gwhs (s.f.) alumni associationwigowsky.com/gw63/murals/muralarticles.pdf · murals around san...
TRANSCRIPT
1
GWHS (S.F.) Alumni Association
And the articles keep on coming!
the74million.org
Censorship or Student Safety? Plans to Remove Iconic Mural at San Francisco High
School Spark Furor
July 23, 2019
Kevin Mahnken
@KevinMahnken
Censorship or Student Safety? Plans to Remove Iconic Mural at San Francisco High School Spark Furor
A panel from Life of Washington. Plans to remove the iconic mural from San Francisco’s George Washington High School have sparked an international debate. (Tammy Aramian/George Washington High School Alumni Association)
A fierce debate over racism and censorship has erupted in one of the largest schools in San Francisco.
In early July, the San Francisco Board of Education voted unanimously to paint over a series of 13 murals
arrayed around George Washington High School. The works, depicting allegorical scenes from the life of
the first president, include images of slaves toiling at Mount Vernon and early settlers venturing
westward over the corpse of a slain Native American.
The vote was described by one board member as a form of “reparations” for historical crimes, and some
members of the school community have complained that encountering the monumental art each day
forces painful reckonings with oppression. But opponents of the decision argue that destroying the
murals will effectively sanitize history and purge a rare and highly valuable work of American wall art.
2
Some have even compared proponents of the idea to ISIS and the Taliban, who destroyed priceless
works of cultural heritage in Afghanistan and Syria.
The order to repaint all 13 panels, which most observers agree are simply too extensive to be relocated
elsewhere, has drawn criticism, as has the plan’s price tag: an estimated $600,000, which would include
an environmental impact assessment. District staff estimated that the removal might take over a year;
the board has said it would consider temporarily covering the art in the event of a legal or procedural
delay.
A group of artists from around the country have penned an open letter urging the board to reconsider.
Members of the school’s alumni association have threatened legal action, while a group of activists are
attempting to put a special measure on the city’s election ballot next year that would prevent the
murals’ removal.
But arguments centered on free expression and preservation have thus far not persuaded local
authorities. In a letter to the New York Times, school board members Stevon Cook and Mark Sanchez
wrote that the potential trauma facing minority students must be prioritized over the concerns of
preservationists.
“The San Francisco Board of Education is charged with ensuring the well-being of all our students,
academically, socially and emotionally, particularly those who have been historically marginalized,” they
wrote. “Should an immovable, public-school-located piece of art that for 80 years has traumatized
students be allowed to remain?”
‘A Disney version of the past’
The controversy echoes previous spats over monuments to prominent Confederates, as well as poorly
received contemporary art that sought to illuminate the country’s troubled history only to be rejected as
racially insensitive.
Yet the debate around the murals is distinguished by the unique provenance of the work at stake. Unlike
many of the disputed Confederate statues, which were often interchangeable and mass-produced in the
early 20th century, the paintings covering the high school’s lobby and stairway are the work of a
celebrated artist: Victor Arnautoff, a Russian-born immigrant who trained under the legendary Diego
Rivera. Some of his most important works, including Life of Washington, were commissioned as part of
the New Deal-era Public Works of Art Project.
Art historians say that Arnautoff, who adopted Rivera’s Communist politics and was later interrogated
by the House Un-American Activities Committee, was accomplishing something radical in emphasizing
Washington’s role as a slaveholder. At the time of the murals’ completion in 1936, popular histories of
early America and its leaders tended toward glorification.
More than 200 verified works of New Deal-era art can be found in roughly 120 public schools around the
country, according to a tally provided to The 74 by John Tibbetts and Barbara Bernstein of the online
New Deal Art Registry. The various paintings and sculptures were commissioned to put artisans back to
3
work during the Depression as well as to enliven public spaces. Decades after their original installation,
not all have been meticulously preserved: Just last year, a much-loved ceiling mural completed in 1940
was carelessly painted over in the Bronx’s DeWitt Clinton High School.
A panel from Life of Washington. Plans to remove the iconic mural from San Francisco’s George
Washington High School have sparked an international debate. (Tammy Aramian/George Washington
High School Alumni Association)
Gray Brechin is a former journalist who founded The Living New Deal, a historical association dedicated
to researching and publicizing the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt’s signature domestic program. In an
interview, he said that Life of Washington holds unique value among the period’s art.
“The purpose was also to be educational,” he said. “But these go so far, with the mural of the dead
Indian in particular, that I often wonder how Arnautoff got away with it at the time.”
The Berkeley-based Brechin is one of the signatories of the open letter of protest sent to the school
board, and he vehemently opposes any effort to alter Arnautoff’s work. New Deal art was originally
meant to be on public display in schools and other municipal buildings, he said, but with the advent of
newer safety measures, members of the public are less likely to see it. He says he sees the decision to
paint over the murals as an attempt to go further still, wrecking a distinctive cultural artifact to offer
high schoolers a measure of psychic protection against trauma.
“This school board, and the people for whom they are working, are not educators,” he said. “They’re not
interested in education. They’re interested in the infantilization of these kids, who are in apprenticeship
to be adults. What they want on the wall is a Disney version of the past, not a depiction of what actually
happened.”
Other critics have raised concerns about whether the decision-making process truly made room for
student voices. The board’s decree followed a similarly lopsided vote in February from an advisory panel
convened to determine the fate of the murals. But an account of the controversy published in April by
the New York Times found that multiple school employees had advised against covering Life of
Washington, noting that their students were largely opposed to the drastic step being taken in their
name.
A panel (“dead Indian”) from Life of Washington. Plans to remove the iconic mural from San Francisco’s
George Washington High School have sparked an international debate. (Courtesy of Barbara
Bernstein/New Deal Art Registry)
Nora Pelizzari, a spokesman for the National Coalition Against Censorship, said that the adults in charge
missed a chance to involve students in a more collaborative exercise in consensus-building.
“There’s an educational benefit to encouraging critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving,” she
said. “The people arguing that students are being traumatized by this — we have yet to hear those
students, and what that trauma is, and if they want the mural removed. I think we’re not giving students
enough credit, and we’re not giving them the opportunity to impact their own environment. So for us,
4
the next steps on this are to push for spaces for student voices to be heard on all sides.”
One solution: Make more art
In fact, several members of the George Washington High School community have gone on the record
demanding that the murals come down. At board meetings that solicited testimony from both sides, a
recent graduate said that she’d never been taught the purpose of the work while enrolled as a student
and that its presence “is teaching students to normalize violence and death of our black and indigenous
community.” A current student of Native American heritage called the series “insulting and demeaning.”
And the controversy has expanded further than just the murals themselves. A former school board
member previously suggested rechristening George Washington High School itself, reasoning that no
district school should have a slaveholder for a namesake.
The pained sentiments are not the first that have been levied against Arnautoff’s paintings. In the early
1970s, a similar wave of activist ferment led the San Francisco school to commission a new set of murals
from Dewey Crumpler, a local black artist. Those pieces, arranged throughout the school, show huge
chains being severed by black, Latino, Asian and Native American subjects.
Today Crumpler says that his work completes Life of Washington and that any attempt to erase
Arnautoff’s work will render his own incoherent.
Professor Dewey Crumpler Defends GWHS Murals
https://youtu.be/sZEMpyvdAXQ (3:20)
<iframe width="400" height="225" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sZEMpyvdAXQ"
frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture"
allowfullscreen></iframe>
He described the urge many people have to eliminate unpleasant representations of history as
understandable but misguided: “‘When something makes me feel uncomfortable and reminds me of a
horrific history, I believe it should be removed.’ Which is exactly what the people who wrote American
history did for several hundred years — to write history that served their interests, and in doing so, to
5
shape history to reflect certain mythologies.”
Crumpler’s proposed remedy for students wounded by the murals was to tap their creativity and make
new art. Anything else amounted to a literal whitewashing of history, he argued.
“I hate — I hate deeply — to go against the interests of young African Americans and Native Americans.
I do not like being in that situation. This is about art and not falling down the slippery slope. I support
any effort to … take art seriously. You don’t destroy it; you make something new. That’s how you make
change, that’s how you critique. We have to give our responses to history as much significance to the
history that was made.”
===========================================================================
https://www.protectpublicart.org/
The Coalition To Protect Public Art
* SF Chronicle, July 16, 2019: Mural supporters plan 2020 ballot measure to protect frescos at
Washington High *
Artnet News, July 10, 2019: "This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington
Slaveholder Murals. Here’s Why He Stands Against Destroying Them"
Tamaka, Elder, Oklahoma Choctaw (Chata) Tribe, speaks about the value of the murals
There are 13 New Deal murals on the walls of George Washington High School in San Francisco that
were painted in fresco in 1936 by Coit Tower muralist Victor Arnautoff, a former assistant of Diego
Rivera, as part of a publicly-funded Works Progress Administration mural project called "Life of George
Washington."
On June 25, 2019, the San Francisco School Board voted to divert over $600,000 in taxpayer money
away from teachers, students, and classrooms and instead spend it to whitewash and permanently
destroy all 13 of these murals. The same anti-mural forces have now pledged to destroy other New Deal
murals around San Francisco next, such as the WPA murals at Mission High School by Coit Tower artist
Edith Hamlin.
To fight back to defend this and other important public art from permanent destruction, a coalition of
6
artists and art organizations, educators, free speech and anti-censorship advocates, New Deal
advocates, former students of the school, historic preservationists, and diverse San Franciscans from
across the political spectrum have come together to form a new organization called the COALITION TO
PROTECT PUBLIC ART.
Before the Arnautoff mural or other publicly-funded New Deal murals in San Francisco can be destroyed,
the COALITION TO PROTECT PUBLIC ART is organizing, educating, and fighting back to prevent
destruction of public art by putting a ballot measure before the voters so that all the people of San
Francisco can have their voices heard on this issue. We are also supporting and advocating for a wide
range of alternative options to increase education, provide mural context for viewers, create more art,
and provide students and others a choice to decide for themselves whether or not to view art instead of
the government destroying art and permanently preventing anyone from ever seeing it again.
We need your help to protect this important public art before it's too late - please donate, sign up, and
join us now.
==============================================================================
This Politico link has been circulating for a couple of days, including 2 or 3 posts on our page, but we
thought we'd post it directly in case anyone hasn't seen it. Other recent coverage urging preservation
includes a L.A. Times editorial and a revolutionary Communist site - the full spectrum.
Brenda Mendoza Crider shared a link to the group: GWHS Class of Spring '63.
July 22 at 9:13 AM
apple.news
Move to erase George Washington mural sparks firestorm among Dems — POLITICO
By CARLA MARINUCCI 07/22/2019 05:07 AM EDT
SAN FRANCISCO — A San Francisco school board decision to spend $600,000 to paint over a New Deal-era mural of George Washington as a slave owner is fueling a family feud among Democrats — with a growing chorus protesting that the controversial move may hand Donald Trump potent ammunition in his re-election bid.
“I think of myself as liberal, progressive, and have been all my life — but I’m just sort of stunned by this,’’ veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum said Sunday. “We have a little more important things to do — like defeating Donald Trump — than to whitewash a mural.”
Shrum, who today directs the Center for the Political Future and Unruh Institute of Politics at USC, set off a round of heated social media commentary Sunday when he tweeted: “I am a progressive Democrat, but this is nuts. Just because others are nuts, doesn’t mean we have to be.”
The San Francisco Board of Education voted unanimously last month to paint over all 13 panels of the 1600 sq. ft. mural “Life of Washington,’’ a historic work commissioned during the New Deal that depicts George Washington as a slave owner. The move came after several vocal protesters demanded the
7
move at a public meeting, saying their children were “traumatized” by depictions of the nation’s first president standing over the images of dead Native Americans.
The mural at San Francisco’s George Washington High School was created in 1936 by Russian-American artist and Stanford University art professor Victor Arnautoff, a committed Communist and a painter in the school of social realism that also included his contemporary, the renowned Mexican muralist Diego Rivera.
School board commissioner Mark Sanchez appeared to dismiss the estimated $600,000 cost for the covering, and insisted the school board retains the option of covering the mural temporarily with paneling. "This is reparations," Sanchez told KQED radio.
emocratic strategist Mike Semler — who has advised Senator Dianne Feinstein and who has taught public policy at Cal State University Sacramento — this weekend sent out an emergency email alert seeking support for an effort to back a ballot measure to save the mural. He said the effort, dubbed the Coalition to Protect Public Art, aims to solicit funds to initiate a ballot measure designed to protect this art, “and perhaps other New Deal art in San Francisco’’ which may also be targeted.
With their move, the school board is “saying we’re all going to jump in this ship together and paddle left,’’ says Semler. “This is Nancy Pelosi’s district. This is where Kamala Harris is from. Clearly, this is not San Francisco values.”
The presidential campaign of Senator Harris, and the Speaker‘s press office, did not respond to requests for comment Sunday.
The school board vote in June has set off a growing chorus of protest from Democrats — many in the political establishment — who say that the move to erase history is not only expensive folly, but could hand Trump fodder to suggest Democrats are out of touch with the mainstream headed toward 2020.
Republican National Committee member Harmeet Dhillon, the former head of the San Francisco Republican Party and now a national commentator on Fox News, said in an interview that the issue represents a political disaster for Democrats, who appear eager to squash history — and “a disaster on multiple levels; it’s un-American.”
Attorney Dhillon, who has represented a growing number of conservative commentators and figures who say their First Amendment rights have been violated by social media — and whom Trump recently introduced and praised at the White House social media conference — said that the move underscores an effort by progressives to tamp down competing points of view. “We’ve seen the negative impacts of that in universities,’’ where she said conservative commentators have had trouble gaining access to speak to students.
Some leading Democrats and progressives agree that the move to paint over the historic mural is outrageous.
Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, in a recent San Francisco Chronicle column, likened the school board supporters’ and tactics to the worst of Trump‘s backers. He noted the vocal group seeking to destroy the painting did so by bullying the recent school board meeting with a claim to be “traumatized by the mural.”
“They’re clearly traumatized by something,’’ he wrote. “They’d be horrified by the comparison, but they’re really no different from the most boorish of President Trump’s supporters.”
8
Brown said that his own daughter, Sydney, a Washington High graduate “was never traumatized by Arnautoff’s painting — as a matter of fact, it generated conversations at home that otherwise would not have occurred. It was a learning experience for her, and for me.”
Progressive former board president Matt Gonzalez, the chief attorney for the San Francisco Public Defenders Office, noted in an op-ed for the San Francisco Examiner, that Arnautoff, a committed leftist, was once subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee to answer for his political views. “Rather than attack a mural painted by an ally of theirs, opponents should focus on real villains — those who whitewash history by pretending terrible things didn’t once happen.”
Semler, who attended George Washington High, agrees that “The “Life of George Washington” was designed “to inform and educate students of Washington’s entire legacy; the noble and ignoble, his leadership in war and peace and his holding of slaves. It also tells students our country’s manifest destiny was built on conquering the frontier.”
“Was Washington a slave owner? Yes. Did he command troops that killed Native Americans? Yes,’’ says Shrum. “But George Washington — it seems stupid to have to say it — performed an incredible service for this country. We wouldn’t be here without him.’’
==========================================================================
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/williesworld/article/The-new-America-Those-who-yell-loudest-win-14092264.php?psid=epxoq
Local // Willie's World
The new America: Those who yell loudest win
Willie Brown July 13, 2019 Updated: July 13, 2019 4:30 p.m.
Victor Arnautoff’s Depression-era mural at Washington High School has sparked noisy protests.
Photo: Yalo
Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle
There’s a troubling trend in America — if there’s someone you disagree with, shout them down.
9
The latest example came the other night at a public event where Robert Cherny, a San Francisco State history professor emeritus, was talking about the Victor Arnautoff’s Depression-era mural at Washington High School in San Francisco — the one the school board wants to destroy because it depicts a dead Indian and black slaves.
Two hundred people packed into the ILWU Local 34 hall to hear what Cherny had to say about Arnautoff and the mural’s origins — and there’s no greater authority. Cherny literally wrote the book on the artist.
But for 20 minutes, they had to listen instead to four people who took over the meeting to harangue them about how upset they are about the mural. Chants of “Shame! Shame!” from people who came to hear Cherny had no effect.
https://youtu.be/K2CRDg4nBCg
The people who took over the meeting say they’re traumatized by the mural. They’ve clearly been traumatized by something. They’d be horrified by the comparison, but they’re really no different from the most boorish of President Trump’s supporters. Any disruption is justified to these folks to make a point.
As for that mural: I’m the father of a Washington High graduate. My daughter was never traumatized by Arnautoff’s painting — as a matter of fact, it generated conversations at home that otherwise would not have occurred. It was a learning experience for her, and for me.
Local // Willie's World
The new America: Those who yell loudest win
Willie Brown July 13, 2019 Updated: July 13, 2019 4:30 p.m.
Comments
Victor Arnautoff’s Depression-era mural at Washington High School has sparked noisy protests.
Photo: Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle
There’s a troubling trend in America — if there’s someone you disagree with, shout them down.
The latest example came the other night at a public event where Robert Cherny, a San Francisco State history professor emeritus, was talking about the Victor Arnautoff’s Depression-era mural at Washington High School in San Francisco — the one the school board wants to destroy because it depicts a dead Indian and black slaves.
Two hundred people packed into the ILWU Local 34 hall to hear what Cherny had to say about Arnautoff and the mural’s origins — and there’s no greater authority. Cherny literally wrote the book on the artist.
But for 20 minutes, they had to listen instead to four people who took over the meeting to harangue them about how upset they are about the mural. Chants of “Shame! Shame!” from people who came to hear Cherny had no effect.
The people who took over the meeting say they’re traumatized by the mural. They’ve clearly been traumatized by something. They’d be horrified by the comparison, but they’re really no different from the most boorish of President Trump’s supporters. Any disruption is justified to these folks to make a
10
point.
As for that mural: I’m the father of a Washington High graduate. My daughter was never traumatized by Arnautoff’s painting — as a matter of fact, it generated conversations at home that otherwise would not have occurred. It was a learning experience for her, and for me.
Mural Dilemma
Academics, educators petition to save controversial school mural
Education
By Jill Tucker
Long, expensive road ahead as school district moves to paint...
===========================================================================
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/opinion/sunday/san-francisco-life-of-washington-murals.html
San Francisco Will Spend $600,000 to Erase History
The school board has voted to destroy public murals by a New Deal-era Communist.
By Bari Weiss
Ms. Weiss is a writer and editor for the Opinion section.
June 28, 2019
San Francisco Will Spend $600,000 to Erase History
The school board has voted to destroy public murals by a New Deal-era Communist.
==========================================================================
11
Rob Bell
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Black-leaders-in-SF-support-saving-controversial-
14284972.php?fbclid=IwAR3YgFLiAZM_z0w6vtGaBUJKbSJRF034j-VnD8KrFXSBN4-
hvZHcKG22OeMCourtesy Noah Griffin
sfexaminer.com
Movement to preserve controversial mural gets support from NAACP - The San Francisco Examiner
David Talbot
http://lufkindailynews.com/news/entertainment/article_82172959-792d-5ad9-ba27-
80f1d4d0ab6a.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-
share&fbclid=IwAR0KneNgbWTvFh0JELfrzM7DgYPkeamXcev1Sg93LpaGhq7BfJ8Ya6AH4q4 San Francisco
Chronicle Share
Cheers for the African American leaders and journalists like the Rev. Amos Brown and Noah Griffin who
stood up yesterday to deplore the whitewashing of George Washington High School's historic mural.
And shame on San Francisco Board of Education President Stevon Cook and his fellow board members
for voting unanimously to destroy the rare wall art. The mural was painted by Communist artist Victor
Arnautoff during FDR's Depression-era WPA arts program, and the anti-racist images were a shockingly
"woke" effort at the time to honestly depict George Washington's life, including his exploitation of slave
labor on his plantation and his leadership of murderous anti-Indian campaigns. But Cook and the SF
Education Board were alarmed by this historical truth-telling and worried that some students were
"disturbed" by the art.
Well, here's a bulletin for Cook and his colleagues: great art is MEANT to disturb, to provoke, to make
people think. And what the hell are they teaching anyway in Washington High history classes? Are they
whitewashing American history in classes too?
12
Cheers also to former Black Panther artist Dewey Crumpler who was involved in an earlier Washington
High mural controversy, former Mayor Art Agnos, activist Jon Golinger and others who are leading a
campaign to stop this Taliban-like move by Education Board officials to erase this outstanding public art.
A recent poll found that a whopping 76% of San Franciscans oppose the destruction of the mural. And
the civic group is prepared to go to the ballot to stop the Education Board's harebrained plan. (I wonder
how much voter support there would also be for a recall of Cook and other Education Board members.)
Destroying this historic mural would be an example of San Francisco political correctness gone mad and
would heap shame and humiliation on the city for years. San Francisco is supposed to be a beacon of
creative freedom, not Orwellian group think.
Paul Mavrides Looks like the citizens need to elect a new school board to replace these self-anointed
censors and failed educators— yesterday.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/philmatier/article/The-people-want-Washington-High-mural-to-
stay-14285355.php?fbclid=IwAR2y-oGPLth06txUMxjDmHWxLctN7AchvHjIw_3VUxIrN4w1vQCo1ABxQv8
The people want Washington High mural to stay — school official not swayed
Marcia Peterzell Save confederate statues too David?
The two issues are not even remotely the same. FOX talking points aren't helpful.
David Talbot Wow, Marcia Peterzell, your comment shows a woeful lack of artistic and historical
understanding. Washington High's racially aware mural is the exact OPPOSITE of a
Richard Hill Amen, David. And yes, they are whitewashing American history. It’s a hallowed tradition
from both the establishment left and right.
Caroline Pincus While my initial response paralleled yours, I have come to think of this differently. Art, in
context--on the wall of a museum, in a book, on screen, etc. -- can provoke, enrage, engage, etc., but art
on the wall of a public high school, where it has to be seen every single day, falls into a different
category for me. If numerous students of color (for over 50 years) report feeling triggered or
traumatized by that art, it should be moved (not possible in this case) or removed. As a Jew and a
lesbian, I certainly would not have wanted to be forced to pass imagery of dead Jews or targeted queers
every single day of my high school life. It's about an inappropriate context. I know the artist intended to
subvert and correct the dominant story, but, again, this does not seem like the right place for this. It's
about not centering whiteness for a change and listening to the many students of color for whom this is
not a welcome sight.
t Cheng Images can be construed differently . The Dead Indian could be become a symbol of
perseverance and pride despite genocide. Let's be a little tougher; hjistopry and current events demand
it of us.
13
Marjorie Sturm Caroline Pincus My son goes to this school. And I have had a lot of mixed feelings about
this. As a Jew myself, I wouldn’t want to see pictures of gassed Jews etc and Native Americans have
described themselves cowering as they walk by.
I think they should be covered with panels or curtains and unveiled intentionally for educational
purposes. But not removed . . .·
e Sallaberry And what a waste of $600,000. This is decision is an embarrassment. Add a plaque instead
explaining the painting and context.
Caroline Pincus Working against racial harm--and that's what this amounts to--might be expensive. And
inconvenient. Too bad. A big chunk of that $600,000 is funding to defend against lawsuits, which have
already been filed. Why? Why is it that important to showcase this place, in this place, when students
for many years now have reported feeling so triggered by it? It's beyond time to center the lives of
students of color, who are a majority in this city after all.
Michael Addario In 2010 the San Francisco Arts Commission was saying that they were going to restore
the same exact mural. What happened?
https://youtu.be/minubBnGb6w
youtube.com
Mural Restoration at Geo. Washington H.S.
Mike Sallaberry [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
DeWitt Cheng I sent them my article. WIll they read?
David Talbot Thanks for the contact info: Tell the Board to stop now!
bbi López I have such a deep respect and admiration for you but I find the support of this mural
troubling. Intent does not matter if it fails to get across a message and images imprint differently on
young evolving minds. I am as are my kids are Black/Latino with native Zapotec blood and I would not
support this being in a learning environment with them. Schools are not museums. Schools are meant to
be safe and support critical thinking not continue to impose historical trauma. If you love the mural so
much, then raise the money and use the campaign $$ to extract the mural from the wall to display at a
museum instead of forcing our children to experience Institutional violence every day. They have
enough violence in their lives. Has the issue of moving the mural been discusse
itt Cheng Your and others' kids will live in a racist world. No good ptrying to pretend this never
happened.
