1 | P a g e

REGARDING THE MURAL IN KOREATOWN

Besides the readers’ opinions, the L.A. Times covered the stories about the mural (“Mural”) drawn by Beau Stanton on a wall of the Robert F. Kennedy School located in the middle of Koreatown as below.

(1) A mural at a Koreatown school pays homage to classic Hollywood. Some say it’s as offensive as a swastika - Howard Blume at https://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-lausd-ava-gardner-mural-20181211-story.html (Blume 12/11/2018)

(2) LAUSD caves to claims of racism on a school mural. It's deplorable –Christopher Knight at https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-koreatown-mural-censorship-20181212-story.html (Knight 12/13/2018)

(3) An artist met with those who fought to have his mural removed. The tone was cordial, but it won't save the art – Howard Blume at https://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-controversial-ava-gardner-mural-20181213-story.html (Blume 12/14/2018)

(4) Artist Shepard Fairey said he will insist on removal of his Robert F. Kennedy mural if LAUSD paints over controversial artwork at school – Howard Blume at https://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-shepard-fairey-kennedys-defend-mural-20181216-story.html (Blume 12/16/2018)

(5) L.A. Unified pauses plan to paint over the Ava Gardner mural targeted by Korean activists – Howard Blume at https://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-mural-destruction-on-hold-20181217-story.html (Blume 12/17/2018)

(6) There’s no shortage of real outrages these days. L.A. Unified doesn’t need to overreact to a perceived one by the Times Editorial Board at https://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-rising-sunburst-ava-20181218-story.html (Editorial 12/18/2018)

(7) Mural uproar teaches LAUSD a lesson: Artists have a moral right against censorship - Christopher Knight at https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-koreatown-mural-censorship-20181219-story.html (Knight 12/19/2018) The above articles, critiques and editorial covered the issues surrounding the Mural, in misleading and mischaracterizing ways and were off the points as to important issues. Below are my responses thereto. 1. Similarity: Zara’s Pajama

In 2014, Zara listed the "sheriff" shirt on its website for $22 as part of a fashion collection. The long-sleeved shirt featured a yellow star to the left of the chest, which was claimed to be reminiscent of the six-point Jewish Star of David. In the concentration camps during the Holocaust, Jews were forced to wear uniforms

2 | P a g e

having a yellow triangle over a red triangle to form the Star of David or a yellow star identified them as Jewish.

Zara said the shirt was designed to be part of a Wild West clothing theme and the star was intended as a sheriff's badge. Indeed, the star of the pajama stated in capital letters “SHERIFF”.

If we follow Knight’s ways of analysis, Zara’s pajama is not even close to the

concentration camp uniform. Lines are horizontal on the pajama while the stripes are vertical on the uniform. Colors are also different. How about the number of lines, the thickness of the lines, the ratio between the different lines? How about the star? The uniform had clear black lines on the yellow star which the pajama did not have, and the pajama’s star clearly says “SHERIFF” in capital letters which the designer explained to have got the inspiration from. In spite of the differences, Zara having thousands of stores in the world still decided to take it down from its website and stores and stopped manufacturing and selling the pajama, costs of which exceeded far more than $20,000. As Blume wrote in his article about the Mural, the innocent designer of Zara must have been stunned and disappointed. (Blume

12/11/2018). According to Knight’s analysis, this incident

may mean we would have to go after all stripes or the stars in the sky which have been always in the fashion industry of the whole world. Indeed, during the controversy about Zara’s pajama, there was a silly comment along the same line stating that maybe we should remove Woody (an animation character in the Toy Story series) from toy stores and the animations as it wears the sheriff’s star.

3 | P a g e

However, in spite of the differences, “[t]o survivors of the Holocaust and their relatives and friends in Israel,” that message was “crystal clear.” Zara in response said in its statement “We would not want any of our products or designs to be perceived as disrespectful or offensive,” while “[t]he design of the T-shirt was only inspired by the sheriff’s stars from the classic Western films, as the claim of the T-shirt says.”

