What makes art unique is two very crucial characteristics: the boundless degree of freedom, and the importance of self interpretation. Many feel that it is one’s natural right to produce any work of art due to these inherent features. However, this all gets a bit more complicated when one’s self interpretation is in direct conflict with another’s freedom to produce.
Currently, there is an international campaign gaining traction mainly in London and New York. This campaign, which is centered around mural based artworks, is a way for people to express protest over the jailing of a female Iranian illustrator, Atena Farghadani. Farghadani was convicted for depicting her local politicians as she perceived them- as animals.
Atena Farghadani
This movement uses art as a way to communicate dissent over the restrictions and limitations of human liberties in Iran. So when Faith47, an acclaimed artist part of the campaign, approached Wylie Goodman about using one of her walls as a canvas for a new work, she gladly agreed. Ms. Goodman’s building stands tall in Red Hook, New York, her permanent residence. Unfortunately, the mural has been involved in protest, vandalism, and public unrest lately. Many of the local residents have expressed opposition to the mural in a wide variety of ways. After much consideration, Goodwin has capitulated, and decided to paint over the mural.
The mural, standing at 27 feet, depicts approximately half of a woman’s face, with her mouth nowhere to be found. The woman can easily be identified as Iranian due to the Niqab, or more commonly known as the Iranian head scarf.
Mural in Red Hook, NY, created by Faith47
To some, the apparent identification of an Iranian character is excessively disrespectful and inappropriate. They feel that the mural is reminiscent, and clearly associated with 9/11 terror attacks, which took place just a few miles away in 2001.
9/11 Rememberance
Upon my first reading of this situation, I was appalled by the irony. This remarkable campaign, along with this specific piece of work, is being protested due to self interpretation by many local residents. The evident paradox is that the campaign itself is concentrated on the belief that every person has innate rights, which includes the freedom to interpret various subjects however they see fit.
Rationally speaking, there are arguments to be made from both sides of the spectrum. To me though, it is clear cut which side has a logical approach, and which side does not. People certainly have the right to decide how they view any work of art. Nevertheless, it is my belief that to have a justified opinion, one must go ahead and do extra research and investigation on the subject at hand. If the residents did not just jump to their premature opinions, and rather did their own due diligence, then they would have discovered the truth behind the creation. They would have seen the painting as the spectacular, legitimate, extensive piece of art that it is. When a movement has such a positive, encouraging meaning behind it, there should be no grounds for objection or dispute. Beyond that, the residents of Red Hook, NY, were acting out of a sense of racism, and unjustified motivation. If we as a people are going to judge people based on the way they look, the people they are linked with, or the place they come from, then how are we any different than the ones who locked up Atena Farghadani in the first place. For us to live in a democracy with freedoms, there must be a balance between liberty and justification.
Thanks to Colin Moynihan, and his article “In Brooklyn, A Protest Mural Draws Its Own Protest,” I am now familiar with Faith47 and the movement to which she has partaken in. Even though Wylie Goodman could not handle the frequent vandalism and disapproval, she deserves great admiration and courage for taking the initiative to be part of such a great campaign. Hopefully in the future Faith47 can continue to spread the message of international solidarity on free speech; except from now on she should be able to operate with the natural human rights this movement fights for.
Many times in history, an artist’s right to freedom of expression has been limited by the government. It’s evident that this still takes place today in your article. However, what is special about this is that the right to freedom of expression isn’t limited by the government but rather by the people. That’s outrageous. What’s even more outrageous is that the government succumbs to popular opinion. Agreed, popular opinion should be important. However, when popular opinion is based on the elimination of all minority opinion, then it causes a constitutional issue.
Living in America is sometimes very complicated especially with the concept of Americans’ rights. We have our rights, but our rights are limited to a certain extent based on how far we can exercise them. Atena has the freedom of speech – artistic expression specifically – and yet she is under fire for her piece of artwork. This kind of controversy sparks a lot of debate.
It’s disappointing that freedom of speech cannot be practiced around the world. People are constantly getting thrown in jail over things like disagreeing with a higher leader or political figure. You wouldn’t expect that to happen here in the U.S., but vandalizing someone’s mural simply because you don’t agree with their views also seems unacceptable. The government needs to stop limiting people’s freedom of speech and expression. The only way we can have some variation of ideas in society is if someone brave–an artist, for example–publicly expresses those ideas for us.
I agree with you that a lot of the time people form premature opinions on subjects that they don’t know much about. Wylie Goodman should not have to take down the mural simply because people associated it with terrorist attacks. If the people actually took the time to research what the mural was about, they would understand why it is a powerful statement about the freedom of speech. Goodman also has the right to have whatever art she wants, simply because it is her property. She should not have to deal with vandalism.
I find your point on art’s uniqueness to be interesting. The idea that art can be free and the importance of “self interpretation” is what makes art accessible to everyone, no matter their age or status. It is sad that in today’s supposed “freer” and more “accepting” world, artists like Goodman must take down their work because of ignorance and racism. I agree with your analysis that to have a justified opinion, one must do their own research instead of jumping to ill-conceived conclusions. When communities excessively censor materials that may require us to view something in a different light, a disservice to society is committed.