DeWitt Cheng Bobbi López As I am of you. Was not intending to scare you, but everyone is fearful these
days, and reluctant to get informed. I am a liberal, but not one of the radical authoritarian ones
14
.https://www.eastbayexpress.com/.../the-shame.../Content...
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/the-shame-of-the-mural-censors-why-art-and-history-
matter/Content?oid=27198706&fbclid=IwAR2nNL6wWQXQgSKUkgoicWVD90iA29OBK6YrKTv9q_mFbGa
lAsbQ18-POf8
Arnautoff’s procession of spectral pioneers walking past the body of a dead Indian could hardly have
been more clearcut in its challenge to the then-prevailing pioneer narrative.
Our affairs are critical, and we must be dispassionate and wise. — POC Alexander Hamilton, getting
better known these days.
If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter. —
George Washington, whitewashed blackguard.
The controversy over the 13-panel mural The Life of George Washington has called into question yet
again the role of public art in culture and politics. Victor Arnautoff, a Russian-born muralist who worked
with Diego Rivera in Mexico and supervised creation of the Coit Tower murals in San Francisco, was
asked in 1934 to paint a mural for the city's newly built George Washington High School. The 1600-
square foot mural recently has come under attack for, to put it bluntly, political incorrectness — or a
least insufficient political correctness for our enlightened, finicky times.
It's unfair. Arnautoff, who was employed by the federal Works Progress Administration, said he carefully
researched "this famous man, a committed defender of freedom." But he also did not shrink from subtly
depicting "the spirit of Washington's time," with its mistreatment of blacks and American Indians,
abuses that customarily were glossed over by just about everyone 80 years ago.
Current thinking holds that Washington was a slaveholder and hypocrite, and thus no liberator; a
champion of American expansion across North America; and that this tarnished history is too damaging
to high-school students of color — and maybe sensitive white kids. Several passionately intense
protesters — clad in black, naturally — at a July 15 panel discussion on the murals even raised placards
and repeatedly shoute "Genocide!" Theirs was an intemperate position, ill-suited to a general noted for
his air of command and self-control. Washington was described by one contemporary as "no harum-
scarum, ranting, swearing fellow, but sober, steady, and calm." Nor did their outburst befit an artist who
harbored strong leftist convictions but — being more politically astute than we appear capable of today
— also knew how far it was possible to go when, across the continent, Nelson Rockefeller ordered a
Diego Rivera mural plastered over because of a portrait of Lenin that the artist adamantly refused to
remove. Just the year before, Arnautoff had vainly counseled the prankish Coit Tower muralist Bernard
Zakheim not to include a hammer and sickle in his mural, noting, "Freedom in America is understood in
a special way." Zakheim later conceded, "You were right, Mr. Arnautoff. I teased the bulls too much."
Nevertheless, on June 28 the San Francisco School Board voted unanimously, on the nearly unanimous
advice of a thirteen-person Reflection and Action Working Group (RAWG), to have the murals "painted
down."
15
"We come to these recommendations due to the continued historical and current trauma of Native
Americans and African Americans with these depictions in the mural that glorifies slavery, genocide,
colonization, manifest destiny, white supremacy, oppression, etc.," the group reportedly wrote. "This
mural doesn't represent SFUSD values of social justice, diversity, united, student-centered. It's not
student-centered if it's focused on the legacy of artists, rather than the experience of the students."
The cost of this erasure is still unclear, but could exceed $600,000 to paint it over, mostly due to the
expense of an environmental impact report. Covering the mural with panels would cost as much as
$845,000, and curtains alone could cost up to $375,000. "It's reparations," concluded one of the board
members, perhaps as dazzled by the astronomical cost of the solution as any GOP lobbyist similarly
working for a better, freer world.
Those breathless condemnations and postmodernist-victim shopping lists, with their poor syntax and
broadly inclusive, comical 'etc.,' constitute in no way a reparation. They constitute a sop to symbolic
retribution. The punitive eradication of a liberal statement from the past is a colossal waste of money.
(Can we impeach?)
Columnists ranging from the San Francisco Chronicle's art critic Charles Desmarais to art historian Brian
T. Allen in the National Review —strange bedfellows — have weighed in for freedom of speech, the
latter quite pointedly, outing by name all seven of the "anti-art fools" on the school board. Many of the
school's alumni and teachers along with hundreds of artists and educators oppose this censorship,
counseling either leaving the murals intact and using them as educational tools (my position); or, if the
anti-muralists insist on their pound of flesh, covering them (or the offending parts) with panels, at a
much lower cost, and thus doing nothing irreversibly shameful, ignorant, and hypocritical, heaping
national ignominy on the socialist shithole of San Francisco. Lope Yap. Jr., vice president of the GWHS
alumni association and the sole RAWG dissenter, as well as a progressive filmmaker and person of color,
has pledged to fight to save the murals. Lawsuits and injunctions are probably in the offing. Stay tuned.
I have opposed political censorship before, as in the teapot tempest over Dana Schutz's Emmett Till
painting, and I try to be independent from art-world groupthink. But L'Affaire Arnautoff contains so
many delicious absurdities that slipping into my Henry Fonda Man-of-Reason costume became
mandatory. There are three salient points to make about this imbroglio.
First, let's dismiss the notion that art should be judged on its politics (what it says or enjoins) instead of
its aesthetics (how it looks, makes us feel). This is the old style-versus-content conundrum, which always
seems to suggest that we have to make a choice between saving the world and savoring it. We don't. Art
is often enlisted in the service of power, as all good postmodernist children know. Some of the best art
ever made was commissioned to enhance the power and prestige of plutocrats and/or scoundrels — the
Medici, the Hanoverians, the Bourbons, the cardinals and popes, the dynasties, etc. Nowadays we enjoy
the splendor of that art while ignoring the imperial or imperialist unpleasantnesses that paid the artists.
And we absolutely should revere the art, despite the complexities of history and patronage. If you look
at the Sistine Chapel and see only the massacred Indians of the New World, blood transmogrified into
aesthetic gold and silver, you deprive yourself of "the greatest thing that's ever been done," in de
16
Kooning's humorously worshipful words. But if you don't know the sordid history behind the wealth, or
ignore it, you're not a morallly sentient adult. Michelangelo's High Renaissance frescos, let it be noted,
have survived even the Reformation addition of fig leaves by poor Daniele da Volterra, Il Braghettone,
aka the Breeches-Maker.
Il Braghettone, aka the Breeches-Maker.
Much other art sidesteps current affairs — like Abstract Expressionism, with its focus on pure expression
(and its contempt for the leftist propagandist art of the 1930s: "poor art for poor people," in Arshile
Gorky's memorably dismissive aphorism). None other than the U.S. government later promoted its cult
of the heroic individual, easily co-opted to serve as propaganda for American-Way capitalism and
consumerism. Rampant individualism vs. creeping collectivism worked in the Cold War; expect a reprise
(not a reprieve) again in 2020, bigly. Some artists manage to bestride both worlds: During the Vietnam-
era 1960s and 1970s, Philip Guston abandoned the elegant shimmering abstractions he made in the
1950s, loosely based on Monet, in order to revisit the dark Klansman social commentary that he made in
the 1930s. His stylistic epiphany and conversion from heavenly formalism — "adjusting a red to a blue,"
as he later put it, wryly, to sinister and comic narratives like his excoriating drawings of scowling, scrotal
Tricky Dick — evoked passionate reactions in the art congregation; he was assailed as a traitor by some,
and as a visionary by others. Politically engaged art and fine art are both valid; and both produce good
and bad art: propaganda on the one hand, decoration on the other.
As to actual treason, remember that in the late 1940s, before Life magazine discovered Pollock the
Cowboy, Abstract Expressionism was seen not as red-blooded he-man stuff, but as the decadent, effete
art of communists, eggheads, and other bearded, bereted subversives, who might be hiding military
secrets in those blobs and squiggles. The McCarthyite Republican senator from Michigan, George
Dondero, deserves exhumation:
"Cubism aims to destroy by designed disorder. ... Dadaism aims to destroy by ridicule. ... Abstractionism
aims to destroy by the creation of brainstorms." In 1952, Dondero went on to tell Congress that modern
art was, in fact, a conspiracy by Moscow to spread communism in the United States. This speech won
him the International Fine Arts Council's Gold Medal of Honor for "dedicated service to American Art."
When art critic Emily Genauer (future winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism) interviewed Dondero in
the mid-1950s, he stated "modern art is Communistic because it is distorted and ugly, because it does
not glorify our beautiful country, our cheerful and smiling people, our material progress. Art which does
not glorify our beautiful country in plain simple terms that everyone can understand breeds
dissatisfaction. It is therefore opposed to our government and those who promote it are our enemies."
When Genauer pointed out the resemblance between his views and those of the Stalinist Communists
he despised, Dondero was so enraged that he reportedly arranged to have her fired from her job at the
New York Herald Tribune.
Second, The Life of George Washington is an excellent subject for education about art, culture, and
politics. While some see Arnautoff's mural as a counter-myth or corrective to the semi-divine man-of-all-
seasons status accorded our first president for two and a half centuries, I see it as a calculated
17
correction by an artist who had learned to be discreet and modulated. Arnautoff was persona non grata
in the USSR for decades because of his having fought against the communists during the Russian Civil
War. Conversely, after his conversion to communism in the 1930s, during the San Francisco General
Strike, he was investigated by the FBI for his links with Russia and his associations with visiting cultural
figures and artists like Diego Rivera and other communist intellectuals in early 1930s Mexico City.
Arnautoff's biographer, Robert W. Cherny, repeatedly emphasized during his hotly disrupted July 15
presentation that Arnautoff's murals were in no way disrespectful to blacks and American Indians.
Of the Washington mural, Cherny wrote that even as the popular portrayal of California Indians still
depicted them as primitive and degraded, "Arnautoff treated them with dignity, presenting the complex
artistry of a woman's basketry and the man's fox-skin quiver. He also depicted the meeting of Indians and
Spanish authorities as a meeting of equals, a sharp contrast to the depiction of that event in the city's
"Pioneer Monument" (1894), which shows an Indian groveling at the feet of a ranchero and priest." That
monument was removed from Civic Center by the City of San Francisco in September of last year, and
deservedly so.
"Arnautoff said nothing, then or later, about his murals' counter-narrative to that then-standard high
school treatment of the founding fathers and Western expansion," Cherny wrote. "Washington dominates
five of the six smaller murals but the centers of the four largest barrels are held by native Americans,
working-class revolutionaries, and enslaved African Americans. In depicting Washington's early life,
Arnautoff centered the mural on native Americans in war paint, surrounded by British, colonial, and
French troops and British colonists. In the facing mural, on the American Revolution, the center belongs
to five men in working-class clothing raising the flagpole. VA's portrayal of Mount Vernon puts Washington
near the left margin and places enslaved African Americans at the center, more prominent than several
white artisans on the right side of the mural. ... Arnautoff's's mural makes clear that slave labor provided
the plantations' economic basis. On the facing wall Arnautoff was even more direct: the procession of
spectral future pioneers moves west over the body of a dead Indian, challenging the prevailing narrative
that westward expansion had been into largely vacant territory waiting for white pioneers to develop its
full potential. For Arnautoff, 'the spirit of Washington's time' included not only the struggle for liberty and
the founding of a new nation but also chattel slavery and the slaughter of Native Americans."
Arnautoff's murals are indictments of America's failings. They are not as dramatic or tragic as the Mexico
City and Cuernavaca murals that Arnautoff helped Diego Rivera paint, full of armored, mounted
conquistadores battling hand-to-hand with jaguar-costumed Aztecs wielding obsidian knives, or
tortured, lashed Indians at the missions. Thus, they are more ambiguous in their sympathies to the
casual viewer. They are on the side of the oppressed, however, while simultaneously giving Washington
his due without sanctimoniously demonizing him for being of his time, not ours.
Thirdly and finally, the notion that adolescents are excessively delicate and need protection from reality
and history is deeply repugnant and patronizing. Even the most temperate of the anti-muralists seems
to assume that Americans are not able to handle the inconvenient truth that people do bad things to
other people in the names of God, justice, empire, or mere self-interest. Arnautoff's stately mural, even
with its hints of America's dirty hands, is no rival for the breathless farrago of mass shootings and
18
abusive drivel that bombards us 24/7.
Remember H.G. Wells' bestial Morlocks and elfin Eloi from his novel The Time Machine? Given the
challenges that we face today, we cannot afford a younger generation trained to accept virtuous
passivity. We need revolutionaries with smarts and moxie, and considerable skill at critical thinking —
not just in being unthinkingly critical as instructed at the latest Two Minutes Hate. _
Contact the author of this piece, send a letter to the editor, like us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.
I've just watched the 20-minute video "Expulsion" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om_LnJKGAE8]
created by commenter No. 2, "Book of Hours" (the link to "Expulsion" provided in the comment above
did not work). I highly recommend the video as well as DeWitt Chang's East Bay Express article to all.
That people are seriously contemplating the destruction of this important mural is a disgrace.
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/the-shame-of-the-mural-censors-why-art-and-history-
matter/Content?oid=27198706&showFullText=true
Paul J. Wigowsky DeWitt Cheng - I read in the Arnautoff book by Cherny that a mural that had a nude in
it was covered up with clothes to placate the public that protest nudity. Could we have the same
solution here (GW mural) by covering up the "Dead Indian" with a plaque? It's the "Dead Indian" that is
the stumbling-block here.
==============================================================================
Paul Mavrides This is a work which is intentionally critical of the offending history by showing it in a hard
light with a unsympathetic eye. The school administration is the one who dropped the ball here— and
failed their students year after year by not using the mural's images as a point of departure for teaching
the uncomfortable and disturbing history on display in the hallway artwork.
The horrors and brutality of American history that are baked into our Nation's founding and expansion
are the uncomfortable truth that the mural unflinchingly acknowledges— making the mural controversy
the polar opposite of the recent campaigns to remove the Klan-generated Southern State statues of
Confederate enablers and slavers. The "beautiful historic statues" that Trump has repeatedly praised,
were knowing monuments to White Racism, statuary which were deliberately intended to glorify the
traitors to the Union who took up arms against America to defend white nationalism and human slavery.
The rebel statures were deliberately intended to intimidate the very people the unrepentant white
supremacists hated.
Caroline Pincus Paul Mavrides And that’s precisely the problem here. The mural is intended to educate
and enlighten white people. The school is not just serving white kids, though. Don’t the kids of color
have a right to reject this imagery in the hallway of their school?
Paul Mavrides The NAACP agrees with my opinion, as do the school's alumni association. And the school
board (and its citizens and politicians) ill served ALL its students by removing art and art history from the
SF public school curriculum and getting rid of art teachers years ago. That pretty much explains the
19
school's (and the school board's) major FAIL here on keeping their students (and the students' parents)
educated about this work over a period of DECADES.
The Board has suddenly found money to reinstate art for the first time in years in the SF school system
syllabus, but I fear it comes too late to help enlighten the current student body— or the majority of the
Board.
Paul Mavrides This article has valid points and real information— but it's easier to just skip over it, as
most do on any given FB post about pretty much anything. Why should this controversy be any
different?
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/movement-to-preserve-controversial-mural-gets-support-from-
naacp/?fbclid=IwAR3_X4jjNPDSL01gGnhf5YzmZWpuPti7Lf2QqYKKnIrTsRfWMx0J6OjZc18
sfexaminer.com
Movement to preserve controversial mural gets support from NAACP - The San Francisco Examiner
Black community leaders say mural was intended to ‘critique American history’
Laura WaxmannAug. 6, 2019 4:50 p.m.NewsThe City
Leaders from San Francisco’s black community on Tuesday announced their opposition to efforts by the
school district to remove a New Deal era mural inside of George Washington High School considered
offensive by some community members.
The mural was ordered painted over by the San Francisco Unified School District board in June at a
projected cost of $600,000, in a decision that made national headlines. The mural, the “Life of
Washington, depicts enslaved African Americans shucking corn and white colonizers towering over a
dead Native American, among other things.
Supporters of the mural, which include members of the high school’s alumni association, have
threatened to challenge the decision with a ballot initiative.
On Tuesday, leaders with the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People (NAACP) called on the school board to walk back its decision, echoing arguments made
previously by arts preservationists and free speech advocates that likened the effort to censorship.
Calling the board’s vote “cotton candy politics,” the group’s president, Rev. Amos Brown, defended the
mural as a crucial reminder of the unjust treatment of African Americans in San Francisco and across the
nation.
“The persons who express concern over this mural were I’m sure well intentioned — but it would be
majoring in minor things for us to do a whole lot of brouhaha regarding a mural that the original artist
did because he wanted it to critique American history,” said Brown, who on Tuesday was joined by local
NAACP Vice President Rev. Arnold Townsend.
20
“We cannot deny the fact that slavery was a reality in this country for 350 years…George Washington
was complicit in the barbaric treatment of my ancestors,” Brown said.
Supporters of the 1936 mural by Russian painter Victor Arnautoff have argued that it was meant as a
critique of manifest destiny and of Washington’s legacy, and that the imagery is a subtle expression of
the Russian painter’s critical views of American history.
Columnist Noah Griffin, a former student at the high school, called the debate over the mural a historic
intersection of art, censorship and history.
“Save it, learn from it, teach from it — they did not destroy the concentration camps [in Germany]— The
ovens are preserved to serve as a ghastly reminder of a history vowed to happen never again,” said
Griffin. “Those panels don’t honor Washington, they expose him.”
But school board leaders have said that in taking action on a decades-old debate over the mural’s value
in the present day, they are aiming to support the experiences and activism of students.
At multiple school board hearing on the issue, teachers, parents and students said that the mural made
them uncomfortable and had no place in a public high school.
School Board member Alison Collins said that the fight to save the mural is more about “power” than
about the students confronting history in their lives each day.
“People want to maintain a narrative that makes them feel good and they are willing to override
recommendations made by the community that is most harmed by the mural to do that,” said Collins.
“This is beyond even a political issue — this goes into our core [beliefs] that some people’s voices are
more important than others. It doesn’t matter that we follow a democratic process, what matters is
money and power and people are flexing,” Collins said.
Members of the school’s Black Student Union first called for the removal of the mural during the Civil
Rights movement. At the time, the school district hired black artist Dewey Crumpler to paint a response
mural at the school portraying the positive achievements of Native and African Americans.
Students, teachers and parent advisory councils at the school in recent months renewed calls to address
the murals, which they said lack context, perpetuate racist stereotypes and are offensive to black and
brown students who attend the school.
Crumpler, who attended another high school in the district, said he became aware of the mural in 11th
grade and was initially “appalled” by the imagery, but added that after studying it, he learned to
understand Arnautoff’s intentions.
“Arnautoff used symbolism — that’s images that serve much deeper meaning,” said Crumpler. “Art’s
role is to make us uncomfortable with the status quo so we can be about this business of change.”
Crumpler said that when he completed his response mural some five decades ago, he asked that
21
curriculum be created to give both murals context.
“My mural held controversy at bay — but now we have 21st century students. I’m hopeful that if this
decision can be delayed, then the curriculum can update itself, that maybe now there can be a digital
curriculum,” said Crumpler. “It could be updated so it would never be left static, but can be a part of the
language of the present all the time.”
But Collins said that the argument for curriculum around the mural is “a red herring.”
“One high school isn’t teaching all kids about this issue,” said Collins, adding that she recently co-
authored a resolution calling for the creation of a task force of parents, students and educators to
review holidays and cultural events that inform school curriculum.
Another resolution passed by the board unanimously this summer would aim to ensure equity in the
arts in regard to representation as well as access across the district.
“We are redirecting millions of dollars into schools to have one full time arts teacher in every K-5
Schools,” said Collins. “This changes how we think about art in every school, versus saving one mural
that is painting a false representation of history.”
Matt Piucci Well said, sir. To destroy art would be horrific.
Merle Kessler What happened to his bowties?
Bernardo Issel This a well written piece by DeWitt Cheng in the East Bay Express that in my view
deserves more attention than it appears to have received, including upon this post where it can also be
found in a thread. I found it comparable if not stronger than the NY Times piece by their art critic
Roberta Smith. I especially appreciated this penultimate paragraph.
"Thirdly and finally, the notion that adolescents are excessively delicate and need protection from
reality and history is deeply repugnant and patronizing. Even the most temperate of the anti-muralists
seems to assume that Americans are not able to handle the inconvenient truth that people do bad
things to other people in the names of God, justice, empire, or mere self-interest. Arnautoff's stately
mural, even with its hints of America's dirty hands, is no rival for the breathless farrago of mass
shootings and abusive drivel that bombards us 24/7."
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/.../the-shame.../Content...
Bernardo Issel Here's Roberta Smith's article, which also makes a strong case in defense of the murals
but not with as much intellectual heft as Cheng in the above, in my humble view.
https://www.nytimes.com/.../george-washington-san...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/arts/design/george-washington-san-francisco-
22
murals.html?fbclid=IwAR2qpfFNC1Vp46_HMKsjmgck7LHtrZ0zaKLF9I7nt2uhmuB9yo8maJ0aMCE
nytimes.com
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George…
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George Washington Murals
DeWitt Cheng Bernardo Issel Thanks. We're all on the same side, sp glad she weighed in with gravitas
and cachet of NYT.
David Talbot Hurrah DeWitt Cheng! Wonderful essay!
Richard Holsworth Removing monumental art from prominence need not lead to its destruction. The
statues of Bulgarian communist leaders, idealized revolutionary workers, and Lenins are now in the
Museum of Socialist Art in Sofia. It is very popular with tourists. There are ways to preserve history
without insisting that, as in this case, children, as a part of their compulsory education, be daily thrust
into the presence of depictions of their ancestors subjected to cruelty and death.
https://ncac.org/censorship-news-articles/monument-and-power
https://ncac.org/censorship-news-articles/monument-and-power?fbclid=IwAR1lWZ0e9oHQuE0iaUHW-
jDhelnRvr5cR5EsByxhBXBOUBWI-RMRqLU6Hfs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ncac.org
Speech Vs. Censorship
Previous Next
This article originally appeared in Censorship News Issue 128
The fall of socialism came unexpectedly for all of us who grew up in what appeared as a regime built to
last forever, its permanence embodied in the weight of Stalinist architecture and the monumental
roughly-hewn statues of communist leaders. The removal of those statues and of the giant red star
shining above the towering structure of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Sofia
23
symbolized for me and my friends the demise of a repressive regime. We cheered.
Public monuments are symbols of power. They convey a strong official message about the values and
principles to which a nation subscribes. With revolution – whether a political revolution or a
fundamental change of values – the monuments to past leaders come down together with the ideas
they enshrine.
Confederate monuments were erected in the 1890s, as the Jim Crow system was established in the
South, and in the 1920s, at the height of black disenfranchisement, segregation and lynching. They had a
purpose: to counter the growing civil rights movement. They also had a message: white supremacy
remains at the heart of the nation. Those who commissioned the monuments spoke for state power. By
honoring confederate heroes they reminded civil rights fighters that the Confederacy may have lost the
war, but its values remained.
Public monuments are not the free products of an artist’s vision: the artist’s hand expresses the values
of the state. There is no multiplicity of competing ideas where monuments are concerned. When the
state speaks, it speaks with an authority no artist or art institution has: The state speaks for power.
Removing such monuments does not violate the First Amendment. Under the Constitution, while
government cannot suppress the ideas of its citizenry, no matter how obnoxious, when it speaks on its
own behalf, it is free to promote a single viewpoint; in this case, the view that racism, segregation and
slavery are all bad ideas.
Those who stand on pedestals are not there just because they played a role in history, but because they
stand for the values a nation holds dear. To keep them in their places of honor is to perpetuate those
ideas, often ideas that a nation has come to detest, even as they may linger on the fringes.
Removing monuments from prominence need not lead to their destruction. The statues of Bulgarian
communist leaders, idealized revolutionary workers, and Lenins are now in the Museum of Socialist Art
in Sofia. It is very popular with tourists. There are ways to preserve history without insisting that, as a
nation, the United States should continue celebrating the bankrupt values of the past.
