Wokery In Art and Science

American Thinker ^ | 13 Nov, 2021 | Michael Curtis

[MtnClimber]

Since the BLM protests began, actions to increase information of slavery and colonialism have become ordained facets of social, political, and cultural organizations.

Since the BLM protests began, actions to increase information of slavery and colonialism have become ordained facets of social, political, and cultural organizations. No person doubts that slavery was an evil or that our ancestors were responsible for appalling behavior, or that past attitudes and views on race, gender, and social class are unacceptable today. Nevertheless, the revelations of these unacceptable actions should not cause confusion of mind. It is questionable for the National Gallery in London to start a project indicating the link of 19th-century donors of collections of its great paintings with the slave trade. The project is to find out what links to slave ownership can be traced with the Gallery and to what extent the profits from plantation slavery impacted early history. The data gathered aims to present, objectively, facts relevant to the long and complex history of the transatlantic slave trade. Observers therefore will be able to determine for themselves the nature and extent of these connections.

But is action of this kind an appropriate function for internationally renowned museums such as the National Gallery which is now carrying out an audit of artworks that may have been owned by anyone linked to slavery. At this point, the NG has examined paintings acquired between 1824 and 1880. Already in 2019, Harvard Art Museum began updating the wall labels of some of its holdings to provide information of the complex histories of works such as Ingres’ Grande Odalisque, or Toulouse-Lautrec’s The Black Countess. Visual art, directly or indirectly, can convey or reflect political or social views or be political barometers in sending coded messages without violating artistic integrity.

[MtnClimber]

The left is never about truth. That is the first thing you should think when dealing with them.

[FreedomPoster]

The members of the National Gallery involved in this effort should commit ritual seppuku over the shame and dishonor inherent in being associated with an institution so closely involved with slavery. Then the rest of us can get back to enjoying the artwork.

[sauropod]

.

[norwaypinesavage]

Slavery is but one sin of past generations that is despised today. What about historical owners who were wife beaters, or had mistresses, or drank excessively, or supported Communism, or were religious zealots of a faith different from mine, or were capitalists, or monks, or had offspring that supported Trump? The historical context would simply drown the art in a sea of false virtue.

[SES1066]

What we are ‘finding’ is that the LEFT has a powerful ‘field advantage’ here. They, by virtue of a near-ownership of popular culture, academia, MSM and their cohorts, can bury indiscrete or incriminating facts about their heroes and causes BUT there are so many obstacles in defending their targets. Add that the attacks can come and then shift too fast to mount any kind of coherent defense.

Recall the recent ‘trigger warnings’ attached to the founding documents of our country by staffers of the National Archives in Washington. Yet when you attempt to give perspective against the contemporary zeitgeist, said defense is dismissed! Abraham Lincoln sculptures, honored for years in portraying a slave rising from chains is now removed because of subjective interpretation of posture.

Far too many (all?) times, statues, depictions, histories are removed/modified at the insistence of vocal pressure groups who insist upon immediate compliance to their ‘just’ outrage! When suggestions are made to put such changes up for a vote, the noise level doubles as the issue(s) are far too important for such a considered process.

[reg45]

No person doubts that slavery was an evil or that our ancestors were responsible for appalling behavior, or that past attitudes and views on race, gender, and social class are unacceptable today.

None of my ancestors were involved with slavery, they didn’t get here until the early 20th century.

[T.B. Yoits]

“Wokery” is a great term, better than “going woke”.

[left that other site]

I’ll take them off their hands.

[Albion Wilde]

No person doubts that slavery was an evil or that our ancestors were responsible for appalling behavior, or that past attitudes and views on race, gender, and social class are unacceptable today.

Speak for yourself, ictor Davis Hanson. Many of "our ancestors" were most certainly not responsible for being born into socio-economic strata in which they, too, struggled. Nor were all of "our ancestors" ill-behaved; the abolition and Civil Rights movements were essentially Christian-based.

I hate these broad-brush, communistic statements so rife in today's media, which are fundamentally untrue, and undercut everything that follows. The sentence should have read:

Civilized societies today have no doubt that slavery was (and remains) a social evil, that many socioeconomic conventions taken for granted in the past are now recognized as appalling, or that a considerable number of past views on race, gender, and social class have rightly become unacceptable today.

[MtnClimber]

I like your version better too.