Along the same line, “Art is intended to celebrate the human spirit, not to offend the community… If we have offended anybody, I apologize.” (emphasis added) said LAUSD Superintendent Roberto Martinez during a news conference regarding the Mural on 12/6/2018.

About Zara’s pajama, the L.A. Times did not raise any issue on dissimilarities. It only said “The shirt has horizontal blue and white stripes and bears a six-pointed yellow star on the left side of the chest. A zoomed-in view of the picture on Zara's website shows the word "sheriff" printed on the star.”1

The L.A. Times did not raise any issue about lack of bad intent, or the actual inspiration having nothing to do with the concentration camp, while admitting to know the inspiration was the sheriff star. Nor did the Times say “the [stripes or the stars in the pajama] has different colors and proportions, and that background images like it are common online.” (emphasis added) (Editorial 12/18/2018). Nor was the Times concerned at all about freedom of expression, censorship, more than $20,000 costs, or wrong lessons to be given to children in the entire U.S. and even the whole world. Nor did its editorial state “One infamous use of that pattern doesn’t erase centuries of other uses, or poison all other uses going forward.” (emphasis added)(Editorial 12/18/2018). Knight did not say Zara’s move was “irresponsible and insupportable”. Knight did not say “To claim today that any [stars or stripe patterns] represent [the concentration camp uniform] is absurd on its face.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018) or “It’s also deplorable. Deceptive claims have been weaponized to shut down free speech.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018).2 Very likely, Blume and Knight would try to distinguish the Mural incident from the Zara’s pajama incident, and we will wait for it with the hope that this time the discussions will be put in voices of cooler heads said by a mature, civil, respectful, courteous and professional person who would be able to stay on point

1 https://www.latimes.com/fashion/alltherage/la-ar-zara-sheriff-holocaust-shirt-20140827-story.html 2 Artistically speaking, Knight probably had even less use for the fashion than the mural (Knight 12/13/2018) so that he did not even know about the Zara pajama, or probably he knew about it but caved in.

4 | P a g e

based on reasonably accurate understanding about what the issues are and what the facts are. 2. Similarity: Urban Outfitters Tapestry

Urban Outfitters was selling a tapestry for $69.99 as part of their Assembly Home collection. Jewish communities raised an issue because to them it looked like the concentration camp uniforms that Jewish gay male prisoners were forced to wear.

“Whether intentional or not, this gray and white striped pattern and pink triangle combination is deeply offensive and should not be mainstreamed into popular culture,” (emphasis added) said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor. “We urge Urban Outfitters to immediately

remove the product eerily reminiscent of clothing forced upon the victims of the Holocaust from their stores and online.”3

3 https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/adl-to-urban-outfitters-remove-tapestry-eerily-reminiscent-of-holocaust-garb

5 | P a g e

However, if seen as a whole, besides the same issues of alleged lack of similarities as to color, pattern, direction and number of lines, ratio, etc., the tapestry at issue looked a lot more different from the encampment uniform, especially because the arrangement and placement of pink triangles. However, the ADL’ National Director claimed the combination of grey stripes and the pink triangles was clear enough for finding that it is deeply offensive and should not be mainstreamed. Again, as to the Urban Outfitters’ tapestry, the L.A. Times never expressed any concern about dissimilarities or the future of triangles or stripes patterns having existed in the past for thousands of years and to be created in the future. 3. Extrinsic/Intrinsic Analysis

In both of the above cases, from the view of a third person who did not suffer nor learned enough about the Nazi’s Concentration Camp, the images at issue may be found not similar enough to offend the Jewish community members, but from the view of the survivors and their relatives and friends, their messages were “crystal clear”. The above examples show that it is not only about the extrinsic analysis about shapes, arrangement and colors, but the intrinsic analysis as to overall impression from the view of the persons who suffered the atrocities of the Nazis or the Imperialists.