Yet, while the time may have come for monuments intended to perpetuate white supremacy to be
retired to a museum, the post-Charlottesville upheaval in transforming public space threatens to dispose
of a much wider range of historical artworks and to do so in the heat of the moment: under pressure
and without the necessary deliberation.
Around 1AM one morning in early March, under the thundering drumbeat of indigenous demonstrators,
Kalamazoo, MI commissioners voted to dismantle a 1940 Art Deco sculpture of the stylized figures of a
settler and a Native American in headdress facing each other above a reflecting pool.
Contrary to Jim Crow-era monuments, Fountain of the Pioneers has no clear political message. It
commemorates a fact: the displacement of Native Americans from the land. Some opposed having a
reminder of a history that caused them emotional pain; others (including Native groups) advocated for
the monument as offering an occasion to remember and learn about the past. Without reaching
24
community consensus, the commissioners made an irreversible decision.
Cities across the country are reconsidering public art: a New York City task force added plaques with
historical context next to the statues of polarizing figures such as Christopher Columbus, after months of
debate; the San Francisco arts commission decided that a plaque was not enough and voted to remove a
statue showing a Native American man at the feet of a Catholic missionary and a Spanish cowboy;
Pittsburgh is taking down a statue of local composer Stephen Foster with a black slave sitting at his feet
playing the banjo.
There are ongoing campaigns against many other public works that reflect historical power relationships
and against monuments that celebrate figures with complex involvement in the nation’s historical sins.
The conversations started by such campaigns are necessary: public art has a special role in our shared
living space. However, making often irreversible decisions to remove or destroy work in the heat of this
politically polarized moment puts us in danger of losing artistically important work and purging public
space of valuable (if sometimes painful) historical reminders.
Svetlana Mintcheva is Director of Programs at the National Coalition Against Censorship. She grew up in
Bulgaria in the 1970s and 80s before moving to the United States in 1992.
Of Monuments and Power: Public Art Debates Are More Than Just Free Speech Vs. Censorship
================================================================================
"Expulsion", a 20-minute YouTube video, addresses this controversy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om_LnJKGAE8
https://youtu.be/om_LnJKGAE8
Richard Holsworth Caroline Pincus Just recreate it -if you must- in an appropriate museum setting using
Direct to Wall Mural Printing or some talented local artists (if you can find any willing to lend their skills
to this subject matter.)
ichard Holsworth Just recreate it -if you must- in an appropriate museum setting using Direct to Wall
Mural Printing or some talented local artists (if you can find any willing to lend their skills to this subject
matter.)
Marie Ciepiela Yes. We can’t paint over history. White people need to see this to not forget.
Alice Diane Kisch I am an East Bay resident and I unfortunately have little influence on what transpires in
San Francisco. But I am horrified that people are seriously considering the removal of this important
mural. I am a Jew, in my early 80s. If the mural depicted the genocide of Jews (I lost family during the
Nazi Holocaust), I would feel thankful that there existed a visual reminder -- to young people, especially -
- of something that should never be repeated.
25
I cannot know for certain that there are no George Washington High School students who are offended
by the mural, but I am skeptical. For the past decade I have been a committed Palestinian solidarity
activist, and I am all too aware of the many "talking points" ("anti-Semitism"; "self-hating Jew") that
Zionist proponents hurl at those among us who work to promote Palestinian human rights.
Erasing history is never a good idea, and art is one brilliant way to teach history. All too often the
genocide of Native Americans is overlooked; the number murdered totaled close to ONE HUNDRED
MILLION. This beautiful mural is clearly anti-racist and must be preserved.
David Hamilton Hopefully, at George Washington High they are teaching of the impact that the court
case Somerset vs. Stewart had on the minds of large slave owners like Washington and Jefferson and
how it might have affected their decision to lead a revolution.
Sue Taylor Move the art. Ridiculous to continue to subject students to it.
Paul Mavrides https://www.npr.org/.../destroyed-by-rockefellers-mural...
https://www.npr.org/2014/03/09/287745199/destroyed-by-rockefellers-mural-trespassed-on-political-
vision?fbclid=IwAR2BQj6sGw0ez2FcVRVKAMZKwoMTp4Wml5m8y765tz96Vd7Rjtsb_JETDSw
npr.org
Destroyed By Rockefellers, Mural Trespassed On Political Vision
Pliego says the exhibition illustrates a key question: Who owns a work of art?
"For example, like Diego said in a letter," she says, "'If someone buys the Sistine Chapel, does he have
the authority to destroy it?' "
The exhibition, "Man at the Crossroads: Diego Rivera's Mural at Rockefeller Center," reconstructs the
story of the mural through reproductions of documents, letters, photographs and Rivera's sketches. It
will be on display at the Mexican Cultural Institute in Washington, D.C., through May 17.
===========================================================================
Bernardo Issel For those of you who would like to help in one way or another, the Coalition to Protect
Public Art was created to protect the Arnautoff murals at George Washington Hight School and other
works of art. A ballot measure is being drafted as part of their efforts. The project is led by SF's Jon
Golinger.
"Before the Arnautoff mural or other publicly-funded New Deal murals in San Francisco can be
destroyed, the COALITION TO PROTECT PUBLIC ART is organizing, educating, and fighting back to
prevent destruction of public art by putting a ballot measure before the voters so that all the people of
San Francisco can have their voices heard on this issue. We are also supporting and advocating for a
wide range of alternative options to increase education, provide mural context for viewers, create more
art, and provide students and others a choice to decide for themselves whether or not to view art
26
instead of the government destroying the murals or permanently preventing anyone from ever seeing
them again."
https://www.protectpublicart.org/
https://www.protectpublicart.org/?fbclid=IwAR00ANp1iw8GV0TSJIIfrWGOqhh0N9OGwQ-
Pmb3_tl5DstRD_sxzwYTtszU
Dolores Neese This mural is part of history. Those who haven't learned from the past are doomed to
repeat it. Leave the mural alone!
l Mavrides Best to hide unpleasant and uncomfortable history from students then, Sue. Maybe we
should just shut the schools down altogether and forget about teaching our young anything— after all—
we can't risk offending them, not a single one, given their genera…See
Larry Gonick Paul Mavrides this is one of your best ideas!!!
Bernardo Issel For those of you who would like to help in one way or another, the Coalition to Protect
Public Art was created to protect the Arnautoff murals at George Washington Hight School and other
works of art. A ballot measure is being drafted as part of their …See More
protectpublicart.org
Coalition To Protect Public Art
Paul Mavrides Just a straw poll here for those arguing against preserving the mural— how many of you
have ever had your speech censored by strangers? Or had your own artwork banned by law (even by
entire nations) or seized by always "well-meaning" authorities and destroyed because of the ideas it
contained?
I have. More than once. And my "offenses" were never about sexual content. Starting in high school and
continuing on throughout my adult life. Once I had published work seized and destroyed by authorities
in New Zealand just because they found it "too depressing."
Bernardo Issel SF artist and professor Dewey Crumpler, who took part in press conference of black
leaders, was commissioned to paint a response to the Arnautoff murals. His commission arose out of
criticism from students at the school. He has been a leading defender of the original murals. I hope that
something as creatively successful as his response murals arises from the current controversy.
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/san-francisco-mural-victor-arnautoff-dewey-crumpler-
1596409?fbclid=IwAR0UqdR52cbeS7WhyR38t3tEK5vDNncxYdLfjHxNTixf0OslLO5VKbywPKY
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here’s
Why He Stands Against Destroying Them
Dewey Crumpler explains the history of controversy over Victor Arnautoff's 'Life of George Washington'
in San Francisco, which are slated to be destroyed.
27
Ben Davis, July 10, 2019
Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George Washington murals.
Screenshot from YouTube/Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George
Washington murals. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
In the past week, a simmering dispute over public art at a high school has burst onto the national stage,
after the San Francisco School Board voted unanimously to destroy a cycle of New Deal-era murals
called the Life of George Washington. The move followed protests by students and parents that images
in the work—specifically one panel featuring black slaves laboring on Washington’s plantation, and
another depicting the Founding Father standing over the body of a dead Native American—were racist
and created a hostile learning environment for minority students.
The controversy first went national in a New York Times op-ed by Bari Weiss, a columnist who has made
a career of belittling progressive student activism. It quickly entered the mainstream of right-wing
commentary as the latest example of “social justice warrior” excess. But the decision to destroy the
work has in recent days attracted much broader opposition, with over 400 artists and academics,
including figures like Judith Butler, David Harvey, and Fredric Jameson, signing a letter asking the school
board to reverse its decision.
Controversy is, in some ways, built into the George Washington High School murals. Like many artists
employed for public works under the New Deal, the creator of the murals, the Russian immigrant Victor
Arnautoff (1896-1979), had radical sensibilities. New Deal rhetoric demanded a celebration of national
themes, but it was not uncommon for artists to test the limits. In 1934, he had worked with other artists
on a cycle of murals at San Francisco’s Coit Tower that had faced censorship for embedding symbols of
Communist sympathy, amid the city’s brutal general strike of that year.
The 1936 Life of George Washington murals would seem to be a more straightforward celebration of
America’s first president. In the book Victor Arnautoff and the Politics of Art, art historian Robert
Cherney argues, however, that the intention was subtly critical: “Washington dominates five of the six
smaller murals, but the center of the four largest murals are held by Native Americans, working-class
revolutionaries, and enslaved African Americans.” At a time when the text books still taught a sanitized
view of the Founding Fathers, Arnautoff was insinuating Washington’s participation in slavery and
genocide—though this, Cherney admits, was subtle enough that commentators of the day largely
missed any subversive message. The mural’s imagery represents a compromise between official
ideology and the artist’s more critical views, which is part of why it can cause such divided reactions.
The murals have proved controversial before. In the ’60s and ’70s, a wave of student activism
denounced their images as offensive to black and Native students, demanding that the Life of George
Washington be taken down. At that time, the young African American artist Dewey Crumpler was
brought in to create a “response mural” to Arnautoff’s cycle, dubbed Multi-Ethnic Heritage, with panels
symbolizing the historic struggles of Asian Americans, African Americans, Latin Americans, and Native
Americans.
28
Crumpler, who now teaches at the San Francisco Art Institute, is today a public critic of the proposed
destruction of Arnautoff’s Life of George Washington, speaking about the importance of appreciating
Arnautoff’s message in a video for the high school’s alumni association, which opposes the destruction. I
spoke with him about the history of student struggle over the murals, his own connections with Civil
Rights protest and black radical art in the 1960s and ’70s, and why he believes the school board should
reverse course.
When did you first become aware of the Life of George Washington murals?
It would be about 1966. I was a junior at that time, graduating in 1967. The school I went to, Balboa High
School in San Francisco, had a football game with George Washington High School.
Balboa was an arts magnet, a test case for creating an all-arts high school, with students from all over
the Bay Area. Being interested in the arts, I went into the hallway, and I was fascinated by the murals. I
was impressed with the scale. I had been reading about the Wall of Respect in Chicago and other murals
in places like Detroit.
Then I proceeded on to the football game and and didn’t really think about the mural anymore—
although I did remember what I perceived at the time as horrible images of African Americans and the
figure of the dead Native American.
So you yourself saw it as an alarming image the first time you saw it?
Initially I did.
news.artnet.com
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington…
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here's
Why He Is Against Destroying Them
Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Then, a few years later, there’s a controversy.
African American students, many of whom were Black Panthers, were angry about the depictions and
demanded that they be removed without question.
By that time I had been showing my artwork around the city. I’d been involved in Civil Rights
demonstrations, and I’d been doing drawings and paintings in relation to them. I had shown at City
College and in several other places. San Francisco had an outdoor Civic Center art fair every year, and I
had been in that a couple of times. There had been a couple of newspaper articles written about me. I
was interviewed on local television.
The backdrop was the riots that were going on in San Francisco. The news media was trying to find some
counter to people who were involved in violent activity, and I think they latched onto me because I was
29
interested in art. I also lived near Hunters Point, which is where it was kicking off. It is a black, lower-
income neighborhood, where I lived as a kid for a few years.
I used to go to the places where the Black Panther Party was holding neighborhood events. I knew some
of the Panther people, like Emory Douglas. I was in the same group with Emory, an organization of
African American artists put together by a woman named Evangeline [E.J.] Montgomery. Black artists
from around the Bay Area used to meet at her apartment about once a month. Emory was one of the
people in that organization initially, before the Black Panther Party really got going.
Before he became minister of culture for the Panthers?
That’s right. In any case, the students saw my work, saw who I was, and they wanted me to make a
work. They were demanding that the mural be destroyed and that an African American artist be chosen
to replace it.
The students reached out to you?
They did, but the art commission said, “No, we’re not gonna hire a kid to do a mural.”
How old were you?
I was 18 or 19. They were vehement: “We’re absolutely not going to spend a dime on somebody who
has never painted a mural of this scale and is just a kid.” They thought that the students at Washington
High ought to paint a mural somewhere on the school, and let that be it.
The black students said, “No, we want a professional to do it.” And the art commission replied, “Well,
he’s not a professional.”
When the art commission and the board of education decided to delay a decision, the students got
angry and threw ink on the Arnautoff mural. After that, the board of education was ready to move. The
issue was to save Arnautoff’s murals, whatever that required.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
Now there’s this narrative that Victor Arnautoff was trying to get on the record a subversive message
about Washington. Was that part of the conversation at that time?
The African American students saw a celebration of George Washington and his slave-owning context.
They didn’t understand the nuance of Arnautoff’s engagement. And neither did I when I first saw it.
But once I became involved, I started researching the imagery. Also, by that time I was in college, and I
was really paying attention to the history of art and how artists use imagery. At that point, I said very
clearly that I would not be a party to destroying the mural. What I will do, I said, is to make a work as
great or greater than the mural—that was my arrogance at that time!
I decided I would prove myself by going to Mexico and studying mural-making. Evangeline Montgomery
30
was friends with Elizabeth Catlett and told her that I was coming to Mexico, asking if she could help me
find murals so I could learn. So Elizabeth agreed to see me and really set me into motion. At the time, I
didn’t even understand how important that meeting was. You know, I’d never heard of Elizabeth Catlett
in any of my art classes. I thought she was just another black person making artwork that nobody paid
much attention to.
I also met Pablo O’Higgins and [David Alfaro] Siqueiros, two of the greatest muralists living in Mexico.
These people helped explain to me what mural painting was. O’Higgins took me into his studio and
explained to me Siqueiros’s ideas about how a mural should function, that a mural was not just a picture
on a wall.
He helped to show me how to break down a set of images, and explained that a mural should be related
to the architecture. He got me to think about how you should study the way people move through the
space, where they looked first.
Arnautoff himself had gone to Mexico and studied muralists like Diego Rivera. Pablo O’Higgins was
familiar with Arnautoff. I came back with a firm understanding that Arnautoff was really not a person
who was trying to venerate George Washington—or rather that he made a picture that venerated
George Washington, but from the standpoint of a serious critique.
Understand, most students including myself never knew that George Washington owned slaves. Never.
That wasn’t brought up in history class. That’s one reason this was a horrible image for me originally:
Arnautoff put slaves next to the president of the United States, and it was that contradiction when I was
first saw the mural that threw me.
Detail of Dewey Crumpler’s mural, Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington High School. Screenshot
from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Tell me about the symbolism of the final mural that you worked out.
When I got back from Mexico, I was interested in trying to set the mural in relationship to the way
people move down that long corridor, and the way they came from Arnautoff’s murals into the space
where my mural is. You have to walk through a set of doors to see my mural, which is adjacent to
Arnautoff’s.
So the first thing you would see when you came through those doors was a Native American holding up
Turtle Island, which was Alcatraz. That Native American would be an archetype, with his body stretched
out into the sky, not dead but fully alive. And articulated as the blood of the earth, with the red soil, the
energy of the earth. Then you would see native peoples.
And then you would see the image of Teotihuacan, which I’d gone to study. And you would see Cesar
Chavez and Dolores Huerta, then you would see an image of Simón Bolívar and several Latin Americans.
You’d see an image of Mexico. There’s an image of broken chains that links all three sections.
Dewey Crumpler’s in front of the African American panel of Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington
31
High School. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
How would you describe its style?
I used archetypes and images of people that would be known to the audience, but done as a kind of
part-spiritual, part-specific image.
For example, in the African American mural, there’s an image of a woman as a kind of phoenix, a
burning source of creative power, showing that power burning through those chains. That became the
central image of the African American panel.
What was the process of making it like?
When I brought back the new designs I had to take them first to the students. I must have gone through
30 meetings over that period, gathering information on what the students wanted to see. Then I had to
go and research that material. Then I had to explain to the students that I wasn’t going to just make an
illustration of what they wanted, that I was going to make an image based on how I make work, but that
I would distill everything they were interested in into a set of images. And that’s what I did.
I had to present that in the form of a maquette, and leave it at the school for students to comment on
and look at. Once I got that feedback, I went back and shifted and changed the mural, and then I had to
take it to the art commission for approval.
And, of course, no one on the art commission really liked it, because it was political. From their point of
view art should never be political, because that made it propaganda, not art. That’s how most of the
people on the commission felt, save for Ruth Asawa, whom I knew. She felt it was okay—she just would
have preferred for students to make the mural.
Were people disappointed that the Arnautoff mural wasn’t taken down?
There were a few who were absolutely disappointed. After all, my murals were really there to save
Arnautoff.
But most of the students agreed with me, because I made it clear: If you want the mural to be
destroyed, you will have to get someone else. I explained then—just as I did in that video—what
Arnautoff was trying to do. I explained the underlying currents in his mural that you might not be able to
decipher if you just look at it quickly.
People are not taught how to read art and artistic imagery. So they don’t understand how it operates,
they are trying to look at images literally, not euphemistically, not symbolically.
As a result of the lack of education around art in general, like I was able to get, we have come to a place
where art, unless it’s absolutely didactic, is without agency and without significance. And that becomes
really a slippery slope that leads to a very dark place.
I thought 50 years ago that it should not be destroyed—because there are elements that are just waiting
32
in the wings to take down other art, and they will use this argument to do exactly that.
Now the school board has voted to destroy the mural. What do you think of that?
I am right with those students. I support their activism. It is just that the outcome here is confused.
I remember that one of the main student leaders from 50 years ago, at the dedication of my murals, he
got up and said, “Mr. Crumpler, I’m happy these murals were painted. I believe your murals are
important. But I want you to know, and I want this audience to know, that if I understood what
Arnautoff was doing, I would never have reacted in the way that I did.” That is exactly what he said. I
have remembered these words very, very clearly for 50 years.
It took almost eight years to get my murals painted, because of all of the hell I had to go through. And by
that time he, like me, had just graduated. I got my graduate degree, and he had just graduated from
college. So he had a different way of seeing the world.
As a young person you are very tender. But as a more mature and knowledgeable person, you realize
that the point of art is to make you think, to make you see that the world is dynamic. Your confrontation
with difficulty is the very thing you need as a child, particularly in an educational environment, so you
can learn how to deal with those difficulties that you are going to run into throughout your life.
If you run away from history, you’ll never change history. You have to confront history. Art is a teaching
tool. That’s why every culture in the world uses it.
All the conversations and emotions stirred up by a work of art are part of what that work of art means.
My mural is part of the Arnautoff mural, part of its meaning, and its meaning is part of mine. If you
destroy his work of art, you are destroying mine as well.
===========================================================================
John Graham It would be a great teaching totem to keep it and every year members of the senior class
write their essay about it. Seems like a no brainer.
KPIX weighs in with its take on the mural press conference...
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/08/06/san-francisco-naacp-leaders-preservation-controversial-
school-mural/?fbclid=IwAR0oOmIWSLHvNKl6omt2xZzgT_sw291qx-dxFBj3RBDxCsnCcQbb5rZ2rFw
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — A plan to replace a controversial mural at a San Francisco high school is
getting pushback from several local African American leaders.
They want the school board to change its mind and preserve the mural. The group is also starting a
petition that could allow the mural to stay.
ALSO READ:
Controversial George Washington Mural At San Francisco School Gets Public Viewing
33
SFUSD Approves Covering Controversial George Washington High School Mural
The controversial mural entitled “The Life of Washington” has been on display at Washington High
School since 1936.
It shows George Washington as a slave owner. On one panel, a Native American man is seen lying dead
at the feet of white explorers.
Over the years, many students have found it offensive. In June, the school board voted unanimously to
have it painted over.
This past weekend, over 100 people crowded into the lobby of the school in San Francisco’s Richmond
District to view a controversial mural.
But on Monday, a group of local African American leaders said they think that is the wrong approach.
“We cannot continue to cut out the things that make us uncomfortable, or we will never grow,” said
Rev. Arnold G. Townsend, a Northern California NAACP Branch Officer.
The gathered leaders said the debate is at the intersection of art, censorship and history. The Reverend
Amos Brown, President of San Francisco chapter of the NAACP says it is a question of balance.
“It takes two wings for a bird to fly, two wings for an airplane to stay up in the air. That mural must not
come down,” said Brown.
“Save it. Learn from it. Teach from it,” said Noah Griffin, a former student body president at Washington
High.
There are other petitions being circulated about the mural, including one that would put the issue on
the ballot for San Francisco voters to decide.
SFUSD officials say it may cost as much as $600,000 to paint over the mural, including legal costs.
Anne Makovec
sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com|By KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco NAACP Leaders Call For Preservation Of Controversial School Mural
Noah Griffin
More moral mural support...
lufkindailynews.com
Black leaders support preserving controversial mural
34
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A group of prominent African American leaders in…
KPIX weighs in with its take on the mural press conference...
sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com|By KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area
San Francisco NAACP Leaders Call For Preservation Of Controversial School Mural
See more from KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area.
==================================================================================
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here’s
Why He Stands Against Destroying Them
Dewey Crumpler explains the history of controversy over Victor Arnautoff's 'Life of George Washington'
in San Francisco, which are slated to be destroyed.
Ben Davis, July 10, 2019
Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George Washington murals.
Screenshot from YouTube/Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George
Washington murals. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
In the past week, a simmering dispute over public art at a high school has burst onto the national stage,
after the San Francisco School Board voted unanimously to destroy a cycle of New Deal-era murals
called the Life of George Washington. The move followed protests by students and parents that images
in the work—specifically one panel featuring black slaves laboring on Washington’s plantation, and
another depicting the Founding Father standing over the body of a dead Native American—were racist
and created a hostile learning environment for minority students.
The controversy first went national in a New York Times op-ed by Bari Weiss, a columnist who has made
a career of belittling progressive student activism. It quickly entered the mainstream of right-wing
commentary as the latest example of “social justice warrior” excess. But the decision to destroy the
work has in recent days attracted much broader opposition, with over 400 artists and academics,
including figures like Judith Butler, David Harvey, and Fredric Jameson, signing a letter asking the school
board to reverse its decision.
Controversy is, in some ways, built into the George Washington High School murals. Like many artists
employed for public works under the New Deal, the creator of the murals, the Russian immigrant Victor
Arnautoff (1896-1979), had radical sensibilities. New Deal rhetoric demanded a celebration of national
themes, but it was not uncommon for artists to test the limits. In 1934, he had worked with other artists
on a cycle of murals at San Francisco’s Coit Tower that had faced censorship for embedding symbols of
Communist sympathy, amid the city’s brutal general strike of that year.
The 1936 Life of George Washington murals would seem to be a more straightforward celebration of
America’s first president. In the book Victor Arnautoff and the Politics of Art, art historian Robert
35
Cherney argues, however, that the intention was subtly critical: “Washington dominates five of the six
smaller murals, but the center of the four largest murals are held by Native Americans, working-class
revolutionaries, and enslaved African Americans.” At a time when the text books still taught a sanitized
view of the Founding Fathers, Arnautoff was insinuating Washington’s participation in slavery and
genocide—though this, Cherney admits, was subtle enough that commentators of the day largely
missed any subversive message. The mural’s imagery represents a compromise between official
ideology and the artist’s more critical views, which is part of why it can cause such divided reactions.
The murals have proved controversial before. In the ’60s and ’70s, a wave of student activism
denounced their images as offensive to black and Native students, demanding that the Life of George
Washington be taken down. At that time, the young African American artist Dewey Crumpler was
brought in to create a “response mural” to Arnautoff’s cycle, dubbed Multi-Ethnic Heritage, with panels
symbolizing the historic struggles of Asian Americans, African Americans, Latin Americans, and Native
Americans.
