Sunday, February 17, 2008

Black History Display Removed

Eugene Kane’s latest column is actually pretty interesting, but I think that Eugene misses some points. 

The story is pretty straightforward.  It’s Black History Month, so a guy was commissioned to put up a Black History Month display in the U.S. Bank building.  The display focused on the housing riots in Milwaukee in the ‘60s and had many pictures.  People complained - all black people - that the display was too graphic and disturbing, so it was taken down.

Kane’s reaction was:

The images of blacks being arrested in the 1960s can be disturbing to some black people who don’t know the history behind the incident. If you don’t know black history, it’s easy to think this exhibit was a tribute to negative aspects of society instead of a reminder of the way things used to be.

Basically, Kane contends the complaints were rooted in ignorance.  That maybe true, but it is incomplete.  Many people may have been perfectly aware of the history behind the pictures, but just don’t want to be confronted with it every day when walking in and out of work.  There’s a lot of history that is important that I don’t want to see pictures of when I’m walking into work.  Furthermore, Kane’s reaction is reminiscent of the snobbish attitude of far too many artists.  If the people viewing the display did not “understand” it, then didn’t the person who put up the display fail to adequately convey his intended message? 

Finally, Kane was surprised that the complainers were black.

In a striking twist, it turned out all of the people who complained about the exhibit were African-American.

Why is that a striking twist?  Can you imagine the column that Kane would have written if a bunch of white people had complained about the display and it was removed?  The accusations of racism would have been thrown with great abandon.  The sad truth is that people like Kane have helped create a culture where white people do not feel comfortable even talking about black history, black issues, or anything else regarding the black community unless it is in purely positive terms.  Heck, a white guy complaining about crime in the inner city of Milwaukee is likely to be called a racist because the inner city is predominately inhabited by black folks.  Is Kane really surprised that in such an environment a white Milwaukeean wouldn’t dare call up the building manager and say, “that Black History display in the lobby is too graphic and disturbing and should be removed”?

(3) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0937 hrs
Culture

  1. Was recent history portrayed by photos of Alderman McGee (With his County Jail number), O.J. Simpson in handcuffs, Michael Jackson’s (The other one) history of contact with little boys, dead victims of Black-on-Black crime and of little girls wounded by the same variety of thugs?

    Posted by James Pawlak on February 17, 2008 at 1244 hrs


  2. The best part of moving out of Milwaukee is not encountering any mention of Eugene Kane.  Almost forgot who he was.  Almost forgot how bad racists like Eugene can be.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 0509 hrs


  3. That was a really snobbish observation. If I was one of those Black people who saw the display, I would have reacted the same way.

    Posted by gina on February 18, 2008 at 2203 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.