15 ms·

How could you say it doesn't matter if the artist opposes or supports slavery?

• ajross 7y ago
  Because the question isn't what the art means! It's whether or not the San Francisco school district and its community should be free to choose what kind of artwork to decorate their school with without knee-jerk conservatives like Bari Weiss and "darkpuma" freaking out about it as it it were censorship. It's their school, not yours. Why do you think you should get veto power over what they are allowed to change and what they must keep? And why on earth, of all things, do you think they should be required to keep this thing?
  • leereeves 7y ago
    We know it is censorship because they're spending $600k to ensure they totally destroy it forever. If it were merely about choosing what kind of art to show on the wall, they could simply paint over it for $1k. That's $599,000 that could be used to pay teachers instead being spent to ensure this mural is never seen again.
  • darkpuma 7y ago
    > "Because the question isn't what the art means!" Of course it is. You've got a bunch of hysterical people saying the mural is in support of slavery and genocide. How can you say that the meaning of the art isn't relevant? The beliefs the mob have about the meaning of the mural are central to the story, you cannot abstract them away.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]