Crumpler, who now teaches at the San Francisco Art Institute, is today a public critic of the proposed
destruction of Arnautoff’s Life of George Washington, speaking about the importance of appreciating
Arnautoff’s message in a video for the high school’s alumni association, which opposes the destruction. I
spoke with him about the history of student struggle over the murals, his own connections with Civil
Rights protest and black radical art in the 1960s and ’70s, and why he believes the school board should
reverse course.
When did you first become aware of the Life of George Washington murals?
It would be about 1966. I was a junior at that time, graduating in 1967. The school I went to, Balboa High
School in San Francisco, had a football game with George Washington High School.
Balboa was an arts magnet, a test case for creating an all-arts high school, with students from all over
the Bay Area. Being interested in the arts, I went into the hallway, and I was fascinated by the murals. I
was impressed with the scale. I had been reading about the Wall of Respect in Chicago and other murals
in places like Detroit.
Then I proceeded on to the football game and and didn’t really think about the mural anymore—
although I did remember what I perceived at the time as horrible images of African Americans and the
figure of the dead Native American.
So you yourself saw it as an alarming image the first time you saw it?
Initially I did.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
Then, a few years later, there’s a controversy.
36
African American students, many of whom were Black Panthers, were angry about the depictions and
demanded that they be removed without question.
By that time I had been showing my artwork around the city. I’d been involved in Civil Rights
demonstrations, and I’d been doing drawings and paintings in relation to them. I had shown at City
College and in several other places. San Francisco had an outdoor Civic Center art fair every year, and I
had been in that a couple of times. There had been a couple of newspaper articles written about me. I
was interviewed on local television.
The backdrop was the riots that were going on in San Francisco. The news media was trying to find some
counter to people who were involved in violent activity, and I think they latched onto me because I was
interested in art. I also lived near Hunters Point, which is where it was kicking off. It is a black, lower-
income neighborhood, where I lived as a kid for a few years.
I used to go to the places where the Black Panther Party was holding neighborhood events. I knew some
of the Panther people, like Emory Douglas. I was in the same group with Emory, an organization of
African American artists put together by a woman named Evangeline [E.J.] Montgomery. Black artists
from around the Bay Area used to meet at her apartment about once a month. Emory was one of the
people in that organization initially, before the Black Panther Party really got going.
Before he became minister of culture for the Panthers?
That’s right. In any case, the students saw my work, saw who I was, and they wanted me to make a
work. They were demanding that the mural be destroyed and that an African American artist be chosen
to replace it.
The students reached out to you?
They did, but the art commission said, “No, we’re not gonna hire a kid to do a mural.”
How old were you?
I was 18 or 19. They were vehement: “We’re absolutely not going to spend a dime on somebody who
has never painted a mural of this scale and is just a kid.” They thought that the students at Washington
High ought to paint a mural somewhere on the school, and let that be it.
The black students said, “No, we want a professional to do it.” And the art commission replied, “Well,
he’s not a professional.”
When the art commission and the board of education decided to delay a decision, the students got
angry and threw ink on the Arnautoff mural. After that, the board of education was ready to move. The
issue was to save Arnautoff’s murals, whatever that required.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
37
Now there’s this narrative that Victor Arnautoff was trying to get on the record a subversive message
about Washington. Was that part of the conversation at that time?
The African American students saw a celebration of George Washington and his slave-owning context.
They didn’t understand the nuance of Arnautoff’s engagement. And neither did I when I first saw it.
But once I became involved, I started researching the imagery. Also, by that time I was in college, and I
was really paying attention to the history of art and how artists use imagery. At that point, I said very
clearly that I would not be a party to destroying the mural. What I will do, I said, is to make a work as
great or greater than the mural—that was my arrogance at that time!
I decided I would prove myself by going to Mexico and studying mural-making. Evangeline Montgomery
was friends with Elizabeth Catlett and told her that I was coming to Mexico, asking if she could help me
find murals so I could learn. So Elizabeth agreed to see me and really set me into motion. At the time, I
didn’t even understand how important that meeting was. You know, I’d never heard of Elizabeth Catlett
in any of my art classes. I thought she was just another black person making artwork that nobody paid
much attention to.
I also met Pablo O’Higgins and [David Alfaro] Siqueiros, two of the greatest muralists living in Mexico.
These people helped explain to me what mural painting was. O’Higgins took me into his studio and
explained to me Siqueiros’s ideas about how a mural should function, that a mural was not just a picture
on a wall.
He helped to show me how to break down a set of images, and explained that a mural should be related
to the architecture. He got me to think about how you should study the way people move through the
space, where they looked first.
Arnautoff himself had gone to Mexico and studied muralists like Diego Rivera. Pablo O’Higgins was
familiar with Arnautoff. I came back with a firm understanding that Arnautoff was really not a person
who was trying to venerate George Washington—or rather that he made a picture that venerated
George Washington, but from the standpoint of a serious critique.
Understand, most students including myself never knew that George Washington owned slaves. Never.
That wasn’t brought up in history class. That’s one reason this was a horrible image for me originally:
Arnautoff put slaves next to the president of the United States, and it was that contradiction when I was
first saw the mural that threw me.
Detail of Dewey Crumpler’s mural, Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington High School. Screenshot
from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Tell me about the symbolism of the final mural that you worked out.
When I got back from Mexico, I was interested in trying to set the mural in relationship to the way
people move down that long corridor, and the way they came from Arnautoff’s murals into the space
where my mural is. You have to walk through a set of doors to see my mural, which is adjacent to
38
Arnautoff’s.
So the first thing you would see when you came through those doors was a Native American holding up
Turtle Island, which was Alcatraz. That Native American would be an archetype, with his body stretched
out into the sky, not dead but fully alive. And articulated as the blood of the earth, with the red soil, the
energy of the earth. Then you would see native peoples.
And then you would see the image of Teotihuacan, which I’d gone to study. And you would see Cesar
Chavez and Dolores Huerta, then you would see an image of Simón Bolívar and several Latin Americans.
You’d see an image of Mexico. There’s an image of broken chains that links all three sections.
Dewey Crumpler’s in front of the African American panel of Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington
High School. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
How would you describe its style?
I used archetypes and images of people that would be known to the audience, but done as a kind of
part-spiritual, part-specific image.
For example, in the African American mural, there’s an image of a woman as a kind of phoenix, a
burning source of creative power, showing that power burning through those chains. That became the
central image of the African American panel.
What was the process of making it like?
When I brought back the new designs I had to take them first to the students. I must have gone through
30 meetings over that period, gathering information on what the students wanted to see. Then I had to
go and research that material. Then I had to explain to the students that I wasn’t going to just make an
illustration of what they wanted, that I was going to make an image based on how I make work, but that
I would distill everything they were interested in into a set of images. And that’s what I did.
I had to present that in the form of a maquette, and leave it at the school for students to comment on
and look at. Once I got that feedback, I went back and shifted and changed the mural, and then I had to
take it to the art commission for approval.
And, of course, no one on the art commission really liked it, because it was political. From their point of
view art should never be political, because that made it propaganda, not art. That’s how most of the
people on the commission felt, save for Ruth Asawa, whom I knew. She felt it was okay—she just would
have preferred for students to make the mural.
Were people disappointed that the Arnautoff mural wasn’t taken down?
There were a few who were absolutely disappointed. After all, my murals were really there to save
Arnautoff.
But most of the students agreed with me, because I made it clear: If you want the mural to be
39
destroyed, you will have to get someone else. I explained then—just as I did in that video—what
Arnautoff was trying to do. I explained the underlying currents in his mural that you might not be able to
decipher if you just look at it quickly.
People are not taught how to read art and artistic imagery. So they don’t understand how it operates,
they are trying to look at images literally, not euphemistically, not symbolically.
As a result of the lack of education around art in general, like I was able to get, we have come to a place
where art, unless it’s absolutely didactic, is without agency and without significance. And that becomes
really a slippery slope that leads to a very dark place.
I thought 50 years ago that it should not be destroyed—because there are elements that are just waiting
in the wings to take down other art, and they will use this argument to do exactly that.
Now the school board has voted to destroy the mural. What do you think of that?
I am right with those students. I support their activism. It is just that the outcome here is confused.
I remember that one of the main student leaders from 50 years ago, at the dedication of my murals, he
got up and said, “Mr. Crumpler, I’m happy these murals were painted. I believe your murals are
important. But I want you to know, and I want this audience to know, that if I understood what
Arnautoff was doing, I would never have reacted in the way that I did.” That is exactly what he said. I
have remembered these words very, very clearly for 50 years.
It took almost eight years to get my murals painted, because of all of the hell I had to go through. And by
that time he, like me, had just graduated. I got my graduate degree, and he had just graduated from
college. So he had a different way of seeing the world.
As a young person you are very tender. But as a more mature and knowledgeable person, you realize
that the point of art is to make you think, to make you see that the world is dynamic. Your confrontation
with difficulty is the very thing you need as a child, particularly in an educational environment, so you
can learn how to deal with those difficulties that you are going to run into throughout your life.
If you run away from history, you’ll never change history. You have to confront history. Art is a teaching
tool. That’s why every culture in the world uses it.
All the conversations and emotions stirred up by a work of art are part of what that work of art means.
My mural is part of the Arnautoff mural, part of its meaning, and its meaning is part of mine. If you
destroy his work of art, you are destroying mine as well.
============================================================================
40
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/07/mura-a07.html
Large turnout to view George Washington murals slated for destruction by San Francisco school board
By Toby Reese
7 August 2019
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) reluctantly opened George Washington High School
for two brief hours last Thursday for a viewing of the historic 13-panel mural by left-wing Depression era
muralist Victor Arnautoff depicting the “Life of Washington.”
Part of the mural depicting the slave trade in America
The murals have been targeted by a right-wing censorship campaign involving SFUSD officials and local
activists, who are using racialist politics to claim that the murals are “traumatizing” students because of
their historical depiction of slavery and the genocide of American Indians. On June 25, the school board
voted unanimously to whitewash the murals as soon as possible, using $600,000 or more of school
district funds.
Crowds lined up for the viewing on Thursday afternoon, including the grandson and great-grandson of
the muralist. According to local news outlets ABC 7, the Mercury News and KPIX 5, the vast majority of
those in attendance were against the destruction of the murals. They have been kept behind closed
doors for months despite broad interest among the public to view them. The event Thursday was kept
virtually secret by the SFUSD until a leak in the press by the San Francisco Chronicle shortly beforehand.
According to Tatiana Sanchez and Erin Allday of the Chronicle, only a limited group of individuals was
informed of the viewing—ostensibly those who had previously requested to see them. This writer had
requested to view the murals multiple times and was notified he was on a list for future viewings, yet he
received no notification from the SFUSD prior to the viewing.
The SFUSD responded later that this was due to an email “labeling error.” Journalist Charles Desmarais
from the Chronicle mentioned in his article that the SFUSD had sent out an unsigned email stating,
“Security will allow visitors entry starting at 1 p.m. and close promptly at 3 p.m.” Desmarais commented
that the Chronicle had requested public access as early as June 2018.
News outlets that did attend the event estimated that hundreds of people crowded the doors waiting
42
declaring that the school board was taking a “wrong-headed approach to art and to history.” The letter
stated:
Let’s set aside the question of the voices calling for the murals’ destruction and their authority to speak
for the communities they claim as their own. What remains is a mistake in the way we react to historical
works of art—ignoring their meaning in favor of our feelings about them—and a mistake in the way we
treat historical works of art—using them as tools for managing feelings, rather than as objects of
interpretation.
The letter, which was sent to the school board, was signed by over 400 academics, artists, authors,
museum curators, journalists and others from around the world who are alarmed and angered by the
censorship in San Francisco.
Dewey Crumpler, the African American artist who was commissioned with creating “response murals”
entitled Multi-Ethnic Heritage when the initial debate over Arnautoff's artwork occurred in the early
1970s, has emerged as a vocal defender of the original murals at George Washington, raising the
obvious point: “Without Arnautoff's murals my murals are irrelevant.” In an online video he explained,
“History is full of discomfort, but that’s the very thing that human beings need to ensure change. …
Arnautoff attempted to give us the clarity of our history as all great works should do.”
On June 28, Bari Weiss wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times in support of keeping the murals,
titled “San Francisco Will Spend $600,000 to Erase History.” In the article, she correctly makes the point
that there are dangerous implications to censorship based on how words or images make people “feel.”
She poses two questions: “What happens when a student suggests that looking at photographs of the
My Lai massacre in history class is too traumatic? Should newspapers avoid printing upsetting images
that illuminate the crisis at the border, like the unforgettable one of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and
his 23-month-old daughter, Valeria, facedown, drowned in the Rio Grande?”
In a letter to the editor in response to Weiss’ article, Stevon Cook and Mark Sanchez, president and vice
president of the San Francisco Board of Education, state that the “heart of the issue” is not censorship
but whether a “public school-located piece of art that for 80 years has traumatized students should be
allowed to remain.” The officials say that comparing this issue to showing students photographs of the
My Lai massacre is “malarkey” and a “false-equivalency argument.”
In fact, the references to My Lai and the Ramírez drowning are apt. The argument that Cook and
Sanchez are putting forward has a logic that leads to the suppression of speech and artistic expression
with the most authoritarian implications. Who are to be the arbiters of what is “traumatic”? Is the public
to be kept in blissful ignorance of the contradictions, complexities and crimes of the past and present?
Who benefits? Obviously, those in power.
Cook, who is also the CEO of the technology education company Mission Bit, has a website,
stevoncook.com, that promotes on its “bookshelf” such works as Beyond Good and Evil by the
reactionary irrationalist Friedrich Nietzsche, Money: Master the Game by multimillionaire huckster Tony
43
Robbins, The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama, Extreme Ownership:
How US Navy SEALs Lead and Win by former Navy SEALs Jocko Willink and Lief Babin, Between the
World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Donald Trump’s The Art of the Deal.
Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and Democratic Party strategists Mike Semler and Bob
Schrum have responded belatedly to popular opposition to the murals’ destruction. The substance of
their objections to the censorship campaign takes the form of a proposed ballot measure and concerns
that the racialist agitation will damage the Democrats’ chances in the 2020 elections.
This is both hypocritical and lacking any political principle. The Democratic Party has for many years
based itself on right-wing racial and identity politics geared to well-off sections of the middle class—
academics, administrators, politicians, executives, trade union bureaucrats—who seek to use the politics
of race and gender to advance their own careers and carve out for themselves a bigger share of the
wealth of the top 10 percent. These politics are designed to conceal the fundamental divisions in
society, which are based on class, and foster divisions within the working class.
Expunging or falsifying history is the hallmark of despotic governments that are fearful of the population
understanding history and drawing connections to contemporary problems. By voting to censor historic
and artistic murals that expose the contradictory character of American social and political
development, the SFUSD officials are setting a precedent with extremely right-wing implications. All
workers and youth and all those who defend democratic rights and artistic freedom must oppose this
criminal action, fighting to unite working people independently of the parties and politicians of the
ruling class.
================================================================================
george washington high school, sf, murals 13 panels (google, news)--allsources
School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural In San Francisco
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural ...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/school-board-votes-paint-over-120500949.html
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/school-board-votes-paint-over-george-washington-mural-san-
francisco-68182
YAHOO! News3d
44
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco high school draws crowd to view George Washington mural some call racist
one of the foremost muralists in the San Francisco area during the Depression. In addition to depicting
Washington as a ...
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/02/california-school-draws-crowd-to-view-mural-some-call-
racist/
Mercury News6d
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large turnout to view George Washington murals slated for destruction by San Francisco school board
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) reluctantly opened George Washington High School
for two brief hours last ...
World Socialist Web Site
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/07/mura-a07.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black leaders in SF support saving controversial George Washington High School mural
(AP Photo/Eric Risberg) People fill the main entryway of George Washington High School to view the
controversial 13-panel, ...
San Francisco Chronicle on MSN.com
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/black-leaders-in-sf-support-saving-controversial-george-
washington-high-school-mural/ar-AAFr4rb
45
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George Washington Murals
After half a century of intermittent debate and protest, the San Francisco Board of Education voted
unanimously in June to ...
New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/arts/design/george-washington-san-francisco-murals.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The people want Washington High mural to stay — school official not swayed
The controversial 13-panel, 1,600-square foot mural, the "Life of Washington" by Victor Arnautoff, is
seen at George ...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-people-want-washington-high-mural-to-stay-—-school-
official-not-swayed/ar-AAFt7dd
San Francisco Chronicle on MSN.com1d
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public viewing held for controversial mural at SF's George Washington High School
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Hundreds of people showed up at George Washington High School Thursday
afternoon to closely examine a ...
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-07-23/san-francisco-mural-george-washington-slavery-
native-americans
ABC7 San Francisco6d
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural In San Francisco
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural pieces stand out as offensive to members of the community, the board’s ...
46
YAHOO!
https://news.yahoo.com/school-board-votes-paint-over-120500949.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PD Editorial: Don’t destroy San Francisco school’s Washington mural
The San Francisco Board of Education recently voted to spend $600,000 to paint over a 13-panel mural
at George Washington ...
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/9830114-181/pd-editorial-dont-destroy-the
Santa Rosa Press Democrat14dOpinion
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A California school board has voted to paint over a mural of George Washington. Educators want to save
it
A California school board has voted on the fate of an expansive mural dedicated to the life of George
Washington: It's demeaning ... In voting unanimously on June 25 to paint over the 13-panel mural, ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/07/11/san-francisco-mural-academics-george-
washington-history/1689543001/
USA Today
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cultural Figures Oppose Destruction of San Francisco School Murals of George Washington
and artists that have signed an open letter condemning the San Francisco Board of Education’s
unanimous vote to destroy a series of Great Depression–era murals at George Washington High School.
The ...
https://www.artforum.com/news/cultural-figures-oppose-destruction-of-san-francisco-school-murals-
of-george-washington-80248
Artforum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural pieces stand out as offensive to members of the community, the board’s ...
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/07/09/san-francisco-school-board-votes-to-paint-over-george-
47
washington-mural/
The Daily Signal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school board votes to paint over mural of George Washington’s life
The San Francisco Board of Education voted Tuesday to paint over a mural depicting scenes in the life of
George Washington ... school was commissioned by the Federal Art Project — a New Deal program ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/san-francisco-board-of-education-votes-to-paint-
over-schools-george-washington-mural/2019/06/27/77e00446-982f-11e9-b503-
8e101553431a_story.html?noredirect=on
Washington Post
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco High School to Paint Over Historic George Washington Mural
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/San-Francisco-to-Paint-Over-Historic-George-Washington-
Mural-512249811.html
NBC Bay Area
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school board votes to paint over ‘degrading’ mural of George Washington’s life
The San Francisco Board of Education voted Tuesday to paint over a mural depicting scenes in the life of
George Washington ... school was commissioned by the Federal Art Project – a New Deal program ...
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/29/san-francisco-school-board-votes-to-paint-over-mural-of-
george-washingtons-life/
Mercury News
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who’s Even Defending the George Washington High Murals At This Point?
Controversial murals at the Richmond District’s George Washington High ... evening San Francisco Board
of Education meeting. The meeting had the sole purpose of hearing from people for or against ...
http://www.sfweekly.com/news/whos-even-defending-the-george-washington-high-murals-at-this-
48
point/
SF Weekly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Francisco Board of Education will paint over controversial George Washington mural
06/27/2019 UPDATE: On Tuesday, the San Francisco ... George Washington High School. The painting,
which has caused controversy for years, depicts dead American Indians and African American slaves. ...
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/covering-up-controversial-george-washington-mural-in-a-high-school-
could-cost-over-600000-220656252.html
YAHOO! News
"The mural tells us about the conquest and colonization of the United States including the genocide of native Americans. The mural reminds us that this nation is born of blood and gore," said Raoul Gonzales.
"We need to know our history ... have it in our face," Peggy Toye said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Controversial George Washington mural to be painted over at San Francisco high school
San Francisco ... at George Washington High School in San Francisco. Wonderful news!
pic.twitter.com/LVE3PGMgwC In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor, statesman and
signer of the ...
https://www.wctv.tv/content/news/Controversial-George-Washington-mural-to-be-painted-over-at-
San-Francisco-high-school-512227782.html
WCTV
Richard Walker, a professor emeritus of geography at the University of California, Berkeley and director
of the history project, Living New Deal, said the Washington mural is meant to show the "uncomfortable
facts" about America's first president. For that, it was among many New Deal works of art considered
radical when created.
"We on the left ought to welcome the honest portrayal," Walker said, adding that destroying a piece of
art "is the worst way we can deal with historic malfeasance, historic evils."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school to paint over mural of George Washington
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor,
and statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
49
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2019/0705/San-Francisco-school-to-paint-over-mural-of-George-
Washington
Christian Science Monitor
"Victor Arnautoff was far ahead of his time, and we have yet to catch up with him in terms of making
school curriculum more inclusive and historically accurate," said Harvey Smith, president of the National
New Deal Preservation Association.
"The mural is an immense public treasure during one of the few periods of American history where you
had the federal government supporting public art, public spaces, public goods," Mr. Walker said. "It's
been the right that has always attacked the New Deal with its social programs."
Mr. Walker suggested rather than destroying the Washington mural, school officials should simply cover
it and require freshmen to take a course on slavery and California's role in subjugating Native
Americans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------San Francisco to
paint over historic George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO (AP ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and statesman, the 13-
panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images of white pioneers ...
https://wtop.com/education/2019/07/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-george-washington-mural/
WTOP News
The board’s decision last week comes at a time when the legacies of Washington and other historical
figures who owned slaves are being re-examined. Some cities have changed the names of streets and
buildings named after slave owners.
Lope Yap, Jr., vice president of the Washington High School Alumni Association and a 1970 graduates,
disagreed, saying when he was a student and saw the mural he was “awed by the subtle ways Arnautoff
was able to critique American history.” He said the depictions are “treasures, priceless art” and painting
it over is tantamount to pretending the history depicted never happened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school district to paint over debated George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor,
statesman and signer of the Declaration of Independence, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at
George ...
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9769833-181/san-francisco-school-district-to
Santa Rosa Press Democrat
50
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco School Board Votes to Paint Over Controversial George Washington Mural
(SAN FRANCISCO ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor, statesman and signer of
the Declaration of Independence, the 13-panel, 1,600-square foot mural at George Washington High ...
YAHOO!
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN FRANCISCO (AP ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and statesman, the 13-
panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images of white pioneers ...
Bay News 9
https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/ap-top-news/2019/07/04/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-
george-washington-mural
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to spend over $600K to paint over George Washington mural some considered offensive
SAN FRANCISCO >> San Francisco will ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images ...
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/07/04/breaking-news/san-francisco-to-spend-over-600k-to-
paint-over-george-washington-mural-considered-offensive-racist/
Honolulu Star-Advertiser
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Years of Debate, San Francisco Votes to Cover Up Controversial 1930s Mural Depicting George
Washington as a Slaveowner
For decades, a series of murals illustrating the life of George Washington on the walls of a San Francisco
high school has been the subject of heated debate. Some say the 13-panel painting, which ...
Artnet
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/san-francisco-votes-cover-controversial-1930s-mural-depicting-
george-washington-colonizer-slave-owner-1589887
For decades, a series of murals illustrating the life of George Washington on the walls of a San Francisco
high school has been the subject of heated debate. Some say the 13-panel painting, which depicts
51
violence against Native Americans and slaves, should be taken down. Others believe the work of art,
which was painted nearly 90 years ago by Russian-born artist Victor Arnautoff—a noted critic of the
whitewashing of American history—is an invaluable teaching tool.
“There’s been this whole discussion about whitewashing history as if a mural is the only way to talk
about history, or as if that history is an accurate depiction of the full experiences of people of that time,”
Stevon Cook, the president of the school board, told the New York Times. “I think that argument really
limits the nuances in how dynamic that time was and all the contributions African slaves made to the
country, that indigenous Americans gave to settlers. To think that those two depictions are it is baffling.”
