Site-specific artwork essentially means that a piece is created with the intention of being present in a particular location in order for the art work to truly exist. Without the location, a site-specific artwork would not be able to be completed nor truly take on its true meaning and true final form. With site-specific artwork the artist must be cognizant of the relationship that is created between the creation itself and the location it is placed in. The location is one of a kind so that the work itself and the setting in which it is place in, become one and essentially inform one another of their co-existence and work in unison towards a specific goal or meaning.

1. The author pointed out that taking offense as a rationalization for censorship is inappropriate.  The right to define art  belongs to everyone, but not only one community.  The development of art would be refrained if people always take the moral high ground in criticism.  “There is a deeply puritanical and anti-intellectual strain in American culture that expresses itself by putting moral judgment before aesthetic understanding.”
2. The explicit equivalence between representation of a black boy in the painting and lynching activity is not logical.  The painting, compared to the lynching happened decades ago,  is much more abstract and  well-intended.
3. The right to speak for the whole black community should’t only be defined by the black community since they are not necessarily the most educated people on racial problems.
4. We need artists and curators who lack formal opportunities to engage with critical race discourses and histories of anti-racist cultural production.

Dana Schutz recently has come under controversy after she depicted an image of Emmett Till and Black suffrage. The most critical critique Schutz encountered is described by Andrew Moisey as her inability to understand the concept of white production and gaze. Moisey describes the scenario in which Schutz work is put into retrospect, a white artist attempting to not only relate the black suffrage by also profit from it through her work.

Schutz believes he work is justified because she was attempting to relate but Moisey states she is crossing an ambiguous line of what white artists can and cannot do anymore. Moisey bring another piece of work into comparison J.M.W. Slave Ship of 1840, and compares how both works are done in similar practice but serve different purposes. For instance, Moisey describes Turner’s piece as an artifact, a historical archive in which Turner used his privilege to return an reflected gaze to the audience. The imagery is to capture a historical moment and make the viewing experience more reflected and critical and less abstract and artistic like Schutz Open Casket. The difference between the two described by Moisey shows how tedious it is to circumspect these issues in the ever evolving art community.

The article I was assigned, “Censorship, Not the Painting, Must Go” addresses artists that are highly criticized for cultural appropriation. The debate is centered around “how artists and curators of all backgrounds represent collective traumas and racial injustice”, which is a sensitive subject for many because the audiences who are viewing these works are so broad. However, there are various different views on this issue, some supporting the artists and others attacking the artists. For instance, the letter written by Hannah Black (a black-identified biracial artist) to Dana Schutz (a white American), the author of “Open Casket”, addresses this issue. In the letter, she expresses that this kind of exploitation should not be considered art and therefore should not be seen by the public. She argues that by recreating this image, the artist is portraying her support for this horrible execution of a young black boy, referring to it as “white insensitivity”, and that the work should be destroyed. On the other hand, the author of the article, who provides a teacher’s point of view, disagrees with this point of view, saying that the destruction of a work of art should never take place, regardless of certain opposing viewpoints. A counterargument that the author makes is that Black does not consider the fact that many black artists have also depicted black trauma, such as enslaved bodies, lynching, and imprisonment without facing any criticism for producing these works. Overall, the article addresses the stance of someone speaking out against these works and offers an opposing view, which allows us to comprehend both sides and formulate our own opinions on the issue.

Who Can Represent Black Pain? Hannah Black’s Letter to the Whitney Biennial

Moisey presents this article as not just a debate on whether or not Dana Schutz, artist of Open Casket, should have removed her work from the Whitney, he also presents the question if white artists should make money and sell work based on the suffering of black people. Moisey relates back to historically famous works based on sufferings. He cites another abstract, J.M.W. Turner’s Slave Ship of 1840.  Moisey relates the two works based on their positions. Open Casket was created with the vision of Emmett Till’s mother in mind, trying to capture her emotional pain of not recognizing her son in his casket, vs Slave Ship, which captures the historical event of when a captain ordered 133 slaves to be thrown overboard so that insurance payments could be collected. This historical event was captured in a different light with bright abstract colors, capturing the horrendous event. 

Moisey states, “Slave Ship doesn’t tell us what it is like to be black, it tells us what it looks like to be black.  White empathy can be extremely valuable when it takes art just that far, for when it’s done right, it can make white viewers wonder what looking like that would be like.”. Using this as his argument he states that Black’s letter of the prohibition on white artists showing the public what black suffering looks like isn’t proper, but a prohibition on white artists trying to show what pain is like is more appropriate. Moisey argues that white artists should not profit off of black people’s sufferings. They do not know the trauma and pain they have dealt with, and it shouldn’t be used as a benefit for themselves. The ability to make money off of someone else’s pain has been a deeply historic problem, and Open Casket continues to play a part of it. 

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.

