Robby Soave
ReasonTue, 14 Jul 2020 13:35 UTC
© Drew Altizer/Sipa USA/Newscom
Until last week, Gary Garrels was senior curator of painting and sculpture at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA). He resigned his position after museum employees circulated a petition that accused him of racism and demanded his immediate ouster.
"Gary's removal from SFMOMA is non-negotiable," read the
petition.
"Considering his lengthy tenure at this institution, we ask just how long have his toxic white supremacist beliefs regarding race and equity directed his position curating the content of the museum?"This accusation — that Garrels' choices as an art curator are guided by white supremacist beliefs — is a very serious one. Unsurprisingly, it does not stand up to even minimal scrutiny.
The petitioners cite few examples of anything even approaching bad behavior from Garrels. Their sole complaint is that he allegedly concluded a presentation on how to diversify the museum's holdings by saying, "don't worry, we will definitely still continue to collect white artists."Garrels has apparently articulated this sentiment on more than one occasion. According to artnet.com, he said that it would be impossible to completely shun white artists, because this would constitute "reverse discrimination." That's the sum total of his alleged crimes. He made a perfectly benign, wholly inoffensive, obviously true statement that at least some of the museum's featured artists would continue to be white. The petition lists no other specific grievances.You might think that one of the most prominent art curators in the country — with 20 years of experience at SFMOMA — would be able to weather such a pathetically weak accusation of racism. But in the current cultural moment, it appears not. Garrels promptly resigned.
In a statement announcing his decision to step down, Garrels apologized for the harm his words caused, only slightly disputing the absurd charge against him. "I do not believe I have ever said that it is important to collect the art of white men," he said, according to artnet.com. "I have said that it is important that we do not exclude consideration of the art of white men."
Suffice it to say that this is not the language of a white supremacist. Those who say otherwise — that Garrels is guilty of racism — have stripped the word of its potency. They have shown once again that the signatories of the recent Harper's letter were entirely correct that the progressive drive to purge lofty institutions of racism and sexism has frequently gone astray, in a manner that threatens both free inquiry and common decency. The 1793 Project continues.
Reader Comments
[Link] Academic Mobbing
Successful mobbing leads to any of a number of outcomes: the targets commit suicide, are dismissed (or often at universities, being denied tenure), resign , retire early, take permanent or recurring sick leave (the last three being the most common cases for university professors), or have all their responsibilities withdrawn (as in the case of sidelined senior public servants
Negative communication frames the target as someone who is impossible to work with and who threatens the organization. The following characteristics are invariably attributed to the target, made out to be someone who:
is a troublemaker
doesn’t listen to advice
is detrimental to the organization
Isn’t a team player,
is mentally ill
asks too many questions
doesn’t share the group’s culture
has a difficult personality
resists injustice
isn’t social,
Or is a bully
And those instances highlighted above (although most seem relevant to some degree) sums up in my mind, the mobbing phenomenon that is occurring in the public domain at this time also.
If anyone ever looks into such, I'd bet that (in the US at least) I'd bet that the Fusion Centers / DHS / Infragard / FBI are involved in a deniable fashion.
Not a coincidence that those in their forties would have been the first to have heard PC BS nonstop once they started school. (As planned.)
That's shameful and waek. Waek is a new word.
He's the curator. He contributed to that environment and is complicit in its proliferation.
During his long career, in a civil society, he had many opportunities to try and protect what is sacred to American culture.
But look at his exit, and how he placated without a shred of decency.
I think you see this though and are pulling my leg.
.
The stupidity has reached epic, laughable levels!
.
Dont they know by now that they will be caused racists, homophobes, misogynists or any other word they come up with, no matter what they do. As David Knight explained; "You cannot appease them". If you try, you'll always lose. Every time.
Surely the museum itself should be cancelled, along with all of its bourgeois, entryist, ethno-careerist, scam-artist staff.
Of course, you know what's going to happen next: All the zillion dollar Warhols and Matisses, etc, are gonna be up for a 'cancel'.
EZ Marxism. You just get yourself a little caucus/mafia scenario going on in there. Anyone gets in your way, you accuse them of racism, as they will not be able to defend themselves because of their 'unconscious racism', you can consume the whole corpse as quick as you like.
It was really interesting to see how much schtick and theatre there was on all sides....[Link] ....[Link]
And they didn't even have Instagram.
*"Who ain't a contrarian?; indeed! "Who ain't a slave?" (Melville.)
RC
I detected that KV was emulating Twain a bit, in re overstatements.
Enjooyed. Thanks.
The paintings I do like, I like because they have the quality of wild music, yer Blakes, yer Turners, Vincent Van Gogh, etc,