The school’s alumni association disagrees. “This is a radical and critical work of art,” the association
argued. “There are many New Deal murals depicting the founding of our country; very few even
acknowledge slavery or the Native genocide. The Arnautoff murals should be preserved for their artistic,
historical and educational value. Whitewashing them will simply result in another ‘whitewash’ of the full
truth about American history.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO, CA — San Francisco will spend ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier,
surveyor and statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School ...
https://www.abc15.com/national/san-francisco-to-paint-over-historic-george-washington-mural
ABC15 Arizona
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Francisco Board of Education will paint over controversial George Washington mural
06/27/2019 UPDATE: On Tuesday, the San Francisco ... George Washington High School. The painting,
which has caused controversy for years, depicts dead American Indians and African American slaves. ...
Yahoo News Canada
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/covering-up-controversial-george-washington-mural-in-a-high-school-
could-cost-over-600000-220656252.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2019/07/04/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-george-
52
washington-mural.html
Toronto Star
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.F. school board to spend at least $375k to cover over 'racist' George Washington mural
Historical images of George Washington’s life will soon vanish from San Francisco’s Washington High
School over accusations of racism. In 1936, Victor Arnautoff, a left-leaning artist who went on to ...
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/21/washington-high-schools-racist-george-
washington-m/
Washington Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://spectator.org/history-is-an-ugly-business/
The San Francisco School Board recently confronted perhaps the greatest crisis in the city’s history. Forget
fire, earthquake, fear of Japanese attack, and murder of the mayor by a disgruntled ex-city councilman.
Washington High School sports an extensive mural of the first president’s life. By a radical Russian-born
artist, Victor Arnautoff, the depiction includes Washington as slaveholder and Indian-killer. Earlier this
year, a “Reflection and Action Group,” presumably a Bay Area staple, denounced Arnautoff for glorifying
“slavery, genocide, colonization, manifest destiny, [and] white supremacy.” The Russian Community
Council of the United States then weighed in on his behalf.
But this is merely the latest iteration of a growing battle over history.
The early American leaders were a bunch of white men, most of them enmeshed in their slave-holding
society as beneficiaries or enablers if not owners themselves. The colonists’ treatment of Native
Americans often looked genocidal. Women had only a minimal public role — they could not vote, of course
— and limited employment opportunities. The Framers eloquently spoke on behalf of liberties denied to
many. Why should any of them, except perhaps the relatively pure John Adams and Alexander Hamilton,
be honored?
We should end the history wars.
The importance of learning the past should be obvious. The fact that the ancients and merely old typically
do not conform to our standards of morality and decency does not mean that they should be discarded.
If it is true that the San Francisco mural “traumatizes students,” as claimed by some, then the kids
desperately need to view it. If George Washington’s career renders students sleepless, then how would
they view the behavior of most of the leaders of other countries at the time? And what would they think
of much of the 20th century, when the world was supposed to have entered a more advanced progressive
age? While we can all appreciate the sanitized national myths that today shape people’s understanding
53
of America, we should know the truth. Only then will we be equipped to learn appropriate lessons and do
better in the future.
Even Lincoln, who detested slavery, nevertheless made clear that his emphasis was not liberation of slaves
but preservation of the Union, which he would choose even if that required the institution’s survival.
At least American history is fairly young. Go back in European or Asian history, and whom can one properly
memorialize? Virtually every monarch, politician, soldier, intellectual, cleric, and citizen held hideous
views by modern standards. Ancient Greece was a slaveholding society. Most of Roman history involved
murderous military operations by an imperialist empire.
Centuries later it was the European powers that established colonial empires; some were better than
others, but none exhibited much concern for the lives or dignity of those who were conquered. Most wars
were over plunder and prestige, for which innumerable lives were sacrificed. Who among the leaders
venerated in country after country was not complicit in, if not an implementer of, slavery, misogyny,
discrimination, corruption, imperialism, brutality, aggression, racism, and much more? Do any of them
deserve remembrance if they fall short of today’s progressive values?
And then there are the American revolutionaries. Let us be clear: George Washington was an ostentatious
traitor. He served in the British Army and owed allegiance to the king. But he took up arms against his
sovereign. Of course, he had the good fortune to end up on the winning side both then and in history’s
judgment. Had the war ended differently, he could have been hung with a British rope and excoriated by
textbooks later used in Britain’s American commonwealth. Military victory doesn’t change the moral
judgment that he was a traitor (and slaveowner, of course). And what of those who defended slavery
while opposing secession? During an earlier crisis, President Jackson threatened war against South
Carolina when it talked of nullification and secession. He was a nationalist, but he directed his fervor for
union, not abolition.
Still, learning history and recognizing reality do not require celebrating all events, causes, or people. It
makes sense to look back and decide that particularly egregious examples of who or what we once
venerated do not warrant such, or perhaps any, respect today.
All sides should de-escalate their rhetoric and behavior. It should surprise no one that African Americans
see the Confederacy differently than descendants of Southern aristocracy do. More light than heat would
be useful, with mutual forbearance, understanding, and respect more common. When the cost of being
right becomes socially divisive and even violent, the battle’s price is probably too high.
As for San Francisco and George Washington, America’s first president was flawed like every other man.
He continues, however, to stand especially high because he exhibited the extraordinarily rare quality of
willingness to step away from political power. That willingness was necessary for the American
experiment to succeed. For that he deserves our continued thanks, no matter what other faults he
exhibited.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
54
The New American
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/32217-school-may-remove-george-washington-mural-
that-traumatizes-students
School May Erase Mural of George Washington Over Concerns It ‘Traumatizes Students’
A school district in Northern California is considering the removal of a mural depicting George
Washington from George Washington High School over concerns that it “traumatizes students and
community ...
Arnautoff “included those images not to glorify Washington, but rather to provoke a nuanced evaluation
of his legacy,” Bordewich continues. “The scene with the dead Native American, for instance, calls
attention to the price of ‘manifest destiny.’ Arnautoff’s murals also portray the slaves with humanity and
the several live Indians as vigorous and manly.”
The group’s recommendation statement attests to this, as the Richmond District Blog related:
We come to these recommendations due to the continued historical and current trauma of Native
Americans and African Americans with these depictions in the mural that glorifies slavery, genocide,
colonization, manifest destiny, white supremacy, oppression, etc. This mural doesn’t represent SFUSD
values of social justice, diversity, united, student-centered. It’s not student-centered if it’s focused on
the legacy of artists, rather than the experience of the students. If we consider the SFUSD equity
definition, the “low” mural glorifies oppression instead of eliminating it. It also perpetuates bias through
stereotypes rather than ending bias. It has nothing to do with equity or inclusion at all. The impact of
this mural is greater than its intent ever was. It’s not a counter-narrative if [the mural] traumatizes
students and community members.
It actually betrays far more than that. If a mural “traumatizes” you, your problem isn’t the mural. It’s
something far deeper.
Of course, the work doesn’t actually traumatize them — they just don’t happen to like it. But this is the
Offensiveness Ploy. Saying they hate the mural makes them seem intolerant, so instead they reverse the
onus by claiming the problem is something inherent in the work itself, its “offensiveness.”
Yet “offense cannot be given, only taken,” as the saying goes. Moreover, there’s something seldom said
about this feelings-driven, policy-based-on-passions phenomenon.
Your feelings don’t mean diddly-squat, snowflakes.
Oh, our feelings matter when undergoing psychoanalysis (for whatever that’s worth) or being counseled
by a spiritual advisor. But letting them drive policy is madness.
There are seven billion-plus people on Earth, snowflakes, with seven billion-plus sets of feelings, and
most everyone is offended by something and most everything offends someone. But since virtually
everything cannot be banned, all we can do is discriminate among feelings, deciding whose to kowtow
55
to.
So our offensiveness obsession doesn’t actually eliminate the offensiveness or the offended; its
engineers simply become the ones to decide who will be offended. This is largely, of course, because the
goal isn’t eliminating “offensiveness,” but eliminating tradition. The Offensiveness Ploy is a just
convenient vehicle through which to do this.
In reality, history should be compiled and traditions embraced based not on the subjective and
spasmodic — feelings — but on the objective and unalterable: Truth. We celebrate George Washington
because he’s the Father of the Nation; because our republic wouldn’t exist without him; and because
these exploits and more inspired even his rival, King George III, to call him “the greatest character of the
age.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco’s Board of Education: Anti-Art Fools
Victor Arnautoff mural at George Washington High School in San Francisco, Calif. (Courtesy Dick Evans ...
Victor Arnautoff (1896–1979) painted the 13 panel murals — covering 1,600 square feet — in ...
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/san-francisco-board-of-education-george-washington-
murals/
National Review
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Painting by Gilbert Stuart – Public Domain
Whitewashing American History: the WPA Mural Controversy in San Francisco
artist Victor Arnautoff that are on display at George Washington High School in San Francisco. These
murals dared to ...
CounterPunch
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/07/23/whitewashing-american-history-the-wpa-mural-
56
controversy-in-san-francisco/
There has a been a controversy percolating the last couple of years over protests against the “Life of
Washington” murals painted in 1935-36 by Works Progress Administration (WPA) artist Victor Arnautoff
that are on display at George Washington High School in San Francisco. These murals dared to challenge
the patriotic stereotype of Washington, instead portraying him as a slaveholder and military commander
overseeing the genocide of American Indians. Seeking to portray the brutal reality of U.S. history, a
reality that the ruling class – and textbooks – has always sought to falsify and obscure, the radical artist
was in many ways far ahead of his time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A school's mural removal: should kids be shielded from brutal US history?
A mural at George Washington high school. Photograph: Walter Thompson/The Guardian Depending on
whom you ask, a 1,600-sq-ft art installation at George Washington high school in San Francisco is either
...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/20/san-francisco-high-school-mural-removal
The Guardian
https://livingnewdeal.org/
https://livingnewdeal.org/the-san-francisco-heritage-memo-to-the-san-francisco-school-board-offers-
alternatives-to-destroying-the-george-washington-high-school-murals/
https://livingnewdeal.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/SFH-memo-to-SFUSD-Options-for-Life-of-
Washington-Mural-Updated-7.16.19.pdf (read the memo)
GEORGE WASHINGTON HIGH SCHOOL “LIFE OF WASHINGTON” MURAL
TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, BUILDING CONSENSUS, RESOURCES (Submitted to SFUSD on 4.17.19, updated
7.16.19)
Over the past year, San Francisco Heritage (Heritage) has been researching examples of comparable
mural and public art controversies across the country and solutions prescribed for addressing
objectionable and offensive imagery. Heritage commissioned the City Landmark nomination for George
Washington High School, co-authored by Donna Graves and Christopher VerPlanck, which
comprehensively documents the school’s public art and architecture, including Victor Arnautoff’s “Life
of Washington” (1936) mural. Heritage is closely following the public process concerning the “Life of
Washington” mural, having attended three of the four Reflection and Action Group meetings convened
by the school district in early 2019. Regardless of Arnautoff’s original intent, we recognize the offensive
nature of the mural’s depictions and their impact on students, especially students of color. Our goal in
compiling this memo is to provide a range of technical options for consideration by district officials in
order to facilitate a constructive and unifying solution.
57
George Washington High School is the latest in a series of controversies surrounding depictions of
Native Americans, African Americans, and other historical events locally and nationally – frequently
involving New Deal-era artworks. Although each case must be considered in its own context, taking into
account the intent of the artist and how the imagery is experienced by contemporary viewers, there
have been a range of creative approaches to remedying inaccurate, offensive, and/or stereotypical
content in public art. All of the cases profiled below combine multiple responses to address the
controversial historical depictions, including screening, interpretation, education, and/or new artwork to
provide a contemporary perspective. Notably, we have not come across any cases where the “solution”
called for whitewashing or destruction of the artwork.
THE IMPORTANCE OF REVERSIBILITY One of the guiding principles of conservation of cultural heritage is
the idea of reversibility, that all interventions with the object should be fully reversible and that the
object should be able to be returned to the state in which it was prior to the conservator's intervention.
“Reversibility” in preservation work maintains the option of being able to reestablish the previous
condition by opting for “more harmless” solutions and avoiding irreversible interventions. This concept
is also a central tenet of federal rehabilitation standards for historic buildings. With all intervention
measures on a work of art, such as the Arnautoff frescoes, the materials that are introduced should be
examined regarding their relative reversibility, including the feasibility of implementing the prescribed
“antidote” to return the artwork to its original condition. As illustrated in the General Services
Administration’s approach to the “Dangers of the Mail” mural in Washington, D.C., profiled below,
reversibility is a key consideration in evaluating whether changes to a
2
historic resource result in an adverse effect, whether under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act or CEQA.
REFLECTION & ACTION GROUP RECOMMENDATION: PAINTING OVER To address concerns over
offensive depictions in “The Life of Washington” mural, the majority recommendation of the Reflection
and Action Group, dated February 28, 2019, simply states: “Paint white paint over all panels of the ‘Life
of Washington’ mural located in lobby before the first day of 2019-2020 school year.” It should be
emphasized that, over the course of its four meetings in early 2019, the Reflection and Action Group
was not formally presented with a range of technical options for screening, recontextualizing, relocating,
and/or removing the murals.
As observed by professional art conservator Will Shank, who conducted a site visit to GWHS on March
7, 2019, “the surface of buon fresco painting is intrinsically porous, and it will absorb any liquid coating
applied to it. (Frescoes are not traditionally varnished like canvas paintings.) There is no ‘reversible’
liquid material that can be applied over a fresco in order to obliterate it. Another paint layer will sink
into the interstices of the carefully prepared surface and into the grooves that separate one giornata
[amount that can be painted in a day while the plaster remains wet] from the ones around it. It cannot
be reversed completely in the future.” In his view, “overpainting would be an act of vandalism.”1
REMOVAL / RELOCATION Although it is theoretically possible to remove and relocate the Arnautoff
58
mural panels, such techniques are very seldom used and would likely be prohibitively expensive. As
explained by Will Shank, who currently resides in Barcelona and practices conservation throughout
Europe:
The [Arnautoff] paintings were created in the traditional buon fresco style of the Italian Renaissance,
which was revived by Rivera and his contemporaries, and picked up as a difficult-to-handle medium by
the WPA artists of the United States in the 1930s and 1940s. This technique requires the artist or her/his
assistants to apply a patch of wet plaster directly onto a solid subsurface, and to apply pigments
suspended in water onto the plaster before it dries. The surface area that the artist can cover in one day
is called a giornata, and the junctures between these areas of plaster can easily be detected decades
later. The paint thus becomes part of the wall. It is not easy, but not impossible, to remove frescoes
from the wall on which they were painted. Usually one of two techniques is used, and this happens only
in dire circumstances which usually result from structural problems in the wall itself, or the threat of
demolition to the building on which the fresco is painted.
The two methods are called strappo and stacco. Both of them are violent techniques of either
hammering away, or tearing away, the top layer of plaster from the rest of the wall behind it. Once the
painted plaster is removed, another support must be identified to attach it to.
1 Shank, Will. “Conservation Observations Regarding Victor Arnautoff’s Life of Washington Frescoes,”
March 13, 2019.
3
According to the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the “detachment and
transfer are dangerous, drastic and irreversible operations that severely affect the physical composition,
material structure, and aesthetic characteristics of wall paintings. These operations are, therefore, only
justifiable in extreme cases when all options of in situ treatment are not viable.” In addition, both forms
of detachment break the intrinsic link between wall paintings and architecture; causing irreversible
physical damage to the texture, topography, and tone of the painting. They also leave a void in the
stripped interior.
Neither of these techniques is advisable in the case of the George Washington murals. The complex
twelve-part mural is highly site-specific, and there is no justifiable reason to incur the enormous expense
and extreme effort required to physically remove them from their original location. There is also the
final matter of their ultimate destination, a question with no obvious answer.2
Contact: Will Shank: [email protected] or www.willshank.net
SCREENING As stated in testimony by public historian Donna Graves at the March 6, 2018 School Board
meeting, Heritage has long supported a solution that would “conceal the [offensive depictions] in a way
that allows people to choose to view it, and to find interpretation that explains why it is hidden, offers a
path forward that is consistent with an educational setting. This could take the form of a screen
59
suspended on wires running from ceiling to floor that can be pulled aside — or vertical doors attached
to the floor that can be swung open. Both of these preliminary ideas leave the rest of the mural visually
accessible. They can also incorporate text that explains the objections to the image, the ways that
Native Americans historically have been erased or misrepresented, and the fact that Native peoples still
live in San Francisco.” The GWHS Alumni Association concurs with and expounds on Heritage’s
statement, having proposed “a combination of solutions to address the concerns raised,” including:
Screen the two panels in question to prevent inadvertent viewing, a solution used in a similar
situation in Washington, D.C. Place interpretive panels to describe the murals' intent and how they
have been experienced by Native American, African American, and other students of color, as has been
done in a similar situation in New York. Develop a site-specific curriculum on contemporary issues
related to the Native American experience. Create new murals in prominent locations with positive
portrayals of Native Americans including San Francisco’s Ramaytush Yelamu Ohlone tribe.
If the content of the frescoes is to be obscured from view, a physical means of covering them over must
be devised. According to Will Shank, such a system could take the form of the Dewey Crumpler murals
adjacent to the Arnautoff frescoes (pictured below); these appear to be painted wooden/Masonite
panels set into frames and adhered to the wall. Other types of material could
be considered in order to cover—and protect—the frescoes, including lightweight panels like foamcore
or honeycomb panels with cardboard or aluminum cladding. In either case, school district should hire a
technician familiar with the installation of such materials, working under the guidance of a conservator,
with the goal of covering the frescoes without (1) making holes in the paintings, or (2) adhering anything
directly onto the painted surfaces. The least invasive, and most reversible, solution would be to devise a
system of fabric coverings. These could hang like draperies, or be stretched and attached with a system
of grommets or other devices. Such a system would similarly need to be carefully fabricated so as to not
penetrate, or adhere to, the painted surface. As referenced above, the key aspect of an acceptable
solution to the problem is reversibility, so that the frescoes can once again be exposed intact if and
when their circumstances change in the future. A qualified local conservator can help devise such a
system and to attach it professionally and safely.
CASE STUDY: Christopher Columbus Murals at Notre Dame University (Removable Screening, Digital
Imaging, Off-Site Interpretation) In an analogous controversy involving a dozen Christopher Columbus
murals inside the main building.
https://rnt.firstnations.org/ RECLAIMING NATIVE TRUTH
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Controversial WPA Mural Is a Litmus Test for the Longevity of Public Art
Victor Arnautoff’s “The Life of George Washington” was painted at George Washington High School in
1934 under the Works Progress Administration. Recently, the school board voted unanimously to paint
...
60
https://hyperallergic.com/507802/the-life-of-george-washington/
Hyperallergic
The San Francisco mural painted by Victor Arnautoff was an exception to the rule, born during the
creative blitz of the Depression era. “The Life of George Washington” (1934) was one of countless
artworks created by the Works Progress Administration (WPA) initiative under President Franklin D.
Roosevelt’s administration to visualize a new roadmap toward national excellence under the adage,
“Search for a usable American past.”
“The Life of George Washington” (1934) (© Tammy Aramiam/GWHS Alumni Association)
Across 13 frescos, the painter renders an unvarnished portrait of Washington as a slaveowner who incentivized settlers and troops to destroy Native American populations and land. One landscape includes a pack of soldiers painted in greyscale walking by the fallen corpse of an Indigenous person.
But according to a report by the New York Times, many other students favor the fresco. Out of 49 freshmen asked to write essays about the mural, only four favored its removal. One student wrote, “The fresco shows us exactly how brutal colonization and genocide really were and are. The fresco is a warning and reminder of the fallibility of our hallowed leaders.” Art historians and alumni have also come to the painting’s defense, saying that it must be preserved as an example of WPA art and a frank representation of how cruel early America’s leading figures could be.
Another set of murals at the school by Dewey Crumpler, painted in 1974 (© Tammy Aramiam/GWHS Alumni Association)
Arnautoff had a more aspirational politic in mind. “‘Art for art’s sake’ or art as perfume have never appealed to me,” he said in 1935. “The artist is a critic of society.” Accordingly, his mural is pedagogical by design; it corrects our tendency to worship the founding fathers as saints. Arnautoff’s purpose was to unsettle viewers with his work, lifting darker perspectives into the frame. The best memorials know how to productively represent histories of violence and grief for emotional catharsis, telling hard truths without preserving their legacies of violence. His reasoning behind the mural is something that the school it exists in should be teaching: We must render our past with open eyes.
61
But what I think this debate is missing is an open heart. Those who oppose the mural’s removal fail to see the pain it inflicts on people whose ancestors have actually experienced the suffering it depicts. Those who seek the mural’s destruction fail to see anything salvageable in the painting. A solution would be to accommodate both sides of the argument by making it an educational exercise for students. Turning Arnautoff’s mural into a memorial would honor the artist’s original intentions while allowing students to evolve its purpose. Good contemporary monuments honor the names of the dead when able or otherwise note the absence of records through visual or textual cues. (Rachel Whiteread’s “Nameless Library” (2000) Holocaust memorial in Vienna’s Judenplatz is a good example of the latter.) The names of many Native Americans killed in the late 18th century are regrettably lost from history, but slave records for the founding fathers are public access through the National Archives. And that includes dated lists from presidents including Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
With all this information available, and so much history left to be uncovered, is there not ample opportunity for students to use research to counteract some of the mural’s missteps? And if we can find a path forward together, can we not preserve the mural as both an art historical tool and a critical lesson on the politics of representation?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extra-mural studies: why students should not look away from uncomfortable art
A mural at George Washington high school in San Francisco. Photograph: Walter Thompson/The
Guardian Even urging a “truer history”, Paloma Flores, a member of California’s Pitt River tribe,
questions ...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/26/san-francisco-george-washington-murals-new-
york-harlem-courthouse
The Guardian
Washington, though, is exalted as the father of our country, bestowing his name on the capital, an
obelisk more massive than any pharaoh’s erected to his memory. The next step in the creation of a
secular saint was to make a shrine of his home. This entailed a band of devoted women, the Mount
Vernon Ladies Association. In the midst of war, they raised enormous sums for restoration. These efforts
failed to include quarters for a workforce of 317 slaves.
Washington and Jefferson, like most of the founding fathers, were complicated people with
contradictory outlooks. Intellectually, abstractly, both came to abhor the idea of slavery. But each so
benefited from it that they could not muster the courage to exist without its advantages. The first
president never espoused the white supremacy Jefferson did, as uncontested fact, ordained by God. But
he was also a stern taskmaster. Nor did Jefferson eschew brutal punishment when productivity and
discipline were at stake.
Originators of a myth of masters of exemplary benevolence and unusual kindness, these men were
neither. What redeems them, then, is not all that they did, but the government they put in place. Capable
of freeing the oppressed, America offers the possibility of liberty and justice as well as true hope for
happiness.
62
Rooted in conquest, genocide and slavery, America’s origins have made the “whitewashing” of history
and the adulation of imperfect leaders common enough. Everything from grade school primers to
Hollywood blockbusters has contributed to the propaganda of early American paragons and pre-
eminence.
In San Francisco, a son of a Russian Orthodox priest, Victor Arnautoff, depicted the life of Washington at
a streamlined art moderne high school bearing the leader’s name. Instead of the cherry-tree-chopping-
truth-teller the painter might have once conveyed, we have an accurate reading of a stern slave master
so morally conflicted he attempted more than once to reason with escaped slaves, saying they were
“ungrateful”, that it was in their best interest to return. In the form of a murdered brave, one also sees
the atrocity attendant to America’s manifest destiny.
But Arnautoff’s now “ancient” installation in San Francisco is another matter. Can the students who see
it, who by the time they reach secondary school have seen so much gratuitous gore-as-entertainment and
triple-X porn, really be so easily distressed?
The matter will be decided by the city’s board of education. But because the school was built under FDR’s
Works Progress Administration, the federal General Services Administration will be the ultimate arbiter.
It’s hardly likely an administration dismissive of the racist cruelty of Andrew Jackson will countenance
Washington’s banishment.
Isn’t it wise to protect and display works of art which offer a warning of what not to try, ignore or condone?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The War over America’s Past Is Really about Its Future
Detail of Washington Delivering His Inaugural Address, April 1789 (Library of Congress) We’ve seen
something like this fight ...
