side of Indiana’s history in people’s faces or pretending it never existed.
According to the IU page on it (which is surprisingly convincing, especially given the background nature of the imagery in question, and how that bears a familarity to similar such imagery in historical works decrying dark events such as massacres), it actually acts as a counterpoint to racial discrimination and even as such, the KKK imagery was viewed negatively from the start. Which, if true, means that opposing the mural could in fact be opposing something with a history of pro-equality sentiments and, thereby, be marginalizing past efforts towards such. Well, it’s an interesting read, anyway, so get your own take on it: https://murals.sitehost.iu.edu/history/woodburn.html
That said, it’s a HELLA distracting mural and, y’know, the KKK aspect is going to be distracting regardless of its intentions- that in the same way the earlier referenced massacre or fascism or other such paintings highlighting and criticising darker periods of the past would be. They’re great to look at within a gallery or display but, not so great if you’re in any classroom that isn’t history-related or otherwise contextual to the work. Or, to put that another way, you can only look at a massacre for so long in one sitting without being extremely uncomfortable.. and since the KKK imagery is in the same general spectrum..
So, in short, the mural is likely far less offensive than we expected when reading the comic (and, since it can’t be removed without damaging it, there’s legitimate basis for not removing it given that its message is puportedly a positive one) but, at the same time, still entirely inappropriate to be matched alongside most classes. Moreover, IU comments I came across were a bit underwhelming in their defense of the mural, unlike the defense the university website provided. That likely also doesn’t help.
In sum, this is another case of “where’s the line between opposing propaganda supporting negative outlooks, and ignoring the existance of past dark events and our overcoming of them entirely”. With that in mind, closing the classroom while retaining mural (again, keeping in mind it apparently can’t be removed) actually seems like the best approach IU could have taken to the matter.
Regalli
Yeah, if it genuinely can’t be removed, then that does seem like one of the better options. (Though the ‘covering it with a cloth would be tantamount to censorship’ comment in said article is… not particularly convincing to me, I admit. Then again, I’ve dealt with enough college professors with draconian policies about use of computers even for notetaking because they’re a Distraction – always a delight outing myself as disabled on the first day of class like that when you bring it up in the syllabus, Professor – that the concept of classroom murals would likely just annoy me in general. I would be genuinely shocked if not a single professor on IU campus had one of those policies, and it seems likely any given mural without depicting the Klan would still be at least a little distracting.)
Regalli
And since it IS depicting a LITERAL HATE CRIME which huge swathes of students would find justifiably traumatic, yeah, I do not blame said students for saying ‘we don’t want to have to sit through lectures in this room.’ Given it’s apparently one of the bigger lecture halls in the building, I could see students having genuine difficulty finding other sections if the campus is accounting for said hall being in use.
HeySo
As I mentioned, it’s enough that it’s just hella distracting by its colors, size, and placement. You don’t even need to bring in the context of the painting’s topic to argue that students have reasonable grounds for not wanting to sit through lectures in a classroom with that mural in it. 😛
Again, as I noted, the context [of hate crimes, etc] of the mural is occasionally useful [for certain lectures, etc], as with such materials in a textbook but, as with a textbook, you really need to be able to move on from a topic when it’s no longer relevant.
Given the age of technology we live in, it’d be easier and more worthy to just put up a digital display with rotating painting and murals..
But, again, there’s no reason to attack or want to destroy the mural itself, given that it itself isn’t based in anything damaging. There’s a big difference between blindly wanting to remove and erase the existence of the mural and its associated context, and simply just not wanting to have regular classes in the same room as it.
All my arguments have been against the immediate jump in the comments to “it has the KKK associated with it, so it’s automatically evil and needs to be destroyed and then forgotten about, regardless of proper contextualization of the mural’s intentions and history”.
So, given a lack of alternatives, closing the room was the best option the university had. That said, as you noted, they DID have an alternative, of just covering the mural. It’s laughably nonsensical to claim that closing a room off entirely is less censoring than covering the mural with a cloth that people can brush aside if there’s interest in doing such.