In other words, perspectives matter. A performance of splashing blood on a naked woman’s body may be an innocent art, but to a rape victim, it may be only reminiscent of the violence she suffered, and her complaint should not be called a “stupid” or “deceptive” claim.4 It would be stupid and even deceptive to say

“no such crime of rape appears anywhere in the performance” by highlighting only the differences while completely shutting the ears against the victim’s voice.

4 Through this choice of words “stupid” and “deceptive”, they imply that getting a certain impression from a certain thing (i.e. the Mural) is a result of either the viewer’s level of intelligence, or the viewer’s deliberate choice. This is not true. Getting the impression of the rising sun flag from the Mural is not a choice but a feeling formed without conscious thought. Calling it stupid and even deceptive is censorship on freedom of speech in attempts to silence the viewers from expressing their feelings.

6 | P a g e

One may say such decisions should not be made solely based on the intrinsic analysis, and I would say “vice versa”. Blume, Knight and Fairy passed such a “hasty” judgment upon the Asian community that it was “stupid” that the community members felt offended by the Mural, based on their own analysis on color, shape, ratio, arrangement, etc.

Having completely failed, or refused, to consider the view of the victims at all, Knight5 hastily concludes on his own “Yet, the [WCC] letter keeps repeating the falsehood. In reality, no such flag appears anywhere in Stanton’s mural.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018). Knight left no room for discussion with the survivors having their own views. From his view, there is no need to hear from the survivors because no such flag appears anywhere in the Mural, and disagreeing with him would simply be stupid and even false.

Or, to a certain extent, they conducted a very subjective analysis conducted from the view of persons who never suffered from nor really learned enough about, the atrocities committed by the Japanese Imperialists and how Asians would feel about the Rising Sun Symbol. Even the extrinsic analysis conducted by Blume, Knight and Fairey was too simplistic. From only their own view, they conclude the patterns are different only because the sun rays pattern on the Mural differ in appearance from those on the rising-sun flag as the flag has 32 red-and-white bands but the Mural has 42 bands of varying sizes in blue and reddish orange. (Blume 12/11/2018).

In the above examples, both Zara and Urban Outfitters stopped selling the pajamas and the tapestries bearing the designs created by their designers while they had dissimilarities and did not intend to offend anyone. However, to the survivors and their relatives and friends, the designs at issue depicted the concentration camp uniforms and the offensive message was crystal clear because there were enough similarities to make them feel offended and hurt. To the survivors of the Japanese Imperialism, the Mural “depicts” the Rising Sun Flag of the Japanese Imperialism from World War II.

5 “Shocker, the non-Korean columnist thinks the mural is benign, and can’t pause for a moment to try to understand why the imagery might be hurtful to another group of people.” (Hector Sanchez) – one of the comments on the L.A. Times website.

7 | P a g e

4. Comparisons First of all, there was some differences of the colors of the “reddish” rays.

The first one below is not really accurate showing of the actual color while others are closer to the real color.

(LA Times 12/13, 19 & 22/2018) (LA Times 12/21/2018)

(NPR 12/11/2018) (KNX 12/6/2018)

Even comparing the flag pattern in red and reddish orange does not really make a big difference anyways.

8 | P a g e

Angie Crouch’s twitter6 displayed a problematic comparison. On her twitter, Crouch presented this misleading side-by-side comparison showing only a part of the Mural by cutting sides thereof and the rising sun flag having a focal point that is obviously different from the Mural’s.

The impression mainly

comes from the thick red or reddish lines and a certain focal point in the middle of the red circle in the rising sun flag and on the edge of Eva Gardner’s eye in the Mural.

6 Citing to Crouch’s twitter, NBC also has been posting this misleading comparison on its website for their viewers. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/LAUSD-Removing-Mural-claims-of-Japanese-flag-502512701.html

9 | P a g e

As shown below, having blue background instead of white background does not really make it different because it is the thick red lines spreading out, which is the dominant impression the rising sun flag pattern gives.