Coco Fusco in “Censonship, Not the Painting, Must Go: On Dana Schutz’s Image of Emmet Till,” brings about many of her arguments that critique the stance expressed by Hannah Black’s letter. Fusco dissects the letter and addresses it piece by piece. Essentially, Black’s claims revolve around who understands black pain and suffering and who is able to depict it, who profits off of what has been produced, and calls for censorship and destruction of something that has been created by someone who is a stranger to the black pain and suffering. As a response, Fusco reiterates that art brings about reactions, emotions, and other symbolic gestures but brings about important questions to keep in mind when analyzing them. Who makes the gestures symbolic? Does it directly recognize the intention versus the perception of the work produced? Regardless of the audience or perception, nothing is deemed as enough to demand censorship and the destruction of the Dana Schutz image of Emmet till, a white artist depicting a black body. Fusco meticulously points out Black’s failure to recognize the monumental significance of the work by Dana Schutz due to her narrow minded focus on the “cultural producers and consumers on the basis of race.” The context and evolution of the depiction of black bodies have come a long way and the image produced in 2016 only proves this point further. Fusco makes sure to provide that historical context that has played such a crucial role in the acknowledgment and validation of black bodies whether the creator were to be black or white.

“However, it is reductive and inaccurate to claim that all treatment of black suffering by white cultural producers is driven by commercial interests and sadistic voyeurism. Black overlooks an important history of white people making anti-racist art, often commissioned by Civil Rights activists.”

Fusco strives to center around the potential works like the one produced by Schutz has in our society. In her eyes, these works strive for “interracial cooperation, mutual understanding, or universal anti-racist consciousness.” This is something that is needed and furthered by works with no true malicious intention. Fusco also points out that “her [Black’s] use of offense as a rationalization for censorship reinforce elitist and formalist views that ethical considerations don’t belong in the aesthetic interpretation of art.” There is an emphasis on work depicting black bodies needing realism and most of all approval of some sort to be granted by the culture  before being evaluated aesthetically, according to Fusco.

Although, Fusco does critique Schutz and her work due to the failure of recognize the connection explicitly present between the past and the present we live regarding the language and actions that still surround black bodies today, works like the one produced by Schutz have stirred dialogue about the minimal changes that have taken place in our society regarding black bodies. Having Open Casket, based on something that took place in 1955 beside THE TIMES THAY AINT A CHANGING, FAST ENOUGH!, something that took place in 2016 only reiterates very loudly the violence and pain that remains present faced by black bodies.

Overall, Fusco’s last paragraph distinctly speaks to the importance of Open Casket.

“Whether or not we like the painting or consider it her greatest work — I do not, but think it still has value — Schutz’s decision to refract an iconic photograph through the language of abstraction has forced the art world out of its usual complacency and complicated the biennial’s uniformly celebratory reviews. She has, perhaps inadvertently, blown the lid off of a biennial that features an almost too perfect blend of messy painting, which appeals to conservatives, and socially engaged art, which appeals to the more politically minded. As far as I’m concerned, that’s not such a bad thing, given the ghastly state of American political culture at this moment.”

Write about how doing research is affecting your 3^rd Chair

Research has always been a component of papers, but I have not really considered it when thinking about making something. Usually there is an assignment and it is to be completed with the materials given. However, this class has brought more for me to consider through my creative and assembling process. This class has also made see research in a different way. Research includes gathering information from family and friends over the phone and even some interviews that may have taken place throughout the process. Due to the chair I have decided to focus on being one that existed within my childhood, picking up the phone and asking my mom about it, screenshooting some images from google that resembled the chair I remember and sending them to my mother to see which one is most accurate, and even reaching out to other family members all formed part of my research. I wondered where it came from, where did it go, and why I interacted with it the way I did. For some reason all the questions I began to ask somehow allowed me to go back in time and think about what the chair meant to me which then have impacted the way my 3rd chair is coming along.

1. I used ARTstor, through the library webpage. I then went through the digital art gallery. I used the search term “chair art”.
2. I knew I wanted to focus on sculpture rather than photography or collage, so I just toggled on the search options and clicked “sculpture.”
3. Not only do we have publications and prints available for works, but the website also has a large selection of websites for research.
4. I could have found a better way, but I just searched chairs, and if i found a work I liked, I clicked on the artist to see if they had other works or similar pieces to the one I found.
5. The results aren’t always accurate, and they aren’t verified. Using a verified source has better quality images and information.
6. I looked at their biography and past works as research into their practice. I was able to get a lot of information through their backgrounds and what they say their focus of the work is.
she/her

1. To research chairs, I would usually go through the Lafayette College library “OneSearch”, specifically Artstor, to find information about any articles, paintings, drawings, or artifacts pertaining to chairs that I could get access to.
2. To narrow it down, I would choose either a certain medium or artist so that the number of results decreases. For example, a search like “clay sculpture chair” is more specific than “chair” but will still yield lots of results. That way, the resources that are coming up are still relevant but also reliable rather than searching for “chair art” google images.
3. The available resources are the online search tool through the library website, such as Jstor, Artstor, and others. In addition, there is information about the Williams Center galleries, the Grossman galleries, the Lass galleries, the special collections in the library.
4. Type in “chair” as the keyword in Artstor or another source through the library website.
5. The images could be distorted from the original or manipulated in some way, such as cropping, zooming, and others.
6. We look into other works of art during a similar time period and/or different works by the same artist and see what similar characteristics they share, which shows us that research must have gone into the work in order for these techniques to shine through in multiple works.