That would, of course, also be far more efficient in terms of building resources, since it wouldn’t waste the classroom. Or, if they insisted, they could just convert the hall into a gallery and emphasize the mural.
So no, the university could have handled things better. But still, it’s not reasonable for individuals to baselessly call out for the destruction of the mural, while insisting that such an action is any better than the actions of the kind of individuals we associate with such dark topics, as with the KKK.
That, and proper contextualization of what the mural represents, is really just the one counter-argument here. After all, the original Star Trek series was considered very progressive for its time but, in retrospect, it’s a terribly bigoted, extremely shallow mess (by modern standards). It’s entirely reasonable to feel discomfort towards it in the modern era but, at the same time, entirely unreasonable to claim it’s pro-bigotry and shouldn’t be aired at all and, further, should have its masters destroyed.
That’d be missing the intent and history of the show being contrary to what the show is being accused of promoting, ignoring that it still has modern contextual uses, and engaging in mindless destruction of things that one doesn’t disagree with regardless of the validity, morality, or ethics of doing such. Y’know, just like the KKK/etc do.
thejeff
While I wouldn’t agree with destroying the mural, I object strongly to the idea that it wouldn’t be any better than the KKK. Destroying a mural might not be good, but it’s a far cry from lynching and terror.
Daniel M Ball
Different only in that it’s usually the first step. Denying history is usually the first step to a full on re-enactment with new faces replacing both attacker and victim. It begins with removing or hiding uncomfortable images, followed by trying to remove or hide uncomfortable words. The next step in the progression, is to try to remove uncomfortable thoughts-and since thoughts are contained in heads, removing heads often becomes the next step. At each step, right up to the one where you’ve got sanctioned violence and mass executions, is ‘completely reasonable’ when viewed in a vacuum and while willfully ignoring what the next logical step in the progression is.
“it’s controversial for the same reasons as Huckleberry Finn. It depicts racism, but doesn’t glorify it.”
Yeah, but the passages of Huckleberry Finn with racial slurs aren’t printed in big letters on the walls of a room where students of color are trying to focus on learning linear algebra or whatever.
thejeff
Right, which is why they’re not teaching in that room anymore, but also why they don’t want to just destroy it.
HeySo
^ This, with its contextualization in mind, concisely sums up every comment I’ve made in today’s comment section. 😛
..though now I’m feeling there’s gotta be a classroom somewhere in the US that has nothing but Huckleberry Finn (or a blend of Huck and similar) quotes on the walls.. >.<
Nah, just update the picture by painting MAGA hats on the cross-burners.
HeySo
I wonder if there’s a way to add that without damaging the underlying painting. I think it’d be a rather evocative way to make the painting relevant for scholastic discussion within a building that appears to be dedicated to social studies classes. In other words, you may have been kidding with that but, I think it’s a totally legit approach to dealing with it. :’P
Doom Shepherd
Not really kidding. Different stupid hat, identical beliefs.
HeySo
I meant, kidding with promoting the actual implementation. I knew you were being sincere with the underlying comparison 😛
(Though presumably any sensible person has already long since recognized that equivalency- rather, even beyond equivalency, Trump’s supporters typically pull directly out of hate groups like the KKK, meaning they’re already fundamentally the same group [at the points of overlap] to begin with).
Needfuldoer
Paint on an overhead transparency held up by static cling.
Demoted Oblivious
Just use a projector to broadcast an image of the appropriate iconography of hatred. Heck, it could be a slideshow and cycle different over-layers, maybe even colour shift some of the workers to include diversity. It could become a chronology of progress, with the persistence of the burning cross illustrating the challenge of both overcoming our history, but of getting free of that hatred that does persist, even today (see: MAGA).
HeySo
See, I questioned your grasp of my sentiments on the utility of the mural just below but, in this comment you seem to be exactly on board with where I’m coming from. Though again, the context of “display piece” still doesn’t work well for general classes. Would make the chamber rather useful for unaffiliated lectures on the given topic, though.