Did you realize on page 5, the picture of the mural was not really the Mural? It was a combination of Eva Gardner and the Cocoanut Grove of the Mural, and the rising sun flag pattern. Did it really matter that the flag has 32 red-and-white bands but the Mural has 42 bands of varying sizes in blue and reddish orange? Even knowing of such combination of thick reddish lines and a very close focal point (if not the same), after looking at the pictures above, would you say it

10 | P a g e

was “stupid” to get the impressions of the rising sun flag from the view of the survivors and their relatives and friends? 5. Misstatement of the Issue: Pattern

Blume and Knight in their writings “began the lengthy diatribe with a falsehood.” They oversimplified, exaggerated and mischaracterized our discussion, and claimed that we object to any and all sun ray patterns such as the torch of freedom held aloft by the Statue of Liberty and motifs in the ceiling at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre, on the doors of the Oviatt Building in the financial district, on the pyramid atop the Central Library, in the Wiltern theater a couple blocks west of RFK Schools and many more.

Knight said “To claim today that any radiating light beams represent the flag of Imperial Japan is absurd on its face.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018), and “For the artist, the radiance symbolizes peace — illumination made manifest, an inescapable irony in the face of the vicious attack on the RFK Schools mural.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018).

Such misstatement is simply “stupid” and “false”. As the Jewish community never asked for banning all stripes or stars, the Asian community never requested for banning all radiating light beams.

There is a famous saying that “the copyright laws protect expressions, not idea.” It means millions of different artists can draw a rose (idea) in zillions of different ways (expression), and the Copyright Laws protects not the idea of a rose, but the different expressions of a rose that different designers would create. In other words, a designer after drawing a rose in her own way, cannot ban other designers from drawing a rose especially when they draw it in their own ways, but can seek protections for her work when another copies her expressions of a rose. The failure to understand what is at issue discloses their failure to distinguish idea (a sunburst pattern) from expression (how the Mural depicts the pattern) as well as their failure to consider and understand the survivors’ view.

“At issue” is the way that sun rays were expressed. It is not any and all sun rays pattern but the pattern on the rising-sun flag. To those who made silly comments expressing concerns about protecting sunrays, sun chips and even the sun, let me state it again loud and clear. Don’t be concerned about sun chips.

“At issue are the rays radiating out from her face” said Blume, which appears to be an objective statement of fact, but is in fact nothing but Blume’s mischaracterization. (emphasis added) (Blume 12/11/2018). Knight also said “To claim today that any radiating light beams represent the flag of Imperial Japan is absurd on its face.” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/13/2018).

11 | P a g e

Such a mischaracterization goes on even in the Times Editorial stating “Stanton’s mural doesn’t “suggest” the battle flag just because it uses a sunburst pattern any more than innumerable other works with a sunburst pattern do.” (emphasis added) (Editorial 12/18/2018). The editorial even goes “One infamous use of that pattern doesn’t erase centuries of other uses, or poison all other uses going forward.” (emphasis added)(Editorial 12/18/2018). Please stay on point. 6. Intent: Hindu Swastika, Sacred Navajo Symbol And Arizona State’s Flag

In 2007, Zara withdrew its $78 handbag in response to complaints from Jewish communities. It in fact was embroidered with Hindu and Buddhist symbols that resemble swastikas. The bags were produced by a supplier in India.

The Anti-Defamation League found no intent to offend the Jewish community, and even stated “The suggestion that Zara is ‘anti-Semitic’ is false.” The ADL said in a statement. “And the ‘bags with swastikas’ reference involves an isolated incident that Zara’s parent company quickly remedied.”

Based on the misleading characterization of the issue, Blume stated “The motif appears in many places, including the flag of Arizona.” (Blume 12/11/2018). While it comes from Blume’s mischaracterization or failure to understand the issue, it in fact raises a few issues worth of discussing together. First, assuming for the discussion’s sake that it is similar enough with the Imperialist flag, Arizona flag, as everyone knows, existed before the Imperialist flag. It is like Hindu Swastika or sacred Navajo symbols7 having existed long before Nazi Swastika. Should we, or can we, ban these?

When a wrong question is asked, an answer thereto is likely to be wrong too. Blume again was off the point on this.