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/20190803/hanson-war-over-americas-past-is-really-about-
its-future
The summer season has ripped off the thin scab that covered an American wound, revealing a festering
disagreement about the nature and origins of the United States.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
63
Judicial Follies: Censoring art
A controversy has arisen recently about a series of murals painted on the walls of a high school, where
the school board has responded to complaints that the artwork offends the tender sensibilities ...
https://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/2019/08/04/judicial-follies-censoring-art/
Ukiah Daily Journal
Something overlooked to date appears to be a series of art preservation statutes that California adopted
in the 1980s to prevent just such art mutilation. For example, Civil Code section 987 provides, “No
person, except an artist who owns and possesses a work of fine art which the artist has created, shall
intentionally commit, or authorize the intentional commission of, any physical defacement, mutilation,
alteration, or destruction of a work of fine art.” Remedies include a court order that can compel that the
artwork be restored, money damages, and attorney’s fees.
The statute makes a distinction between the “owner” of the artwork and the “artist,” who may no
longer be the owner. While a building may get a new owner, therefore, these laws give the Victor
Arnautoffs of the world, or their heirs, the right to protect his artwork even if the artist doesn’t own the
art itself, or never owned the walls where it is painted.
And these laws give attorneys an incentive to bring lawsuits to stop the destruction of artwork. Or even
to try to restore it. In one case in Los Angeles, someone bought a building and promptly painted over a
multi-story mural on the exterior of the building. The owner was sued by the artist, who obtained court
order directing the owner to remove the paint — without damaging the mural underneath. This is not a
cheap undertaking.
So before the San Francisco School Board gets out its paint brushes, it better check to make sure Victor
Arnautoff doesn’t have an heir out there somewhere who might have inherited his rights to art
preservation under the Civil Code. And that that heir doesn’t have a lawyer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://mondediplo.com/2019/08/01edito
The Taliban of San Francisco
The most controversial painting in Victor Arnautoff’s Life of Washington series. Does ‘resistance’ to
racism in the US ...
Le Monde Diplomatique
Does ‘resistance’ to racism in the US require destroying works by a communist artist, created under the
sponsorship of the New Deal? Life of Washington, 13 murals by Victor Arnautoff covering 150 sq m on
the walls of George Washington High School in San Francisco, has been condemned by ‘resistance’
fighters despite the fact that it is explicitly anti-racist, which was boldly revolutionary when it was
64
painted in 1936. It exposes the hypocrisy of the virtuous proclamations made by the founding fathers
(including Washington) in the US constitution.
Their decision was informed by the report of a 13-member ‘reflection and action group’ (appointed by
the SFBE), which boldly asserted that the murals ‘[glorify] slavery, genocide, colonisation, manifest
destiny [the belief that protestant settlers had a divine mission to “civilise” North America], white
supremacy [and] oppression.’
This interpretation does not withstand scrutiny: the socialist realist tradition that inspired Arnautoff left
no room for such gross misinterpretation. So another justification was devised, considered more
acceptable though it is just as worrying: the reflection and action group claimed that Life of Washington,
which shows the dead body of a Native American being trampled by settlers, ‘traumatises students and
community members’. We face a choice: should we remember slavery and genocide, or forget them?
When can anyone be sure that an artist’s work about the history of his country will never upset
‘community members’, who surely have countless other opportunities to witness scenes of violence
every day, in real life or in art? Should Picasso’s Guernica and Goya’s Tres de Mayo, which are just as
violent and traumatising, be destroyed as well?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Political Correctness Activists Seek to Erase Part of US History
Please note that the posts on The Blogs are contributed by third parties. The opinions, facts and any
media content in them are presented solely by the authors, and neither The Times of Israel nor ...
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/political-correctness-activists-seek-to-erase-part-of-us-history/
The Times of Israel
Roberta Smith, reporting in the “NY Times” opined that the offended persons “assume that their
feelings about the murals are permanent and paramount… and that they have the right to decide for
everyone, now and in the future” what is acceptable and accessible art. I see a strong parallel between
these people and the Taliban and ISIS terrorists destroying art and artifacts they found objectionable
and the Nazis burning books they found objectionable. (Wow! Did I just compare a group of PC activists
to terrorists and Nazis? I guess so.)
I think a little history lesson is in order to put this in perspective.
1. Virtually all wealthy landowners in colonial Virginia owned slaves. Like it or not, slaves were
economically necessary to maintain the viability of the plantations and farms throughout the South.
2. According to Wikipedia six presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson and Van
Buren) and most of the Founding Fathers owned slaves. Washington, in particular, owned 317 slaves at
the time of his death in 1799. In his will he freed all the ones he could legally.
3. According to Henry Louis Gates, Jr. one of, if not the, leading authority on AA history and slavery,
65
many free blacks owned slaves beginning in 1654 and right through the Civil War. And not just in the
South. Free blacks owned slaves in the North as well, for instance in Boston (an abolitionist hotbed) and
Connecticut. Some free blacks even owned ......
So, like it or not, slavery, objectionable as it may have been on many levels, particularly with respect to
the mores of 21st century America, was an integral part of our history. The same is true of our
interactions with Native Americans.
CONCLUSION
I strongly object to what I call revisionist history. It reminds me of the George Orwell novel, “1984.”
America’s history is what it is, both good and bad. I believe it is necessary to educate ourselves about
our history, all of it, including the bad elements. Most historians agree that if you ignore historical
mistakes you are doomed to repeat them.
The current trend of removing certain names from landmarks is insidious. First, it’s taking down statues
and plaques; then it’s removing Jackson from the $10 bill; then it’s changing the names of schools,
sports names, parks, bridges and tunnels; then it’s destroying works of art. Where does it all end? Who
decides what is acceptable for all the rest of us as well as future generations? Once you whitewash the
murals, they are gone forever. That, like the “Times” article said, is not only presumptuous, it’s just plain
wrong.
My comparison to the Nazis, ISIS and the Taliban is apt. Cover the murals up if you must, but don’t
destroy them.
Paul Mavrides This is a work which is intentionally critical of the offending history by showing it in a hard
light with a unsympathetic eye. The school administration is the one who dropped the ball here— and
failed their students year after year by not using the mural's images as a point of departure for teaching
the uncomfortable and disturbing history on display in the hallway artwork.
The horrors and brutality of American history that are baked into our Nation's founding and expansion
are the uncomfortable truth that the mural unflinchingly acknowledges— making the mural controversy
the polar opposite of the recent campaigns to remove the Klan-generated Southern State statues of
Confederate enablers and slavers. The "beautiful historic statues" that Trump has repeatedly praised,
were knowing monuments to White Racism, statuary which were deliberately intended to glorify the
traitors to the Union who took up arms against America to defend white nationalism and human slavery.
The rebel statures were deliberately intended to intimidate the very people the unrepentant white
supremacists hated.
Caroline Pincus Paul Mavrides And that’s precisely the problem here. The mural is intended to educate
66
and enlighten white people. The school is not just serving white kids, though. Don’t the kids of color
have a right to reject this imagery in the hallway of their school?
Paul Mavrides The NAACP agrees with my opinion, as do the school's alumni association. And the school
board (and its citizens and politicians) ill served ALL its students by removing art and art history from the
SF public school curriculum and getting rid of art teachers years ago. That pretty much explains the
school's (and the school board's) major FAIL here on keeping their students (and the students' parents)
educated about this work over a period of DECADES.
The Board has suddenly found money to reinstate art for the first time in years in the SF school system
syllabus, but I fear it comes too late to help enlighten the current student body— or the majority of the
Board.
Paul Mavrides This article has valid points and real information— but it's easier to just skip over it, as
most do on any given FB post about pretty much anything. Why should this controversy be any
different?
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/movement-to-preserve-controversial-mural-gets-support-from-
naacp/?fbclid=IwAR3_X4jjNPDSL01gGnhf5YzmZWpuPti7Lf2QqYKKnIrTsRfWMx0J6OjZc18
sfexaminer.com
Movement to preserve controversial mural gets support from NAACP - The San Francisco Examiner
Black community leaders say mural was intended to ‘critique American history’
Laura WaxmannAug. 6, 2019 4:50 p.m.NewsThe City
Leaders from San Francisco’s black community on Tuesday announced their opposition to efforts by the
school district to remove a New Deal era mural inside of George Washington High School considered
offensive by some community members.
The mural was ordered painted over by the San Francisco Unified School District board in June at a
projected cost of $600,000, in a decision that made national headlines. The mural, the “Life of
Washington, depicts enslaved African Americans shucking corn and white colonizers towering over a
dead Native American, among other things.
Supporters of the mural, which include members of the high school’s alumni association, have
threatened to challenge the decision with a ballot initiative.
On Tuesday, leaders with the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People (NAACP) called on the school board to walk back its decision, echoing arguments made
previously by arts preservationists and free speech advocates that likened the effort to censorship.
Calling the board’s vote “cotton candy politics,” the group’s president, Rev. Amos Brown, defended the
mural as a crucial reminder of the unjust treatment of African Americans in San Francisco and across the
67
nation.
“The persons who express concern over this mural were I’m sure well intentioned — but it would be
majoring in minor things for us to do a whole lot of brouhaha regarding a mural that the original artist
did because he wanted it to critique American history,” said Brown, who on Tuesday was joined by local
NAACP Vice President Rev. Arnold Townsend.
“We cannot deny the fact that slavery was a reality in this country for 350 years…George Washington
was complicit in the barbaric treatment of my ancestors,” Brown said.
Supporters of the 1936 mural by Russian painter Victor Arnautoff have argued that it was meant as a
critique of manifest destiny and of Washington’s legacy, and that the imagery is a subtle expression of
the Russian painter’s critical views of American history.
Columnist Noah Griffin, a former student at the high school, called the debate over the mural a historic
intersection of art, censorship and history.
“Save it, learn from it, teach from it — they did not destroy the concentration camps [in Germany]— The
ovens are preserved to serve as a ghastly reminder of a history vowed to happen never again,” said
Griffin. “Those panels don’t honor Washington, they expose him.”
But school board leaders have said that in taking action on a decades-old debate over the mural’s value
in the present day, they are aiming to support the experiences and activism of students.
At multiple school board hearing on the issue, teachers, parents and students said that the mural made
them uncomfortable and had no place in a public high school.
School Board member Alison Collins said that the fight to save the mural is more about “power” than
about the students confronting history in their lives each day.
“People want to maintain a narrative that makes them feel good and they are willing to override
recommendations made by the community that is most harmed by the mural to do that,” said Collins.
“This is beyond even a political issue — this goes into our core [beliefs] that some people’s voices are
more important than others. It doesn’t matter that we follow a democratic process, what matters is
money and power and people are flexing,” Collins said.
Members of the school’s Black Student Union first called for the removal of the mural during the Civil
Rights movement. At the time, the school district hired black artist Dewey Crumpler to paint a response
mural at the school portraying the positive achievements of Native and African Americans.
Students, teachers and parent advisory councils at the school in recent months renewed calls to address
the murals, which they said lack context, perpetuate racist stereotypes and are offensive to black and
brown students who attend the school.
Crumpler, who attended another high school in the district, said he became aware of the mural in 11th
68
grade and was initially “appalled” by the imagery, but added that after studying it, he learned to
understand Arnautoff’s intentions.
“Arnautoff used symbolism — that’s images that serve much deeper meaning,” said Crumpler. “Art’s
role is to make us uncomfortable with the status quo so we can be about this business of change.”
Crumpler said that when he completed his response mural some five decades ago, he asked that
curriculum be created to give both murals context.
“My mural held controversy at bay — but now we have 21st century students. I’m hopeful that if this
decision can be delayed, then the curriculum can update itself, that maybe now there can be a digital
curriculum,” said Crumpler. “It could be updated so it would never be left static, but can be a part of the
language of the present all the time.”
But Collins said that the argument for curriculum around the mural is “a red herring.”
“One high school isn’t teaching all kids about this issue,” said Collins, adding that she recently co-
authored a resolution calling for the creation of a task force of parents, students and educators to
review holidays and cultural events that inform school curriculum.
Another resolution passed by the board unanimously this summer would aim to ensure equity in the
arts in regard to representation as well as access across the district.
“We are redirecting millions of dollars into schools to have one full time arts teacher in every K-5
Schools,” said Collins. “This changes how we think about art in every school, versus saving one mural
that is painting a false representation of history.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Piucci Well said, sir. To destroy art would be horrific.
Merle Kessler What happened to his bowties?
Bernardo Issel This a well written piece by DeWitt Cheng in the East Bay Express that in my view
deserves more attention than it appears to have received, including upon this post where it can also be
found in a thread. I found it comparable if not stronger than the NY Times piece by their art critic
Roberta Smith. I especially appreciated this penultimate paragraph.
"Thirdly and finally, the notion that adolescents are excessively delicate and need protection from
reality and history is deeply repugnant and patronizing. Even the most temperate of the anti-muralists
seems to assume that Americans are not able to handle the inconvenient truth that people do bad
things to other people in the names of God, justice, empire, or mere self-interest. Arnautoff's stately
mural, even with its hints of America's dirty hands, is no rival for the breathless farrago of mass
shootings and abusive drivel that bombards us 24/7."
69
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/.../the-shame.../Content...
Bernardo Issel Here's Roberta Smith's article, which also makes a strong case in defense of the murals
but not with as much intellectual heft as Cheng in the above, in my humble view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.nytimes.com/.../george-washington-san...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/arts/design/george-washington-san-francisco-
murals.html?fbclid=IwAR2qpfFNC1Vp46_HMKsjmgck7LHtrZ0zaKLF9I7nt2uhmuB9yo8maJ0aMCE
nytimes.com
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George…
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George Washington Murals
DeWitt Cheng Bernardo Issel Thanks. We're all on the same side, sp glad she weighed in with gravitas
and cachet of NYT.
David Talbot Hurrah DeWitt Cheng! Wonderful essay!
Richard Holsworth Removing monumental art from prominence need not lead to its destruction. The
statues of Bulgarian communist leaders, idealized revolutionary workers, and Lenins are now in the
Museum of Socialist Art in Sofia. It is very popular with tourists. There are ways to preserve history
without insisting that, as in this case, children, as a part of their compulsory education, be daily thrust
into the presence of depictions of their ancestors subjected to cruelty and death.
https://ncac.org/censorship-news-articles/monument-and-power
https://ncac.org/censorship-news-articles/monument-and-power?fbclid=IwAR1lWZ0e9oHQuE0iaUHW-
jDhelnRvr5cR5EsByxhBXBOUBWI-RMRqLU6Hfs
ncac.org
70
Speech Vs. Censorship
Previous Next
This article originally appeared in Censorship News Issue 128
The fall of socialism came unexpectedly for all of us who grew up in what appeared as a regime built to
last forever, its permanence embodied in the weight of Stalinist architecture and the monumental
roughly-hewn statues of communist leaders. The removal of those statues and of the giant red star
shining above the towering structure of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in Sofia
symbolized for me and my friends the demise of a repressive regime. We cheered.
Public monuments are symbols of power. They convey a strong official message about the values and
principles to which a nation subscribes. With revolution – whether a political revolution or a
fundamental change of values – the monuments to past leaders come down together with the ideas
they enshrine.
Confederate monuments were erected in the 1890s, as the Jim Crow system was established in the
South, and in the 1920s, at the height of black disenfranchisement, segregation and lynching. They had a
purpose: to counter the growing civil rights movement. They also had a message: white supremacy
remains at the heart of the nation. Those who commissioned the monuments spoke for state power. By
honoring confederate heroes they reminded civil rights fighters that the Confederacy may have lost the
war, but its values remained.
Public monuments are not the free products of an artist’s vision: the artist’s hand expresses the values
of the state. There is no multiplicity of competing ideas where monuments are concerned. When the
state speaks, it speaks with an authority no artist or art institution has: The state speaks for power.
Removing such monuments does not violate the First Amendment. Under the Constitution, while
government cannot suppress the ideas of its citizenry, no matter how obnoxious, when it speaks on its
own behalf, it is free to promote a single viewpoint; in this case, the view that racism, segregation and
slavery are all bad ideas.
Those who stand on pedestals are not there just because they played a role in history, but because they
stand for the values a nation holds dear. To keep them in their places of honor is to perpetuate those
ideas, often ideas that a nation has come to detest, even as they may linger on the fringes.
Removing monuments from prominence need not lead to their destruction. The statues of Bulgarian
communist leaders, idealized revolutionary workers, and Lenins are now in the Museum of Socialist Art
in Sofia. It is very popular with tourists. There are ways to preserve history without insisting that, as a
nation, the United States should continue celebrating the bankrupt values of the past.
Yet, while the time may have come for monuments intended to perpetuate white supremacy to be
retired to a museum, the post-Charlottesville upheaval in transforming public space threatens to dispose
of a much wider range of historical artworks and to do so in the heat of the moment: under pressure
and without the necessary deliberation.
71
Around 1AM one morning in early March, under the thundering drumbeat of indigenous demonstrators,
Kalamazoo, MI commissioners voted to dismantle a 1940 Art Deco sculpture of the stylized figures of a
settler and a Native American in headdress facing each other above a reflecting pool.
Contrary to Jim Crow-era monuments, Fountain of the Pioneers has no clear political message. It
commemorates a fact: the displacement of Native Americans from the land. Some opposed having a
reminder of a history that caused them emotional pain; others (including Native groups) advocated for
the monument as offering an occasion to remember and learn about the past. Without reaching
community consensus, the commissioners made an irreversible decision.
Cities across the country are reconsidering public art: a New York City task force added plaques with
historical context next to the statues of polarizing figures such as Christopher Columbus, after months of
debate; the San Francisco arts commission decided that a plaque was not enough and voted to remove a
statue showing a Native American man at the feet of a Catholic missionary and a Spanish cowboy;
Pittsburgh is taking down a statue of local composer Stephen Foster with a black slave sitting at his feet
playing the banjo.
There are ongoing campaigns against many other public works that reflect historical power relationships
and against monuments that celebrate figures with complex involvement in the nation’s historical sins.
The conversations started by such campaigns are necessary: public art has a special role in our shared
living space. However, making often irreversible decisions to remove or destroy work in the heat of this
politically polarized moment puts us in danger of losing artistically important work and purging public
space of valuable (if sometimes painful) historical reminders.
Svetlana Mintcheva is Director of Programs at the National Coalition Against Censorship. She grew up in
Bulgaria in the 1970s and 80s before moving to the United States in 1992.
Of Monuments and Power: Public Art Debates Are More Than Just Free Speech Vs. Censorship
================================================================================
"Expulsion", a 20-minute YouTube video, addresses this controversy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om_LnJKGAE8
Richard Holsworth Caroline Pincus Just recreate it -if you must- in an appropriate museum setting using
Direct to Wall Mural Printing or some talented local artists (if you can find any willing to lend their skills
to this subject matter.)
ichard Holsworth Just recreate it -if you must- in an appropriate museum setting using Direct to Wall
Mural Printing or some talented local artists (if you can find any willing to lend their skills to this subject
matter.)
arie Ciepiela Yes. We can’t paint over history. White people need to see this to not forget.
72
Alice Diane Kisch I am an East Bay resident and I unfortunately have little influence on what transpires in
San Francisco. But I am horrified that people are seriously considering the removal of this important
mural. I am a Jew, in my early 80s. If the mural depicted the genocide of Jews (I lost family during the
Nazi Holocaust), I would feel thankful that there existed a visual reminder -- to young people, especially -
- of something that should never be repeated.
I cannot know for certain that there are no George Washington High School students who are offended
by the mural, but I am skeptical. For the past decade I have been a committed Palestinian solidarity
activist, and I am all too aware of the many "talking points" ("anti-Semitism"; "self-hating Jew") that
Zionist proponents hurl at those among us who work to promote Palestinian human rights.
Erasing history is never a good idea, and art is one brilliant way to teach history. All too often the
genocide of Native Americans is overlooked; the number murdered totaled close to ONE HUNDRED
MILLION. This beautiful mural is clearly anti-racist and must be preserved.
"Expulsion", a 20-minute YouTube video, addresses this controversy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om_LnJKGAE8
David Hamilton Hopefully, at George Washington High they are teaching of the impact that the court
case Somerset vs. Stewart had on the minds of large slave owners like Washington and Jefferson and
how it might have affected their decision to lead a revolution.
Sue Taylor Move the art. Ridiculous to continue to subject students to it.
Paul Mavrides https://www.npr.org/.../destroyed-by-rockefellers-mural...
https://www.npr.org/2014/03/09/287745199/destroyed-by-rockefellers-mural-trespassed-on-political-
vision?fbclid=IwAR2BQj6sGw0ez2FcVRVKAMZKwoMTp4Wml5m8y765tz96Vd7Rjtsb_JETDSw
npr.org
Destroyed By Rockefellers, Mural Trespassed On Political Vision
Pliego says the exhibition illustrates a key question: Who owns a work of art?
"For example, like Diego said in a letter," she says, "'If someone buys the Sistine Chapel, does he have
the authority to destroy it?' "
The exhibition, "Man at the Crossroads: Diego Rivera's Mural at Rockefeller Center," reconstructs the
story of the mural through reproductions of documents, letters, photographs and Rivera's sketches. It
will be on display at the Mexican Cultural Institute in Washington, D.C., through May 17.
===========================================================================
Bernardo Issel For those of you who would like to help in one way or another, the Coalition to Protect
Public Art was created to protect the Arnautoff murals at George Washington Hight School and other
works of art. A ballot measure is being drafted as part of their efforts. The project is led by SF's Jon
73
Golinger.
"Before the Arnautoff mural or other publicly-funded New Deal murals in San Francisco can be
destroyed, the COALITION TO PROTECT PUBLIC ART is organizing, educating, and fighting back to
prevent destruction of public art by putting a ballot measure before the voters so that all the people of
San Francisco can have their voices heard on this issue. We are also supporting and advocating for a
wide range of alternative options to increase education, provide mural context for viewers, create more
art, and provide students and others a choice to decide for themselves whether or not to view art
instead of the government destroying the murals or permanently preventing anyone from ever seeing
them again."
https://www.protectpublicart.org/
https://www.protectpublicart.org/?fbclid=IwAR00ANp1iw8GV0TSJIIfrWGOqhh0N9OGwQ-
Pmb3_tl5DstRD_sxzwYTtszU
Dolores Neese This mural is part of history. Those who haven't learned from the past are doomed to
repeat it. Leave the mural alone!
l Mavrides Best to hide unpleasant and uncomfortable history from students then, Sue. Maybe we
should just shut the schools down altogether and forget about teaching our young anything— after all—
we can't risk offending them, not a single one, given their genera…See
Larry Gonick Paul Mavrides this is one of your best ideas!!!
Bernardo Issel For those of you who would like to help in one way or another, the Coalition to Protect
Public Art was created to protect the Arnautoff murals at George Washington Hight School and other
works of art. A ballot measure is being drafted as part of their …See More
protectpublicart.org
Coalition To Protect Public Art
Paul Mavrides Just a straw poll here for those arguing against preserving the mural— how many of you
have ever had your speech censored by strangers? Or had your own artwork banned by law (even by
entire nations) or seized by always "well-meaning" authorities and destroyed because of the ideas it
contained?
I have. More than once. And my "offenses" were never about sexual content. Starting in high school and
continuing on throughout my adult life. Once I had published work seized and destroyed by authorities
in New Zealand just because they found it "too depressing."
Bernardo Issel SF artist and professor Dewey Crumpler, who took part in press conference of black
leaders, was commissioned to paint a response to the Arnautoff murals. His commission arose out of
criticism from students at the school. He has been a leading defender of the original murals. I hope that
something as creatively successful as his response murals arises from the current controversy.
74
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/san-francisco-mural-victor-arnautoff-dewey-crumpler-
1596409?fbclid=IwAR0UqdR52cbeS7WhyR38t3tEK5vDNncxYdLfjHxNTixf0OslLO5VKbywPKY
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here’s
Why He Stands Against Destroying Them
Dewey Crumpler explains the history of controversy over Victor Arnautoff's 'Life of George Washington'
in San Francisco, which are slated to be destroyed.
Ben Davis, July 10, 2019
Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George Washington murals.