Honestly, I’m liking Needfuldoer’s take the most, though. We can just have the students markering all over it as they please. Eg, having a dinosaur nomming on the KKK. Walky’d approve, I’m sure.
If it were a straight forward bit of old racist art outright celebrating the KKK, I’m sure student activists *would* have already simply destroyed it. But the piece is overtly anti-Klan, intended to be stark recognition but also condemnation of the darker parts of Indiana’s state history. Even so, though, it’s unreasonable to expect black students to simply focus and learn about whatever a class’s topic is supposed to be with that mural sitting above their heads the entire time. If it could be easily relocated, I’m sure that would have been done, but that’s not really possible either. I don’t think anybody believes “just not using the room” is anything more than a short term option to put off making a real decision on what to do, but then again there’s nothing so permanent as a temporary solution.
Speaking as a Hoosier, I don’t want them to paint over it. For a long time I didn’t know this bit of history about my home state. I’ve lived in Indiana all my life and didn’t get taught about it in school. I didn’t hear a single peep about it, in fact. That is pretty shameful, in my opinion. I am uncomfortable with the idea of erasing the evidence of that history, because I know racism is still alive and well in this state and the rest of the country.
take a picture and put a plaque up explaining the history behind it. there’s no need to retraumatize people just trying to go to school
Zee
Well i guess that’s why they’re not using that hall anymore. Personally I think they should just make it a mini free museum and build a new lecture hall
Demoted Oblivious
Turn it into an art room to display historical and current student art. Dedicate the room to illustrating and destroying the stereotypes and hatred that racism promotes.
PB
I was just thinking the same thing. Leave it up so the ugly parts of history aren’t ignored, but dedicate the room to art with a similar theme and intent. It can also serve as a discussion piece for teachers who want to talk about the controversies of censorship.
PB
-Let me clarify real quick here: the controversies of censorship which erases something glorifying the negative parts of history vs. censoring something which depicts the negative parts as a warning. Because there is an important distinction to be made there.
BBCC
Pretty much what I think. Turn it into a free display/exhibit.
Kryss LaBryn
Sounds like that’s pretty much what they’re intending to do (or did?), according to the article linked above. Ends up that it’s right next to the art corridor, and so both the art and the students are much better served by turning the room into an art gallery (especially, as both you and they say, of additional artwork that puts the original mural into context), where, when you come into the room and are faced with the mural, it is because you came into the room to see the mural.
Context definitely matters for these kind of things. If the classroom has a context similar to that of a history book (ie, it is oriented towards discussions over past negative events, while properly framing them for constructive discussion) then there’s no real legitimate reason to remove the painting, anymore than it would make sense to remove photos of nazis from a WW2 section in a history book. That’d be different if the image was flattering towards the KKK or especially grisly and troubling but, as it is, it’s a worthy discussion piece (even if, as I noted above, it’s just way too visually distracting in its placement and style and overt emphasis on the given topic).
Basically, it’s not the kind of work that’d traumatize anyone who is in a rational state, unless the contextualization for it was mishandled. Or, rather, if it did poke at trauma, that’d be a good thing, as it has the right context and mildness to allow someone to properly frame such stress into something constructive.
So again, I don’t feel it should be the distraction that it is but, at the same time, it’s not reasonable to view it as racist propaganda (versus constructive historical reference) given its apparent lack of historical intention as being such.
This, of course, is rather significantly different in concept from seeking to remove statue celebrating enemy generals who actively fought to defend slavery. There are things we should remove but, after a point, trying to erase the past becomes extremely counterproductive and sabotages the gains we made from overcoming that past in the first place.
HeySo
*To be clear, ” overcoming that past in the first place” was meant as a general comment. Within the scope of the mural, it’d be referencing overcoming “the KKK getting away with mass lynchings while running around dressed as vengeful ghosts” rather than racism on the whole.
thejeff
Maybe not traumatize, but I don’t think it’s irrational for say, a black student with a personal family history with the Klan not wanting a Klan burning painting hanging over their heads in every class they have in that room. Nor would it be a good thing to have that poked at every day.
