The article I was assigned, “Censorship, Not the Painting, Must Go: On Dana Schutz’s Image of Emmett Till”, was written by Coco Fusco, an artist, writer, and Andrew Banks Chair in Art at the University of Florida. Fusco had a lot to say regarding Dana Schutz’s painting of Emmitt Till and Hannah Black’s letter regarding this painting. Overall, Coco Fusco believes that while not Schutz’s greatest work of art, her painting of Till still contains value, and that this painting, and controversial art in general should not be censored or destroyed. In this article, Fusco first addresses the protests that were associated with Schutz’ painting. While she does not feel like the painting was entirely wrong, she does commend the protestors and agrees that they have valid reasoning for protesting the work. As she continues, she begins to analyze Hannah Black’s letter regarding Schutz’ depiction and use of Emmett Till as subject matter. There are many aspects of Black’s letter that Fusco feels strongly against. For one, she feels as though Black claims that white people could never understand black pain and that the only reason a white artist would then paint something like that would be for their own profit. Fusco goes on to eventually address the fact that while obviously not all white artists who have used black suffering have used it for good, however there are many artists who have used black suffering for anti-racist art, and that many of these white artists were even commissioned for the Civil Rights movement. Fusco explains how she finds Black’s letter unacceptable, and she emphasizes the fact that Black uses “problematic notions of cultural property and imputes malicious intent in a totalizing manner to cultural producers and consumers on the basis of race”. While Hannah Black makes these claims, Coco Fusco brings light to the fact that makes a point that claiming that an artist’s non-mass produced, single painting is on the same level as advertising campaign and Hollywood blockbuster is unjust. And that Black falsely assumed the ability to speak on behalf of all black people. Fusco addresses many points that Black brings up and is able to refute many of them. She finds many faults with Black’s letter, especially the fact that Fusco feels that is hypocritical because Black speaks on a culture that use to keep black British people, such as herself, out of being able to talk on black American experience. In addition, Fusco also reminds the readers that Hannah Black does not address many major points, such as the fact that black artists have also used black suffering for social capital and commercial gain. Fusco continues her article by bringing up some of her own views of the subject matter, and by emphasizing the fact that she believes that black artists are not taught to be able to properly represent/discuss race correctly. Fusco explains that “while elite art schools deploy tokenist inclusion strategies to create the impression of diversity, they actively avoid revising curricula and discourses of critique; the end result is that they produce artists and curators who lack formal opportunities to engage with critical race discourses and histories of anti-racist cultural production”. Fusco claims that without proper discussion it just leads to rage. Another point of Hannah Black’s that Fusco debunks is that how while Black claims that Till’s mother only wanted black people to see the photos, that was not the case at all, and that Mamie Till wants the world to see Emmett’s photo. Fusco emphasizes the fact that while Hannah Black believes that white artists should address white guilt, even artists who have done exactly that were still subject to protests and that one artist in particular who received complaints for his use of subject matter sold his work of art, whereas Dana Schutz promised to never sell her painting fo Emmitt Till. Fusco brings this point up many times throughout her article that Schutz has pledged to never sell her painting, therefore she will never profit off of this painting. Towards the end of the article, Fusco addresses the critics claiming that it was unacceptable for Dana Schutz to represent suffering and Emmett Till in an abstract form and that it should only ever be done in realism. She feels adamant that abstraction is an artistic language, and that it in fact evokes greater emotions for subject matter because one must truly process what is being depicted. Fusco feels so strongly against censoring and destroying difficult to look at art. She emphasizes the ideas that these types of works are important because they bring light to problems that our country are facing especially given the current state of our country. Fusco makes the argument that the fact that Schutz even painted Emmett Till shows the success of Black Lives Matter, and of their bringing up the awareness of patterns of state violence. Fusco believes that the critics and complaints that Hanna Black and others have are unjust.