Screenshot from YouTube/Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George
Washington murals. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
In the past week, a simmering dispute over public art at a high school has burst onto the national stage,
after the San Francisco School Board voted unanimously to destroy a cycle of New Deal-era murals
called the Life of George Washington. The move followed protests by students and parents that images
in the work—specifically one panel featuring black slaves laboring on Washington’s plantation, and
another depicting the Founding Father standing over the body of a dead Native American—were racist
and created a hostile learning environment for minority students.
The controversy first went national in a New York Times op-ed by Bari Weiss, a columnist who has made
a career of belittling progressive student activism. It quickly entered the mainstream of right-wing
commentary as the latest example of “social justice warrior” excess. But the decision to destroy the
work has in recent days attracted much broader opposition, with over 400 artists and academics,
including figures like Judith Butler, David Harvey, and Fredric Jameson, signing a letter asking the school
board to reverse its decision.
Controversy is, in some ways, built into the George Washington High School murals. Like many artists
employed for public works under the New Deal, the creator of the murals, the Russian immigrant Victor
Arnautoff (1896-1979), had radical sensibilities. New Deal rhetoric demanded a celebration of national
themes, but it was not uncommon for artists to test the limits. In 1934, he had worked with other artists
on a cycle of murals at San Francisco’s Coit Tower that had faced censorship for embedding symbols of
Communist sympathy, amid the city’s brutal general strike of that year.
The 1936 Life of George Washington murals would seem to be a more straightforward celebration of
America’s first president. In the book Victor Arnautoff and the Politics of Art, art historian Robert
Cherney argues, however, that the intention was subtly critical: “Washington dominates five of the six
smaller murals, but the center of the four largest murals are held by Native Americans, working-class
revolutionaries, and enslaved African Americans.” At a time when the text books still taught a sanitized
view of the Founding Fathers, Arnautoff was insinuating Washington’s participation in slavery and
genocide—though this, Cherney admits, was subtle enough that commentators of the day largely
missed any subversive message. The mural’s imagery represents a compromise between official
75
ideology and the artist’s more critical views, which is part of why it can cause such divided reactions.
The murals have proved controversial before. In the ’60s and ’70s, a wave of student activism
denounced their images as offensive to black and Native students, demanding that the Life of George
Washington be taken down. At that time, the young African American artist Dewey Crumpler was
brought in to create a “response mural” to Arnautoff’s cycle, dubbed Multi-Ethnic Heritage, with panels
symbolizing the historic struggles of Asian Americans, African Americans, Latin Americans, and Native
Americans.
Crumpler, who now teaches at the San Francisco Art Institute, is today a public critic of the proposed
destruction of Arnautoff’s Life of George Washington, speaking about the importance of appreciating
Arnautoff’s message in a video for the high school’s alumni association, which opposes the destruction. I
spoke with him about the history of student struggle over the murals, his own connections with Civil
Rights protest and black radical art in the 1960s and ’70s, and why he believes the school board should
reverse course.
When did you first become aware of the Life of George Washington murals?
It would be about 1966. I was a junior at that time, graduating in 1967. The school I went to, Balboa High
School in San Francisco, had a football game with George Washington High School.
Balboa was an arts magnet, a test case for creating an all-arts high school, with students from all over
the Bay Area. Being interested in the arts, I went into the hallway, and I was fascinated by the murals. I
was impressed with the scale. I had been reading about the Wall of Respect in Chicago and other murals
in places like Detroit.
Then I proceeded on to the football game and and didn’t really think about the mural anymore—
although I did remember what I perceived at the time as horrible images of African Americans and the
figure of the dead Native American.
So you yourself saw it as an alarming image the first time you saw it?
Initially I did.
news.artnet.com
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington…
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here's
Why He Is Against Destroying Them
Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Then, a few years later, there’s a controversy.
African American students, many of whom were Black Panthers, were angry about the depictions and
demanded that they be removed without question.
76
By that time I had been showing my artwork around the city. I’d been involved in Civil Rights
demonstrations, and I’d been doing drawings and paintings in relation to them. I had shown at City
College and in several other places. San Francisco had an outdoor Civic Center art fair every year, and I
had been in that a couple of times. There had been a couple of newspaper articles written about me. I
was interviewed on local television.
The backdrop was the riots that were going on in San Francisco. The news media was trying to find some
counter to people who were involved in violent activity, and I think they latched onto me because I was
interested in art. I also lived near Hunters Point, which is where it was kicking off. It is a black, lower-
income neighborhood, where I lived as a kid for a few years.
I used to go to the places where the Black Panther Party was holding neighborhood events. I knew some
of the Panther people, like Emory Douglas. I was in the same group with Emory, an organization of
African American artists put together by a woman named Evangeline [E.J.] Montgomery. Black artists
from around the Bay Area used to meet at her apartment about once a month. Emory was one of the
people in that organization initially, before the Black Panther Party really got going.
Before he became minister of culture for the Panthers?
That’s right. In any case, the students saw my work, saw who I was, and they wanted me to make a
work. They were demanding that the mural be destroyed and that an African American artist be chosen
to replace it.
The students reached out to you?
They did, but the art commission said, “No, we’re not gonna hire a kid to do a mural.”
How old were you?
I was 18 or 19. They were vehement: “We’re absolutely not going to spend a dime on somebody who
has never painted a mural of this scale and is just a kid.” They thought that the students at Washington
High ought to paint a mural somewhere on the school, and let that be it.
The black students said, “No, we want a professional to do it.” And the art commission replied, “Well,
he’s not a professional.”
When the art commission and the board of education decided to delay a decision, the students got
angry and threw ink on the Arnautoff mural. After that, the board of education was ready to move. The
issue was to save Arnautoff’s murals, whatever that required.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
Now there’s this narrative that Victor Arnautoff was trying to get on the record a subversive message
about Washington. Was that part of the conversation at that time?
77
The African American students saw a celebration of George Washington and his slave-owning context.
They didn’t understand the nuance of Arnautoff’s engagement. And neither did I when I first saw it.
But once I became involved, I started researching the imagery. Also, by that time I was in college, and I
was really paying attention to the history of art and how artists use imagery. At that point, I said very
clearly that I would not be a party to destroying the mural. What I will do, I said, is to make a work as
great or greater than the mural—that was my arrogance at that time!
I decided I would prove myself by going to Mexico and studying mural-making. Evangeline Montgomery
was friends with Elizabeth Catlett and told her that I was coming to Mexico, asking if she could help me
find murals so I could learn. So Elizabeth agreed to see me and really set me into motion. At the time, I
didn’t even understand how important that meeting was. You know, I’d never heard of Elizabeth Catlett
in any of my art classes. I thought she was just another black person making artwork that nobody paid
much attention to.
I also met Pablo O’Higgins and [David Alfaro] Siqueiros, two of the greatest muralists living in Mexico.
These people helped explain to me what mural painting was. O’Higgins took me into his studio and
explained to me Siqueiros’s ideas about how a mural should function, that a mural was not just a picture
on a wall.
He helped to show me how to break down a set of images, and explained that a mural should be related
to the architecture. He got me to think about how you should study the way people move through the
space, where they looked first.
Arnautoff himself had gone to Mexico and studied muralists like Diego Rivera. Pablo O’Higgins was
familiar with Arnautoff. I came back with a firm understanding that Arnautoff was really not a person
who was trying to venerate George Washington—or rather that he made a picture that venerated
George Washington, but from the standpoint of a serious critique.
Understand, most students including myself never knew that George Washington owned slaves. Never.
That wasn’t brought up in history class. That’s one reason this was a horrible image for me originally:
Arnautoff put slaves next to the president of the United States, and it was that contradiction when I was
first saw the mural that threw me.
Detail of Dewey Crumpler’s mural, Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington High School. Screenshot
from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Tell me about the symbolism of the final mural that you worked out.
When I got back from Mexico, I was interested in trying to set the mural in relationship to the way
people move down that long corridor, and the way they came from Arnautoff’s murals into the space
where my mural is. You have to walk through a set of doors to see my mural, which is adjacent to
Arnautoff’s.
So the first thing you would see when you came through those doors was a Native American holding up
78
Turtle Island, which was Alcatraz. That Native American would be an archetype, with his body stretched
out into the sky, not dead but fully alive. And articulated as the blood of the earth, with the red soil, the
energy of the earth. Then you would see native peoples.
And then you would see the image of Teotihuacan, which I’d gone to study. And you would see Cesar
Chavez and Dolores Huerta, then you would see an image of Simón Bolívar and several Latin Americans.
You’d see an image of Mexico. There’s an image of broken chains that links all three sections.
Dewey Crumpler’s in front of the African American panel of Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington
High School. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
How would you describe its style?
I used archetypes and images of people that would be known to the audience, but done as a kind of
part-spiritual, part-specific image.
For example, in the African American mural, there’s an image of a woman as a kind of phoenix, a
burning source of creative power, showing that power burning through those chains. That became the
central image of the African American panel.
What was the process of making it like?
When I brought back the new designs I had to take them first to the students. I must have gone through
30 meetings over that period, gathering information on what the students wanted to see. Then I had to
go and research that material. Then I had to explain to the students that I wasn’t going to just make an
illustration of what they wanted, that I was going to make an image based on how I make work, but that
I would distill everything they were interested in into a set of images. And that’s what I did.
I had to present that in the form of a maquette, and leave it at the school for students to comment on
and look at. Once I got that feedback, I went back and shifted and changed the mural, and then I had to
take it to the art commission for approval.
And, of course, no one on the art commission really liked it, because it was political. From their point of
view art should never be political, because that made it propaganda, not art. That’s how most of the
people on the commission felt, save for Ruth Asawa, whom I knew. She felt it was okay—she just would
have preferred for students to make the mural.
Were people disappointed that the Arnautoff mural wasn’t taken down?
There were a few who were absolutely disappointed. After all, my murals were really there to save
Arnautoff.
But most of the students agreed with me, because I made it clear: If you want the mural to be
destroyed, you will have to get someone else. I explained then—just as I did in that video—what
Arnautoff was trying to do. I explained the underlying currents in his mural that you might not be able to
decipher if you just look at it quickly.
79
People are not taught how to read art and artistic imagery. So they don’t understand how it operates,
they are trying to look at images literally, not euphemistically, not symbolically.
As a result of the lack of education around art in general, like I was able to get, we have come to a place
where art, unless it’s absolutely didactic, is without agency and without significance. And that becomes
really a slippery slope that leads to a very dark place.
I thought 50 years ago that it should not be destroyed—because there are elements that are just waiting
in the wings to take down other art, and they will use this argument to do exactly that.
Now the school board has voted to destroy the mural. What do you think of that?
I am right with those students. I support their activism. It is just that the outcome here is confused.
I remember that one of the main student leaders from 50 years ago, at the dedication of my murals, he
got up and said, “Mr. Crumpler, I’m happy these murals were painted. I believe your murals are
important. But I want you to know, and I want this audience to know, that if I understood what
Arnautoff was doing, I would never have reacted in the way that I did.” That is exactly what he said. I
have remembered these words very, very clearly for 50 years.
It took almost eight years to get my murals painted, because of all of the hell I had to go through. And by
that time he, like me, had just graduated. I got my graduate degree, and he had just graduated from
college. So he had a different way of seeing the world.
As a young person you are very tender. But as a more mature and knowledgeable person, you realize
that the point of art is to make you think, to make you see that the world is dynamic. Your confrontation
with difficulty is the very thing you need as a child, particularly in an educational environment, so you
can learn how to deal with those difficulties that you are going to run into throughout your life.
If you run away from history, you’ll never change history. You have to confront history. Art is a teaching
tool. That’s why every culture in the world uses it.
All the conversations and emotions stirred up by a work of art are part of what that work of art means.
My mural is part of the Arnautoff mural, part of its meaning, and its meaning is part of mine. If you
destroy his work of art, you are destroying mine as well.
===========================================================================
John Graham It would be a great teaching totem to keep it and every year members of the senior class
write their essay about it. Seems like a no brainer.
KPIX weighs in with its take on the mural press conference...
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/08/06/san-francisco-naacp-leaders-preservation-controversial-
school-mural/?fbclid=IwAR0oOmIWSLHvNKl6omt2xZzgT_sw291qx-dxFBj3RBDxCsnCcQbb5rZ2rFw
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — A plan to replace a controversial mural at a San Francisco high school is
80
getting pushback from several local African American leaders.
They want the school board to change its mind and preserve the mural. The group is also starting a
petition that could allow the mural to stay.
ALSO READ:
Controversial George Washington Mural At San Francisco School Gets Public Viewing
SFUSD Approves Covering Controversial George Washington High School Mural
The controversial mural entitled “The Life of Washington” has been on display at Washington High
School since 1936.
It shows George Washington as a slave owner. On one panel, a Native American man is seen lying dead
at the feet of white explorers.
Over the years, many students have found it offensive. In June, the school board voted unanimously to
have it painted over.
This past weekend, over 100 people crowded into the lobby of the school in San Francisco’s Richmond
District to view a controversial mural.
But on Monday, a group of local African American leaders said they think that is the wrong approach.
“We cannot continue to cut out the things that make us uncomfortable, or we will never grow,” said
Rev. Arnold G. Townsend, a Northern California NAACP Branch Officer.
The gathered leaders said the debate is at the intersection of art, censorship and history. The Reverend
Amos Brown, President of San Francisco chapter of the NAACP says it is a question of balance.
“It takes two wings for a bird to fly, two wings for an airplane to stay up in the air. That mural must not
come down,” said Brown.
“Save it. Learn from it. Teach from it,” said Noah Griffin, a former student body president at Washington
High.
There are other petitions being circulated about the mural, including one that would put the issue on
the ballot for San Francisco voters to decide.
SFUSD officials say it may cost as much as $600,000 to paint over the mural, including legal costs.
Anne Makovec
sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com|By KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
81
San Francisco NAACP Leaders Call For Preservation Of Controversial School Mural
Noah Griffin
More moral mural support...
lufkindailynews.com
Black leaders support preserving controversial mural
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A group of prominent African American leaders in…
KPIX weighs in with its take on the mural press conference...
sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com|By KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area
San Francisco NAACP Leaders Call For Preservation Of Controversial School Mural
See more from KPIX CBS San Francisco Bay Area.
==================================================================================
This Artist Painted the Black Radical Response to the George Washington Slaveholder Murals. Here’s
Why He Stands Against Destroying Them
Dewey Crumpler explains the history of controversy over Victor Arnautoff's 'Life of George Washington'
in San Francisco, which are slated to be destroyed.
Ben Davis, July 10, 2019
Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George Washington murals.
Screenshot from YouTube/Artist Dewey Crumpler speaking in front of Victor Arnautoff's Life of George
Washington murals. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
In the past week, a simmering dispute over public art at a high school has burst onto the national stage,
after the San Francisco School Board voted unanimously to destroy a cycle of New Deal-era murals
called the Life of George Washington. The move followed protests by students and parents that images
in the work—specifically one panel featuring black slaves laboring on Washington’s plantation, and
another depicting the Founding Father standing over the body of a dead Native American—were racist
and created a hostile learning environment for minority students.
The controversy first went national in a New York Times op-ed by Bari Weiss, a columnist who has made
a career of belittling progressive student activism. It quickly entered the mainstream of right-wing
commentary as the latest example of “social justice warrior” excess. But the decision to destroy the
work has in recent days attracted much broader opposition, with over 400 artists and academics,
including figures like Judith Butler, David Harvey, and Fredric Jameson, signing a letter asking the school
board to reverse its decision.
82
Controversy is, in some ways, built into the George Washington High School murals. Like many artists
employed for public works under the New Deal, the creator of the murals, the Russian immigrant Victor
Arnautoff (1896-1979), had radical sensibilities. New Deal rhetoric demanded a celebration of national
themes, but it was not uncommon for artists to test the limits. In 1934, he had worked with other artists
on a cycle of murals at San Francisco’s Coit Tower that had faced censorship for embedding symbols of
Communist sympathy, amid the city’s brutal general strike of that year.
The 1936 Life of George Washington murals would seem to be a more straightforward celebration of
America’s first president. In the book Victor Arnautoff and the Politics of Art, art historian Robert
Cherney argues, however, that the intention was subtly critical: “Washington dominates five of the six
smaller murals, but the center of the four largest murals are held by Native Americans, working-class
revolutionaries, and enslaved African Americans.” At a time when the text books still taught a sanitized
view of the Founding Fathers, Arnautoff was insinuating Washington’s participation in slavery and
genocide—though this, Cherney admits, was subtle enough that commentators of the day largely
missed any subversive message. The mural’s imagery represents a compromise between official
ideology and the artist’s more critical views, which is part of why it can cause such divided reactions.
The murals have proved controversial before. In the ’60s and ’70s, a wave of student activism
denounced their images as offensive to black and Native students, demanding that the Life of George
Washington be taken down. At that time, the young African American artist Dewey Crumpler was
brought in to create a “response mural” to Arnautoff’s cycle, dubbed Multi-Ethnic Heritage, with panels
symbolizing the historic struggles of Asian Americans, African Americans, Latin Americans, and Native
Americans.
Crumpler, who now teaches at the San Francisco Art Institute, is today a public critic of the proposed
destruction of Arnautoff’s Life of George Washington, speaking about the importance of appreciating
Arnautoff’s message in a video for the high school’s alumni association, which opposes the destruction. I
spoke with him about the history of student struggle over the murals, his own connections with Civil
Rights protest and black radical art in the 1960s and ’70s, and why he believes the school board should
reverse course.
When did you first become aware of the Life of George Washington murals?
It would be about 1966. I was a junior at that time, graduating in 1967. The school I went to, Balboa High
School in San Francisco, had a football game with George Washington High School.
Balboa was an arts magnet, a test case for creating an all-arts high school, with students from all over
the Bay Area. Being interested in the arts, I went into the hallway, and I was fascinated by the murals. I
was impressed with the scale. I had been reading about the Wall of Respect in Chicago and other murals
in places like Detroit.
Then I proceeded on to the football game and and didn’t really think about the mural anymore—
although I did remember what I perceived at the time as horrible images of African Americans and the
figure of the dead Native American.
83
So you yourself saw it as an alarming image the first time you saw it?
Initially I did.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
Then, a few years later, there’s a controversy.
African American students, many of whom were Black Panthers, were angry about the depictions and
demanded that they be removed without question.
By that time I had been showing my artwork around the city. I’d been involved in Civil Rights
demonstrations, and I’d been doing drawings and paintings in relation to them. I had shown at City
College and in several other places. San Francisco had an outdoor Civic Center art fair every year, and I
had been in that a couple of times. There had been a couple of newspaper articles written about me. I
was interviewed on local television.
The backdrop was the riots that were going on in San Francisco. The news media was trying to find some
counter to people who were involved in violent activity, and I think they latched onto me because I was
interested in art. I also lived near Hunters Point, which is where it was kicking off. It is a black, lower-
income neighborhood, where I lived as a kid for a few years.
I used to go to the places where the Black Panther Party was holding neighborhood events. I knew some
of the Panther people, like Emory Douglas. I was in the same group with Emory, an organization of
African American artists put together by a woman named Evangeline [E.J.] Montgomery. Black artists
from around the Bay Area used to meet at her apartment about once a month. Emory was one of the
people in that organization initially, before the Black Panther Party really got going.
Before he became minister of culture for the Panthers?
That’s right. In any case, the students saw my work, saw who I was, and they wanted me to make a
work. They were demanding that the mural be destroyed and that an African American artist be chosen
to replace it.
The students reached out to you?
They did, but the art commission said, “No, we’re not gonna hire a kid to do a mural.”
How old were you?
I was 18 or 19. They were vehement: “We’re absolutely not going to spend a dime on somebody who
has never painted a mural of this scale and is just a kid.” They thought that the students at Washington
High ought to paint a mural somewhere on the school, and let that be it.
The black students said, “No, we want a professional to do it.” And the art commission replied, “Well,
he’s not a professional.”
84
When the art commission and the board of education decided to delay a decision, the students got
angry and threw ink on the Arnautoff mural. After that, the board of education was ready to move. The
issue was to save Arnautoff’s murals, whatever that required.
Detail of Victor Arnautoff, The Life of George Washington (1934). Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn
SF CA on YouTube.
Now there’s this narrative that Victor Arnautoff was trying to get on the record a subversive message
about Washington. Was that part of the conversation at that time?
The African American students saw a celebration of George Washington and his slave-owning context.
They didn’t understand the nuance of Arnautoff’s engagement. And neither did I when I first saw it.
But once I became involved, I started researching the imagery. Also, by that time I was in college, and I
was really paying attention to the history of art and how artists use imagery. At that point, I said very
clearly that I would not be a party to destroying the mural. What I will do, I said, is to make a work as
great or greater than the mural—that was my arrogance at that time!
I decided I would prove myself by going to Mexico and studying mural-making. Evangeline Montgomery
was friends with Elizabeth Catlett and told her that I was coming to Mexico, asking if she could help me
find murals so I could learn. So Elizabeth agreed to see me and really set me into motion. At the time, I
didn’t even understand how important that meeting was. You know, I’d never heard of Elizabeth Catlett
in any of my art classes. I thought she was just another black person making artwork that nobody paid
much attention to.
I also met Pablo O’Higgins and [David Alfaro] Siqueiros, two of the greatest muralists living in Mexico.
These people helped explain to me what mural painting was. O’Higgins took me into his studio and
explained to me Siqueiros’s ideas about how a mural should function, that a mural was not just a picture
on a wall.
He helped to show me how to break down a set of images, and explained that a mural should be related
to the architecture. He got me to think about how you should study the way people move through the
space, where they looked first.
Arnautoff himself had gone to Mexico and studied muralists like Diego Rivera. Pablo O’Higgins was
familiar with Arnautoff. I came back with a firm understanding that Arnautoff was really not a person
who was trying to venerate George Washington—or rather that he made a picture that venerated
George Washington, but from the standpoint of a serious critique.
Understand, most students including myself never knew that George Washington owned slaves. Never.
That wasn’t brought up in history class. That’s one reason this was a horrible image for me originally:
Arnautoff put slaves next to the president of the United States, and it was that contradiction when I was
first saw the mural that threw me.
Detail of Dewey Crumpler’s mural, Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington High School. Screenshot
85
from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
Tell me about the symbolism of the final mural that you worked out.
When I got back from Mexico, I was interested in trying to set the mural in relationship to the way
people move down that long corridor, and the way they came from Arnautoff’s murals into the space
where my mural is. You have to walk through a set of doors to see my mural, which is adjacent to
Arnautoff’s.
So the first thing you would see when you came through those doors was a Native American holding up
Turtle Island, which was Alcatraz. That Native American would be an archetype, with his body stretched
out into the sky, not dead but fully alive. And articulated as the blood of the earth, with the red soil, the
energy of the earth. Then you would see native peoples.
And then you would see the image of Teotihuacan, which I’d gone to study. And you would see Cesar
Chavez and Dolores Huerta, then you would see an image of Simón Bolívar and several Latin Americans.
You’d see an image of Mexico. There’s an image of broken chains that links all three sections.
Dewey Crumpler’s in front of the African American panel of Multi-Ethnic Heritage at George Washington
High School. Screenshot from GWHS Alumni Assn SF CA on YouTube.
How would you describe its style?
I used archetypes and images of people that would be known to the audience, but done as a kind of
part-spiritual, part-specific image.
For example, in the African American mural, there’s an image of a woman as a kind of phoenix, a
burning source of creative power, showing that power burning through those chains. That became the
central image of the African American panel.
What was the process of making it like?
When I brought back the new designs I had to take them first to the students. I must have gone through
30 meetings over that period, gathering information on what the students wanted to see. Then I had to
go and research that material. Then I had to explain to the students that I wasn’t going to just make an
illustration of what they wanted, that I was going to make an image based on how I make work, but that
I would distill everything they were interested in into a set of images. And that’s what I did.
I had to present that in the form of a maquette, and leave it at the school for students to comment on
and look at. Once I got that feedback, I went back and shifted and changed the mural, and then I had to
take it to the art commission for approval.
And, of course, no one on the art commission really liked it, because it was political. From their point of
view art should never be political, because that made it propaganda, not art. That’s how most of the
people on the commission felt, save for Ruth Asawa, whom I knew. She felt it was okay—she just would
have preferred for students to make the mural.