Which is different than having a session of an appropriate class talk about the Klan and their historical significance – even using the painting as reference.
Demoted Oblivious
You nailed it Jeff. It’s one thing to briefly study a particular picture in a text book that you can close. It is completely worse to have to have an image in your view for several hours a week, when you still live in a society that carries the same hate, and has arguably institutionalized it into the police force. I wonder how many students have lost loved ones to racial violence and have had to sit in that classroom?
304 thoughts on “Mural”
Ana Chronistic
Speaking of cable news talking heads, when’s Bart O’Ryan making the jump from the Walkyverse?
[not that I really WANT him to]
butts
i assume he’s one of Sarah’s teachers
Sirksome
Isn’t Sarah studying law though? Does that have crossover with political science?
ktbear
Wait, if its political science doesnt that mean he’ll be Beckys tutor?
UrsulaDavina
There is alot of crossover between the two. Alot of students who want to study law start out as an undergrad in poly sci some schools political science departments offer specializations in public law. Also they often offer constitutional law as poly sci class also many international relations courses are in Human Rights and international law. Also polticans tend to be Lawyers or business owners, so often they choose political science for a BA, before going for an MBA or JD. So political science degree is just as good or better then declaring oneself pre law. Also there nothing stopping poly sci students from taking law courses.
My grad program offered a joint JD-PhD program .
butts
bart o’ryan… was a lawyer??
Cattleprod
He’s having Lawsome adventures with Mike, who faked his death.
Clif
Mike faked Bart O’ryan’s death so they could hang out and have adventures?
Too bad it happened off panel.
RacingTurtle
I think he’s Scarface’s dad.
RacingTurtle
To clarify, this is just my wild guess, but it’s a hypothesis I’m fond of. We have no info on Bart in this universe that I am aware of.
Yumi
What.
Yumi
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2017/09/29/indiana-university-no-longer-use-room-mural-showing-kkk-rally-classroom/717308001/
Savail
Wow. Yeah, oddly enough, not using the room does seem to be one of the better options. Though wouldn’t it be perfect for Poli Sci classes?
Rose by Any Other Name
I tried both this link and the one below.
My computer refuses to load it because my security programs don’t trust “indystar”.
I choose to believe that my computer is like “content from Indiana? No thanks!” And is thus protecting me from it.
Dara
The mural is pretty unavoidable if you’re in the classroom, particularly as a student.
woobie
What the hell?
Demoted Oblivious
Thank you for sharing the link! That is … something else. It may be a weakness of image resolution, but the only African-American respresentation I see in there are the presumed targets of the cross burning and the child on the hospital-bed. As if it were impossible to portray them as anything other than victims of white people or being saved by white people. I understand people’s grievances with it. Who is the artist?
Demoted Oblivious
Ah. It’s Thomas Hart Benton, and I feel it’s worth reproducing here a key piece from the article about the controversy.
“””Hart prevailed in keeping it in his work because he wanted it to be an honest portrayal of Indiana’s history — “even the ugly and discomfiting parts,” as Robel’s letter said.”””
Apparently it can’t be moved, and they don’t want to censor it. What it is supposed to show is the horror of a klan burning and a sign of hope that people can be better. Yet it still reveals the internalized biases of the period when it was made.
Thanks Dara and Yumi for the links.
Borg
I’m not sure if it’s fair to judge biases based on seeing only one panel out of a 22-panel work. Quite possibly it does display internalized biases, but we can’t honestly tell when we’ve seen less than 5% of the work.
Psychie
Wow, I really failed my perception check when I had a class there a few years ago, as I definitely remember that painting, but I somehow failed to notice any of the KKK stuff in it, granted I don’t tend to pay much attention to art and it is in a higher part in the background, but still…
GutterChick
Huh. I mean intention behind the mural aside, isn’t that kind of a distraction? I’m all for aesthetics in a learning setting to improve mood, but this kinda seems like it screams at you from across the room, at least to my ADHD brain
Inara
Oh God, I was hoping this was just a Parks and Rec reference…
He Who Abides
Same here.
Makkabee
Thank you for providing that context, Yumi.
Regalli
Yeah uh. Even in its intended context decrying the racism, I would not want to sit in that classroom for an hour or so several times a week and try to focus on… well, literally anything else in said room.
It’s like trying not to think of a pink rhinoceros, only in this case it’s a depiction of a hate crime. In the room. Just… right there.
Not the best test-taking environment, I imagine.
Keith
two kinds of people, those who get art and those others. I get it I also recognize the era it’s from. 🙂 There is a lot of WPA art work that’s been painted over by the hypersensitive of all sides. Art isn’t just to be pretty, it makes you uncomfortable with yourself, with others etc and so on and so forth. I’m no qualified to give this dang art class okay? I can’t even do stick figures. I prefer Dada to baroque and find most Low Brow better than anything Pollock ever did.
Rose
Huh, when I went to IU ~10 years ago they still used the room! In fact I think it was the room used for my freshman orientation. I definitely had at least two classes in there over the years. It was definitely controversial then too, though.
Bicycle Bill
Noting from the linked article that this occurred in 2017 (in the real world). So we now know that as of this particular strip, Dumbing of Age is taking place during the past four years.
Which means we can reasonably expect references to things that have happened at least up to that point (such as Trump’s run for POTUS).
Yumi
I mean… we know the strip takes place in a floating timeline comic book time setting where it’s always “this year” (but, like…not this year this year.)
Geneseepaws
2020 is its own IRL Dumbing of Age, it doesn’t need to be lampooned, that would be self referent.
Tan
https://www.dumbingofage.com/about/ point 6.
King Daniel
Joe has already made a “joke” in the past about how because of T****, his own actions have been more presidential than Dorothy’s.
butts
sounds like indiana to me
Clif
They could start a petition to name the University after a less controversial state.
Makkabee
Unfortunately given the current political climate, if they renamed Indiana they’d pick something like Pence-ylvania.
Sirksome
What the fuck?
Spookyfox
Hoosiers please explain
Insanenoodlyguy
Not a Hoosier, a New Yorker, but the same guy lived here 20 years so we know about him too. Thomas Hart Benton did a bunch of murals depicting the social, economic, and cultural history of Indiana through the 1930’s. This includes a mural about the 1920’s which depicts the Klu Klux Klan in the back. In the foreground is a reporter at a typewriter, (in the late 1920’s newspapers began attacking the clan as a whole), and there is also depicted a nurse administering to both a black and a white child, which in the 1930’s would be a pretty big statement on integration of health care. (In short, it’s not a pro-klan painting)
Geneseepaws
I thought, “Hey! That looks like Thomas Hart Benton, TBH!” And you are confirming that it’s not just a knock off, but the real thing?
Demoted Oblivious
Yes. Yumi’s link above is very worth the read.
JR
Wait, so they just opt not to ever use the room, instead of…painting over it? Come on, this could be fixed in an hour.
Buli-Buli
To summarize the Smithsonian article google pulled up, it’s controversial for the same reasons as Huckleberry Finn. It depicts racism, but doesn’t glorify it. So its a question of either rubbibg that dark side of Indiana’s history in people’s faces or pretending it never existed.
HeySo
“but doesn’t glorify it”
According to the IU page on it (which is surprisingly convincing, especially given the background nature of the imagery in question, and how that bears a familarity to similar such imagery in historical works decrying dark events such as massacres), it actually acts as a counterpoint to racial discrimination and even as such, the KKK imagery was viewed negatively from the start. Which, if true, means that opposing the mural could in fact be opposing something with a history of pro-equality sentiments and, thereby, be marginalizing past efforts towards such. Well, it’s an interesting read, anyway, so get your own take on it:
https://murals.sitehost.iu.edu/history/woodburn.html
That said, it’s a HELLA distracting mural and, y’know, the KKK aspect is going to be distracting regardless of its intentions- that in the same way the earlier referenced massacre or fascism or other such paintings highlighting and criticising darker periods of the past would be. They’re great to look at within a gallery or display but, not so great if you’re in any classroom that isn’t history-related or otherwise contextual to the work. Or, to put that another way, you can only look at a massacre for so long in one sitting without being extremely uncomfortable.. and since the KKK imagery is in the same general spectrum..