86
Were people disappointed that the Arnautoff mural wasn’t taken down?
There were a few who were absolutely disappointed. After all, my murals were really there to save
Arnautoff.
But most of the students agreed with me, because I made it clear: If you want the mural to be
destroyed, you will have to get someone else. I explained then—just as I did in that video—what
Arnautoff was trying to do. I explained the underlying currents in his mural that you might not be able to
decipher if you just look at it quickly.
People are not taught how to read art and artistic imagery. So they don’t understand how it operates,
they are trying to look at images literally, not euphemistically, not symbolically.
As a result of the lack of education around art in general, like I was able to get, we have come to a place
where art, unless it’s absolutely didactic, is without agency and without significance. And that becomes
really a slippery slope that leads to a very dark place.
I thought 50 years ago that it should not be destroyed—because there are elements that are just waiting
in the wings to take down other art, and they will use this argument to do exactly that.
Now the school board has voted to destroy the mural. What do you think of that?
I am right with those students. I support their activism. It is just that the outcome here is confused.
I remember that one of the main student leaders from 50 years ago, at the dedication of my murals, he
got up and said, “Mr. Crumpler, I’m happy these murals were painted. I believe your murals are
important. But I want you to know, and I want this audience to know, that if I understood what
Arnautoff was doing, I would never have reacted in the way that I did.” That is exactly what he said. I
have remembered these words very, very clearly for 50 years.
It took almost eight years to get my murals painted, because of all of the hell I had to go through. And by
that time he, like me, had just graduated. I got my graduate degree, and he had just graduated from
college. So he had a different way of seeing the world.
As a young person you are very tender. But as a more mature and knowledgeable person, you realize
that the point of art is to make you think, to make you see that the world is dynamic. Your confrontation
with difficulty is the very thing you need as a child, particularly in an educational environment, so you
can learn how to deal with those difficulties that you are going to run into throughout your life.
If you run away from history, you’ll never change history. You have to confront history. Art is a teaching
tool. That’s why every culture in the world uses it.
All the conversations and emotions stirred up by a work of art are part of what that work of art means.
My mural is part of the Arnautoff mural, part of its meaning, and its meaning is part of mine. If you
destroy his work of art, you are destroying mine as well.
87
============================================================================
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/07/mura-a07.html
Large turnout to view George Washington murals slated for destruction by San Francisco school board
By Toby Reese
7 August 2019
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) reluctantly opened George Washington High School
for two brief hours last Thursday for a viewing of the historic 13-panel mural by left-wing Depression era
muralist Victor Arnautoff depicting the “Life of Washington.”
Part of the mural depicting the slave trade in America
The murals have been targeted by a right-wing censorship campaign involving SFUSD officials and local
activists, who are using racialist politics to claim that the murals are “traumatizing” students because of
their historical depiction of slavery and the genocide of American Indians. On June 25, the school board
voted unanimously to whitewash the murals as soon as possible, using $600,000 or more of school
district funds.
Crowds lined up for the viewing on Thursday afternoon, including the grandson and great-grandson of
the muralist. According to local news outlets ABC 7, the Mercury News and KPIX 5, the vast majority of
those in attendance were against the destruction of the murals. They have been kept behind closed
doors for months despite broad interest among the public to view them. The event Thursday was kept
virtually secret by the SFUSD until a leak in the press by the San Francisco Chronicle shortly beforehand.
According to Tatiana Sanchez and Erin Allday of the Chronicle, only a limited group of individuals was
informed of the viewing—ostensibly those who had previously requested to see them. This writer had
requested to view the murals multiple times and was notified he was on a list for future viewings, yet he
received no notification from the SFUSD prior to the viewing.
The SFUSD responded later that this was due to an email “labeling error.” Journalist Charles Desmarais
from the Chronicle mentioned in his article that the SFUSD had sent out an unsigned email stating,
“Security will allow visitors entry starting at 1 p.m. and close promptly at 3 p.m.” Desmarais commented
that the Chronicle had requested public access as early as June 2018.
88
News outlets that did attend the event estimated that hundreds of people crowded the doors waiting
for the opening to the school. Several video clips that have circulated show a rapt, diverse public eagerly
viewing the murals and signing a poster with the slogan “Educate Do Not Eradicate.” There were
grandparents, parents, children, teachers, artists and historical preservationists, many seeing the murals
for the first time.
At the event, Peter Arnautoff told CBS news that his grandfather intended to be subversive in painting
the murals. “He was trying to go against the grain of the common narrative of history that was being
probably portrayed in schools at the time,” he said. Arnautoff added that in light of the limited public
knowledge of the event, he was “blown away” by the turnout.
On the Facebook page of the George Washington High School Alumni Association there was an
outpouring of support for the murals. Lope Yap, Jr., vice president of the association, has been a vocal
defender of the murals in recent months and attended the event on Thursday. The organization has
been posting articles and engaging former students and families in discussion about the murals.
The depiction of Manifest Destiny
In one recent comment, Ray Carr stated: “I was a student at GWHS more than 60 years ago. The murals
were an essential part of my education. By examining them closely … I learned about injustice, truth,
oppression, prejudice, and how American history (particularly the concept of ‘Manifest Destiny’) was
being depicted in our textbooks and classes by the ‘victors’ and not the victims. We had many
discussions both in and out of class (and home room) about the murals.”
The outpouring of support for the murals at the open house, despite the “surprise” character of the
showing, exposes the fraud and bad faith of the censorship campaign. The demand to destroy the
murals is not a concession to popular sentiment, but rather a campaign launched by privileged, right-
wing petty-bourgeois elements.
Amy Anderson, the mother of a student at the school and vocal supporter of the censorship campaign,
told the press on Thursday, “Reparations need to happen so the kids know, even though this has been
here for 80 years, your voice matters, you can stand up for change and change is the one constant.”
89
Anderson and others pushed for school board officials to create a “Reflection and Action Group” to
provide a recommendation on what should be done with the murals.
As the World Socialist Web Site wrote in May:
The campaign against the art work is censorious and deeply misguided, bound up with contemporary
identity politics, and has nothing progressive about it … The claim made by Stevon Cook, president of
the San Francisco Board of Education, that Arnautoff’s honest and dynamic murals are ‘offensive to
certain communities’ (New York Times) simply doesn’t hold water. It largely ‘offends’ middle-class
elements who do not want students to encounter complex and challenging art work. In the end, well-
heeled African Americans and other prosperous minorities fear the radicalizing influence of such efforts.
In the wake of the decision by the school board in June to destroy the murals, opposition to the
censorship has become more widespread. On July 2, an “Open Letter” was published on Nonsite.org
declaring that the school board was taking a “wrong-headed approach to art and to history.” The letter
stated:
Let’s set aside the question of the voices calling for the murals’ destruction and their authority to speak
for the communities they claim as their own. What remains is a mistake in the way we react to historical
works of art—ignoring their meaning in favor of our feelings about them—and a mistake in the way we
treat historical works of art—using them as tools for managing feelings, rather than as objects of
interpretation.
The letter, which was sent to the school board, was signed by over 400 academics, artists, authors,
museum curators, journalists and others from around the world who are alarmed and angered by the
censorship in San Francisco.
Dewey Crumpler, the African American artist who was commissioned with creating “response murals”
entitled Multi-Ethnic Heritage when the initial debate over Arnautoff's artwork occurred in the early
1970s, has emerged as a vocal defender of the original murals at George Washington, raising the
obvious point: “Without Arnautoff's murals my murals are irrelevant.” In an online video he explained,
“History is full of discomfort, but that’s the very thing that human beings need to ensure change. …
Arnautoff attempted to give us the clarity of our history as all great works should do.”
On June 28, Bari Weiss wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times in support of keeping the murals,
titled “San Francisco Will Spend $600,000 to Erase History.” In the article, she correctly makes the point
that there are dangerous implications to censorship based on how words or images make people “feel.”
She poses two questions: “What happens when a student suggests that looking at photographs of the
My Lai massacre in history class is too traumatic? Should newspapers avoid printing upsetting images
that illuminate the crisis at the border, like the unforgettable one of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and
his 23-month-old daughter, Valeria, facedown, drowned in the Rio Grande?”
In a letter to the editor in response to Weiss’ article, Stevon Cook and Mark Sanchez, president and vice
president of the San Francisco Board of Education, state that the “heart of the issue” is not censorship
90
but whether a “public school-located piece of art that for 80 years has traumatized students should be
allowed to remain.” The officials say that comparing this issue to showing students photographs of the
My Lai massacre is “malarkey” and a “false-equivalency argument.”
In fact, the references to My Lai and the Ramírez drowning are apt. The argument that Cook and
Sanchez are putting forward has a logic that leads to the suppression of speech and artistic expression
with the most authoritarian implications. Who are to be the arbiters of what is “traumatic”? Is the public
to be kept in blissful ignorance of the contradictions, complexities and crimes of the past and present?
Who benefits? Obviously, those in power.
Cook, who is also the CEO of the technology education company Mission Bit, has a website,
stevoncook.com, that promotes on its “bookshelf” such works as Beyond Good and Evil by the
reactionary irrationalist Friedrich Nietzsche, Money: Master the Game by multimillionaire huckster Tony
Robbins, The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama, Extreme Ownership:
How US Navy SEALs Lead and Win by former Navy SEALs Jocko Willink and Lief Babin, Between the
World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates, and Donald Trump’s The Art of the Deal.
Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and Democratic Party strategists Mike Semler and Bob
Schrum have responded belatedly to popular opposition to the murals’ destruction. The substance of
their objections to the censorship campaign takes the form of a proposed ballot measure and concerns
that the racialist agitation will damage the Democrats’ chances in the 2020 elections.
This is both hypocritical and lacking any political principle. The Democratic Party has for many years
based itself on right-wing racial and identity politics geared to well-off sections of the middle class—
academics, administrators, politicians, executives, trade union bureaucrats—who seek to use the politics
of race and gender to advance their own careers and carve out for themselves a bigger share of the
wealth of the top 10 percent. These politics are designed to conceal the fundamental divisions in
society, which are based on class, and foster divisions within the working class.
Expunging or falsifying history is the hallmark of despotic governments that are fearful of the population
understanding history and drawing connections to contemporary problems. By voting to censor historic
and artistic murals that expose the contradictory character of American social and political
development, the SFUSD officials are setting a precedent with extremely right-wing implications. All
workers and youth and all those who defend democratic rights and artistic freedom must oppose this
criminal action, fighting to unite working people independently of the parties and politicians of the
ruling class.
================================================================================
george washington high school, sf, murals 13 panels (google, news)--allsources
School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural In San Francisco
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural ...
91
https://www.yahoo.com/news/school-board-votes-paint-over-120500949.html
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/school-board-votes-paint-over-george-washington-mural-san-
francisco-68182
YAHOO! News3d
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco high school draws crowd to view George Washington mural some call racist
one of the foremost muralists in the San Francisco area during the Depression. In addition to depicting
Washington as a ...
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/02/california-school-draws-crowd-to-view-mural-some-call-
racist/
Mercury News6d
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large turnout to view George Washington murals slated for destruction by San Francisco school board
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) reluctantly opened George Washington High School
for two brief hours last ...
World Socialist Web Site
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/07/mura-a07.html
92
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black leaders in SF support saving controversial George Washington High School mural
(AP Photo/Eric Risberg) People fill the main entryway of George Washington High School to view the
controversial 13-panel, ...
San Francisco Chronicle on MSN.com
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/black-leaders-in-sf-support-saving-controversial-george-
washington-high-school-mural/ar-AAFr4rb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Case for Keeping San Francisco’s Disputed George Washington Murals
After half a century of intermittent debate and protest, the San Francisco Board of Education voted
unanimously in June to ...
New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/arts/design/george-washington-san-francisco-murals.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
93
The people want Washington High mural to stay — school official not swayed
The controversial 13-panel, 1,600-square foot mural, the "Life of Washington" by Victor Arnautoff, is
seen at George ...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-people-want-washington-high-mural-to-stay-—-school-
official-not-swayed/ar-AAFt7dd
San Francisco Chronicle on MSN.com1d
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public viewing held for controversial mural at SF's George Washington High School
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Hundreds of people showed up at George Washington High School Thursday
afternoon to closely examine a ...
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-07-23/san-francisco-mural-george-washington-slavery-
native-americans
ABC7 San Francisco6d
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural In San Francisco
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural pieces stand out as offensive to members of the community, the board’s ...
YAHOO!
https://news.yahoo.com/school-board-votes-paint-over-120500949.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PD Editorial: Don’t destroy San Francisco school’s Washington mural
The San Francisco Board of Education recently voted to spend $600,000 to paint over a 13-panel mural
at George Washington ...
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/9830114-181/pd-editorial-dont-destroy-the
94
Santa Rosa Press Democrat14dOpinion
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A California school board has voted to paint over a mural of George Washington. Educators want to save
it
A California school board has voted on the fate of an expansive mural dedicated to the life of George
Washington: It's demeaning ... In voting unanimously on June 25 to paint over the 13-panel mural, ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/07/11/san-francisco-mural-academics-george-
washington-history/1689543001/
USA Today
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cultural Figures Oppose Destruction of San Francisco School Murals of George Washington
and artists that have signed an open letter condemning the San Francisco Board of Education’s
unanimous vote to destroy a series of Great Depression–era murals at George Washington High School.
The ...
https://www.artforum.com/news/cultural-figures-oppose-destruction-of-san-francisco-school-murals-
of-george-washington-80248
Artforum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco School Board Votes to Paint Over George Washington Mural
The San Francisco Board of Education unanimously voted last month in favor of painting over a George
Washington ... mural pieces stand out as offensive to members of the community, the board’s ...
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/07/09/san-francisco-school-board-votes-to-paint-over-george-
washington-mural/
The Daily Signal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school board votes to paint over mural of George Washington’s life
The San Francisco Board of Education voted Tuesday to paint over a mural depicting scenes in the life of
George Washington ... school was commissioned by the Federal Art Project — a New Deal program ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/san-francisco-board-of-education-votes-to-paint-
95
over-schools-george-washington-mural/2019/06/27/77e00446-982f-11e9-b503-
8e101553431a_story.html?noredirect=on
Washington Post
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco High School to Paint Over Historic George Washington Mural
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/San-Francisco-to-Paint-Over-Historic-George-Washington-
Mural-512249811.html
NBC Bay Area
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school board votes to paint over ‘degrading’ mural of George Washington’s life
The San Francisco Board of Education voted Tuesday to paint over a mural depicting scenes in the life of
George Washington ... school was commissioned by the Federal Art Project – a New Deal program ...
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/29/san-francisco-school-board-votes-to-paint-over-mural-of-
george-washingtons-life/
Mercury News
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who’s Even Defending the George Washington High Murals At This Point?
Controversial murals at the Richmond District’s George Washington High ... evening San Francisco Board
of Education meeting. The meeting had the sole purpose of hearing from people for or against ...
http://www.sfweekly.com/news/whos-even-defending-the-george-washington-high-murals-at-this-
point/
SF Weekly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Francisco Board of Education will paint over controversial George Washington mural
06/27/2019 UPDATE: On Tuesday, the San Francisco ... George Washington High School. The painting,
which has caused controversy for years, depicts dead American Indians and African American slaves. ...
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/covering-up-controversial-george-washington-mural-in-a-high-school-
96
could-cost-over-600000-220656252.html
YAHOO! News
"The mural tells us about the conquest and colonization of the United States including the genocide of native Americans. The mural reminds us that this nation is born of blood and gore," said Raoul Gonzales.
"We need to know our history ... have it in our face," Peggy Toye said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Controversial George Washington mural to be painted over at San Francisco high school
San Francisco ... at George Washington High School in San Francisco. Wonderful news!
pic.twitter.com/LVE3PGMgwC In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor, statesman and
signer of the ...
https://www.wctv.tv/content/news/Controversial-George-Washington-mural-to-be-painted-over-at-
San-Francisco-high-school-512227782.html
WCTV
Richard Walker, a professor emeritus of geography at the University of California, Berkeley and director
of the history project, Living New Deal, said the Washington mural is meant to show the "uncomfortable
facts" about America's first president. For that, it was among many New Deal works of art considered
radical when created.
"We on the left ought to welcome the honest portrayal," Walker said, adding that destroying a piece of
art "is the worst way we can deal with historic malfeasance, historic evils."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school to paint over mural of George Washington
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor,
and statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2019/0705/San-Francisco-school-to-paint-over-mural-of-George-
Washington
Christian Science Monitor
"Victor Arnautoff was far ahead of his time, and we have yet to catch up with him in terms of making
school curriculum more inclusive and historically accurate," said Harvey Smith, president of the National
New Deal Preservation Association.
"The mural is an immense public treasure during one of the few periods of American history where you
had the federal government supporting public art, public spaces, public goods," Mr. Walker said. "It's
97
been the right that has always attacked the New Deal with its social programs."
Mr. Walker suggested rather than destroying the Washington mural, school officials should simply cover
it and require freshmen to take a course on slavery and California's role in subjugating Native
Americans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------San Francisco to
paint over historic George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO (AP ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and statesman, the 13-
panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images of white pioneers ...
https://wtop.com/education/2019/07/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-george-washington-mural/
WTOP News
The board’s decision last week comes at a time when the legacies of Washington and other historical
figures who owned slaves are being re-examined. Some cities have changed the names of streets and
buildings named after slave owners.
Lope Yap, Jr., vice president of the Washington High School Alumni Association and a 1970 graduates,
disagreed, saying when he was a student and saw the mural he was “awed by the subtle ways Arnautoff
was able to critique American history.” He said the depictions are “treasures, priceless art” and painting
it over is tantamount to pretending the history depicted never happened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco school district to paint over debated George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor,
statesman and signer of the Declaration of Independence, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at
George ...
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/9769833-181/san-francisco-school-district-to
Santa Rosa Press Democrat
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco School Board Votes to Paint Over Controversial George Washington Mural
(SAN FRANCISCO ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor, statesman and signer of
the Declaration of Independence, the 13-panel, 1,600-square foot mural at George Washington High ...
YAHOO!
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
98
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN FRANCISCO (AP ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and statesman, the 13-
panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images of white pioneers ...
Bay News 9
https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/ap-top-news/2019/07/04/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-
george-washington-mural
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to spend over $600K to paint over George Washington mural some considered offensive
SAN FRANCISCO >> San Francisco will ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains images ...
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/07/04/breaking-news/san-francisco-to-spend-over-600k-to-
paint-over-george-washington-mural-considered-offensive-racist/
Honolulu Star-Advertiser
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Years of Debate, San Francisco Votes to Cover Up Controversial 1930s Mural Depicting George
Washington as a Slaveowner
For decades, a series of murals illustrating the life of George Washington on the walls of a San Francisco
high school has been the subject of heated debate. Some say the 13-panel painting, which ...
Artnet
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/san-francisco-votes-cover-controversial-1930s-mural-depicting-
george-washington-colonizer-slave-owner-1589887
For decades, a series of murals illustrating the life of George Washington on the walls of a San Francisco
high school has been the subject of heated debate. Some say the 13-panel painting, which depicts
violence against Native Americans and slaves, should be taken down. Others believe the work of art,
which was painted nearly 90 years ago by Russian-born artist Victor Arnautoff—a noted critic of the
whitewashing of American history—is an invaluable teaching tool.
“There’s been this whole discussion about whitewashing history as if a mural is the only way to talk
about history, or as if that history is an accurate depiction of the full experiences of people of that time,”
Stevon Cook, the president of the school board, told the New York Times. “I think that argument really
limits the nuances in how dynamic that time was and all the contributions African slaves made to the
country, that indigenous Americans gave to settlers. To think that those two depictions are it is baffling.”
99
The school’s alumni association disagrees. “This is a radical and critical work of art,” the association
argued. “There are many New Deal murals depicting the founding of our country; very few even
acknowledge slavery or the Native genocide. The Arnautoff murals should be preserved for their artistic,
historical and educational value. Whitewashing them will simply result in another ‘whitewash’ of the full
truth about American history.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
SAN FRANCISCO, CA — San Francisco will spend ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier,
surveyor and statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School ...
https://www.abc15.com/national/san-francisco-to-paint-over-historic-george-washington-mural
ABC15 Arizona
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Francisco Board of Education will paint over controversial George Washington mural
06/27/2019 UPDATE: On Tuesday, the San Francisco ... George Washington High School. The painting,
which has caused controversy for years, depicts dead American Indians and African American slaves. ...
Yahoo News Canada
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/covering-up-controversial-george-washington-mural-in-a-high-school-
could-cost-over-600000-220656252.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco to paint over historic George Washington mural
San Francisco will spend up to $600,000 ... In addition to depicting Washington as a soldier, surveyor and
statesman, the 13-panel, 1,600-sqaure foot mural at George Washington High School contains ...
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2019/07/04/san-francisco-to-paint-over-debated-george-
washington-mural.html
Toronto Star
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.F. school board to spend at least $375k to cover over 'racist' George Washington mural
Historical images of George Washington’s life will soon vanish from San Francisco’s Washington High
School over accusations of racism. In 1936, Victor Arnautoff, a left-leaning artist who went on to ...
100
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/21/washington-high-schools-racist-george-
washington-m/
Washington Times
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/movement-to-preserve-controversial-mural-gets-support-from-
naacp/?fbclid=IwAR3ygxXbem_0JL1IzyLWPugXxCyi7MPH6uemijmJp-M3lP-AjLFy6olVvGQ
Movement to preserve controversial mural gets support from NAACP. Black community leaders say
mural was intended to 'critique American history'
by Laura Waxmann, Aug. 6, 2019
with Noah Griffin at Third Baptist Church San Francisco.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Black-leaders-in-SF-support-saving-controversial-14284972.php?utm_campaign=CMS+Sharing+Tools+%28Premium%29&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR3je2JQyEubpKO4jfjEhPlS1cGEIVlahq7YmZ2LpZf08MhXcav7FtKQljk
August 6 at 3:50 PM · San Francisco, CA ·
SRO for today's Amos Brown press conference: “That mural must not come down,” said Amos Brown,
president of the San Francisco chapter of the NAACP said at a press conference on Tuesday. The "Life of
Washington" mural at George Washington High School in the Richmond neighorhood holds a mirror to
American history, most importantly, what Brown called the “original sin” of slavery. “Therefore, every
student should know about that history and George Washington was complicit in that barbaric
treatment of my ancestors,” Brown said. He and others are calling for the San Francisco Board of
Education to reverse its decision to paint over the mural. Students and parents have objected to the
images of slavery and the dead body of a Native American lying at the feet of white explorer. Dewey
Crumpler, the artist who painted an alternative mural at the school in the 1960s, said he also supports
101
the mural’s preservation. “It was said in The New York Times that those murals in that school are a
national treasure. I believe that” Crumpler said, “and you don’t destroy African American history or
Native American history.” The NAACP is also calling for the school to make education about the
controversial mural mandatory for all incoming ninth graders.
HIGHLIGHTS – good articles to read:
https://livingnewdeal.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/SFH-memo-to-SFUSD-Options-for-Life-of-
Washington-Mural-Updated-7.16.19.pdf (Living New Deal – options to preserve murals)
https://spectator.org/history-is-an-ugly-business/
History is an Ugly Business
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/movement-to-preserve-controversial-mural-gets-support-from-
naacp/?fbclid=IwAR3_X4jjNPDSL01gGnhf5YzmZWpuPti7Lf2QqYKKnIrTsRfWMx0J6OjZc18
Movement to preserve controversial mural gets support from NAACP - Black community
leaders say mural was intended to ‘critique American history’
https://youtu.be/sZEMpyvdAXQ Professor Dewey Crumpler Defends GWHS Murals
"Expulsion", a 20-minute YouTube video, addresses this controversy:
https://youtu.be/om_LnJKGAE8
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/08/07/mura-a07.html
Large turnout to view George Washington murals slated for destruction by San Francisco school board
102
The GWHS murals by Victor Arnautoff are available for viewing and purchase at Tammy Aramian's
ARTAM site. https://artam.smugmug.com/GWHS/The-Campus/The-Art/
https://artam.smugmug.com/GWHS/The-Campus/The-Art/