So, in short, the mural is likely far less offensive than we expected when reading the comic (and, since it can’t be removed without damaging it, there’s legitimate basis for not removing it given that its message is puportedly a positive one) but, at the same time, still entirely inappropriate to be matched alongside most classes. Moreover, IU comments I came across were a bit underwhelming in their defense of the mural, unlike the defense the university website provided. That likely also doesn’t help.
In sum, this is another case of “where’s the line between opposing propaganda supporting negative outlooks, and ignoring the existance of past dark events and our overcoming of them entirely”. With that in mind, closing the classroom while retaining mural (again, keeping in mind it apparently can’t be removed) actually seems like the best approach IU could have taken to the matter.
Regalli
Yeah, if it genuinely can’t be removed, then that does seem like one of the better options. (Though the ‘covering it with a cloth would be tantamount to censorship’ comment in said article is… not particularly convincing to me, I admit. Then again, I’ve dealt with enough college professors with draconian policies about use of computers even for notetaking because they’re a Distraction – always a delight outing myself as disabled on the first day of class like that when you bring it up in the syllabus, Professor – that the concept of classroom murals would likely just annoy me in general. I would be genuinely shocked if not a single professor on IU campus had one of those policies, and it seems likely any given mural without depicting the Klan would still be at least a little distracting.)
Regalli
And since it IS depicting a LITERAL HATE CRIME which huge swathes of students would find justifiably traumatic, yeah, I do not blame said students for saying ‘we don’t want to have to sit through lectures in this room.’ Given it’s apparently one of the bigger lecture halls in the building, I could see students having genuine difficulty finding other sections if the campus is accounting for said hall being in use.
HeySo
As I mentioned, it’s enough that it’s just hella distracting by its colors, size, and placement. You don’t even need to bring in the context of the painting’s topic to argue that students have reasonable grounds for not wanting to sit through lectures in a classroom with that mural in it. 😛
Again, as I noted, the context [of hate crimes, etc] of the mural is occasionally useful [for certain lectures, etc], as with such materials in a textbook but, as with a textbook, you really need to be able to move on from a topic when it’s no longer relevant.
Given the age of technology we live in, it’d be easier and more worthy to just put up a digital display with rotating painting and murals..
But, again, there’s no reason to attack or want to destroy the mural itself, given that it itself isn’t based in anything damaging. There’s a big difference between blindly wanting to remove and erase the existence of the mural and its associated context, and simply just not wanting to have regular classes in the same room as it.
All my arguments have been against the immediate jump in the comments to “it has the KKK associated with it, so it’s automatically evil and needs to be destroyed and then forgotten about, regardless of proper contextualization of the mural’s intentions and history”.
So, given a lack of alternatives, closing the room was the best option the university had. That said, as you noted, they DID have an alternative, of just covering the mural. It’s laughably nonsensical to claim that closing a room off entirely is less censoring than covering the mural with a cloth that people can brush aside if there’s interest in doing such.
That would, of course, also be far more efficient in terms of building resources, since it wouldn’t waste the classroom. Or, if they insisted, they could just convert the hall into a gallery and emphasize the mural.
So no, the university could have handled things better. But still, it’s not reasonable for individuals to baselessly call out for the destruction of the mural, while insisting that such an action is any better than the actions of the kind of individuals we associate with such dark topics, as with the KKK.
That, and proper contextualization of what the mural represents, is really just the one counter-argument here. After all, the original Star Trek series was considered very progressive for its time but, in retrospect, it’s a terribly bigoted, extremely shallow mess (by modern standards). It’s entirely reasonable to feel discomfort towards it in the modern era but, at the same time, entirely unreasonable to claim it’s pro-bigotry and shouldn’t be aired at all and, further, should have its masters destroyed.
That’d be missing the intent and history of the show being contrary to what the show is being accused of promoting, ignoring that it still has modern contextual uses, and engaging in mindless destruction of things that one doesn’t disagree with regardless of the validity, morality, or ethics of doing such. Y’know, just like the KKK/etc do.
thejeff
While I wouldn’t agree with destroying the mural, I object strongly to the idea that it wouldn’t be any better than the KKK. Destroying a mural might not be good, but it’s a far cry from lynching and terror.
Daniel M Ball
Different only in that it’s usually the first step. Denying history is usually the first step to a full on re-enactment with new faces replacing both attacker and victim. It begins with removing or hiding uncomfortable images, followed by trying to remove or hide uncomfortable words. The next step in the progression, is to try to remove uncomfortable thoughts-and since thoughts are contained in heads, removing heads often becomes the next step. At each step, right up to the one where you’ve got sanctioned violence and mass executions, is ‘completely reasonable’ when viewed in a vacuum and while willfully ignoring what the next logical step in the progression is.
AbacusWizard
“it’s controversial for the same reasons as Huckleberry Finn. It depicts racism, but doesn’t glorify it.”
Yeah, but the passages of Huckleberry Finn with racial slurs aren’t printed in big letters on the walls of a room where students of color are trying to focus on learning linear algebra or whatever.
thejeff
Right, which is why they’re not teaching in that room anymore, but also why they don’t want to just destroy it.
HeySo
^ This, with its contextualization in mind, concisely sums up every comment I’ve made in today’s comment section. 😛
..though now I’m feeling there’s gotta be a classroom somewhere in the US that has nothing but Huckleberry Finn (or a blend of Huck and similar) quotes on the walls.. >.<
Proxiehunter
I’m surprised in this era that they haven’t had students break in and destroy the mural.
Doom Shepherd
Nah, just update the picture by painting MAGA hats on the cross-burners.
HeySo
I wonder if there’s a way to add that without damaging the underlying painting. I think it’d be a rather evocative way to make the painting relevant for scholastic discussion within a building that appears to be dedicated to social studies classes. In other words, you may have been kidding with that but, I think it’s a totally legit approach to dealing with it. :’P
Doom Shepherd
Not really kidding. Different stupid hat, identical beliefs.
HeySo
I meant, kidding with promoting the actual implementation. I knew you were being sincere with the underlying comparison 😛
(Though presumably any sensible person has already long since recognized that equivalency- rather, even beyond equivalency, Trump’s supporters typically pull directly out of hate groups like the KKK, meaning they’re already fundamentally the same group [at the points of overlap] to begin with).
Needfuldoer
Paint on an overhead transparency held up by static cling.
Demoted Oblivious
Just use a projector to broadcast an image of the appropriate iconography of hatred. Heck, it could be a slideshow and cycle different over-layers, maybe even colour shift some of the workers to include diversity. It could become a chronology of progress, with the persistence of the burning cross illustrating the challenge of both overcoming our history, but of getting free of that hatred that does persist, even today (see: MAGA).
HeySo
See, I questioned your grasp of my sentiments on the utility of the mural just below but, in this comment you seem to be exactly on board with where I’m coming from. Though again, the context of “display piece” still doesn’t work well for general classes. Would make the chamber rather useful for unaffiliated lectures on the given topic, though.
Honestly, I’m liking Needfuldoer’s take the most, though. We can just have the students markering all over it as they please. Eg, having a dinosaur nomming on the KKK. Walky’d approve, I’m sure.
malisteen
If it were a straight forward bit of old racist art outright celebrating the KKK, I’m sure student activists *would* have already simply destroyed it. But the piece is overtly anti-Klan, intended to be stark recognition but also condemnation of the darker parts of Indiana’s state history. Even so, though, it’s unreasonable to expect black students to simply focus and learn about whatever a class’s topic is supposed to be with that mural sitting above their heads the entire time. If it could be easily relocated, I’m sure that would have been done, but that’s not really possible either. I don’t think anybody believes “just not using the room” is anything more than a short term option to put off making a real decision on what to do, but then again there’s nothing so permanent as a temporary solution.
Myth
Speaking as a Hoosier, I don’t want them to paint over it. For a long time I didn’t know this bit of history about my home state. I’ve lived in Indiana all my life and didn’t get taught about it in school. I didn’t hear a single peep about it, in fact. That is pretty shameful, in my opinion. I am uncomfortable with the idea of erasing the evidence of that history, because I know racism is still alive and well in this state and the rest of the country.
Spookyfox
take a picture and put a plaque up explaining the history behind it. there’s no need to retraumatize people just trying to go to school
Zee
Well i guess that’s why they’re not using that hall anymore. Personally I think they should just make it a mini free museum and build a new lecture hall
Demoted Oblivious
Turn it into an art room to display historical and current student art. Dedicate the room to illustrating and destroying the stereotypes and hatred that racism promotes.
PB
I was just thinking the same thing. Leave it up so the ugly parts of history aren’t ignored, but dedicate the room to art with a similar theme and intent. It can also serve as a discussion piece for teachers who want to talk about the controversies of censorship.
PB
-Let me clarify real quick here: the controversies of censorship which erases something glorifying the negative parts of history vs. censoring something which depicts the negative parts as a warning. Because there is an important distinction to be made there.
BBCC
Pretty much what I think. Turn it into a free display/exhibit.
Kryss LaBryn
Sounds like that’s pretty much what they’re intending to do (or did?), according to the article linked above. Ends up that it’s right next to the art corridor, and so both the art and the students are much better served by turning the room into an art gallery (especially, as both you and they say, of additional artwork that puts the original mural into context), where, when you come into the room and are faced with the mural, it is because you came into the room to see the mural.
HeySo
Context definitely matters for these kind of things. If the classroom has a context similar to that of a history book (ie, it is oriented towards discussions over past negative events, while properly framing them for constructive discussion) then there’s no real legitimate reason to remove the painting, anymore than it would make sense to remove photos of nazis from a WW2 section in a history book. That’d be different if the image was flattering towards the KKK or especially grisly and troubling but, as it is, it’s a worthy discussion piece (even if, as I noted above, it’s just way too visually distracting in its placement and style and overt emphasis on the given topic).
Basically, it’s not the kind of work that’d traumatize anyone who is in a rational state, unless the contextualization for it was mishandled. Or, rather, if it did poke at trauma, that’d be a good thing, as it has the right context and mildness to allow someone to properly frame such stress into something constructive.
So again, I don’t feel it should be the distraction that it is but, at the same time, it’s not reasonable to view it as racist propaganda (versus constructive historical reference) given its apparent lack of historical intention as being such.
This, of course, is rather significantly different in concept from seeking to remove statue celebrating enemy generals who actively fought to defend slavery. There are things we should remove but, after a point, trying to erase the past becomes extremely counterproductive and sabotages the gains we made from overcoming that past in the first place.
HeySo
*To be clear, ” overcoming that past in the first place” was meant as a general comment. Within the scope of the mural, it’d be referencing overcoming “the KKK getting away with mass lynchings while running around dressed as vengeful ghosts” rather than racism on the whole.
thejeff
Maybe not traumatize, but I don’t think it’s irrational for say, a black student with a personal family history with the Klan not wanting a Klan burning painting hanging over their heads in every class they have in that room. Nor would it be a good thing to have that poked at every day.
Which is different than having a session of an appropriate class talk about the Klan and their historical significance – even using the painting as reference.
Demoted Oblivious
You nailed it Jeff. It’s one thing to briefly study a particular picture in a text book that you can close. It is completely worse to have to have an image in your view for several hours a week, when you still live in a society that carries the same hate, and has arguably institutionalized it into the police force. I wonder how many students have lost loved ones to racial violence and have had to sit in that classroom?