7 www.cpr.org/news/story/those-are-sacred-navajo-symbols-not-swastikas-on-that-pueblo-art-collectors-rug (Thanks “joyous111”. While we may have disagreements, I heard your point and appreciated the link.)

12 | P a g e

Jeong suggested that his group would go after other similar artistic

representations of sun rays, which are not hard to find. The state flag of Arizona, for example, much more closely resembles the Japanese flag that the critics find offensive —though it, too, has nothing to do with Japan, let alone Japanese imperialism. “How about a swastika on the flag of Arizona?” Jeong said. “Is that objectionable?” (Blume 12/14/2018) Not only did he ask a wrong question off the point, Blume also failed to, or

deliberately omitted to, include the whole answers I gave at the news conference on 12/13/2018. While the question was off the point, I gave him the answers on point by clearly stating that whenever something like that happens, it would not be the reason for fighting but discussing together8 and trying to resolve the issues together because when there is no hatred intended, there would be no reason for fighting. It may be hard for immature, silly, disrespectful persons, but it should not be too hard for mature, wise and respectful persons to discuss the issues in “cooler and more thoughtful voices.”

Further, another fundamental problem is that the L.A. Times articles and critics took an overly simplistic approach that there was no bad intent, and therefore, we should keep the mural. They completely failed to consider other factors a mature, respectful and reasonable persons would consider as below.

The L.A. Times in fact improperly framed the whole discussion with a wrong question, “should we, or can we, ban the sacred Navajo symbols or Hindu Swastikas?” The question is wrong because it is not the matter of a fight where one side should completely win against the other. The L.A. Times said “The episode is just the latest example of people seeking to erase something in the public eye that offends them, even when no offense was meant.” (Editorial 12/18/2018). Yes, to the extent I know, this is the fourth and the last so far after Zara’s pajama and handbag and Urban Outfitter’s tapestry, where the Jewish people sought to erase the designs in their eye that offends them, even when no offense was meant.

Obviously, Shepard Fairey also saw this matter in the same simplistic way. He said he would insist on the removal of his large outdoor portrait of Robert F. Kennedy if the Mural is removed (Blume 12/16/2018) which he called “the only leverage” for fighting. (Blume 12/16/2018).

The right question would be what we should consider in order to handle such issues together as a mature, caring and respectful community member to

8 Hopefully, Blume would get it, and would not avoid it, this time.

13 | P a g e

another because the said issue should not be the reason for fighting against each other but discussing together, as I told Blume in response to his own question.

Further, we should also ask another question which leads us to the next issue. The artist did not mean anything bad, and therefore, there should be no problem whatsoever? When there is no bad intent, “Freedom of Expression” is the only thing to be considered?

7. Time, Place, Manner And Respect

The L.A. Times calls the Mural a public art, while it claims there should be no censorship whatsoever in order to leave it up solely to an individual artist. Obviously, we are not talking about a small painting hung on a wall of an individual’s home, but a gigantic mural on a wall of a public school in Koreatown, which the community members cannot help but seeing in front of their home or work places. Even for a private speech, the US Supreme Court recognized that the time, place and manner of the speech matter.

Notwithstanding the law, one thing should be very clear even to the L.A. Times. We’d rather not display a Hindu Swastika or a sacred Navajo symbol on a gigantic wall of a public school in the middle of Jewish towns. It is a matter of minimum level of respect, care, courtesy and decency, not censorship, to be shown for the Jewish community as a community member to another. By the same logic, we would not want to do the performance of splashing blood on a naked woman’s body in front of a rape victim’s home especially when the victim expresses her feelings thereabout even if the performing artist did not intend to offend the victim and got the inspiration from something that has nothing to do with rape. Another problem is that none of Fairey, Knight and Blume had ever seriously looked at the mural before this became an issue, nor would get to see the Mural often times in the future, while it has been, and will be, Koreans and other Asians living and working nearby and their children who would have to see the gigantic mural at the public school. Should the entire U.S. control on the mural in each and every local area? Or even when there are a substantial number of residents who really suffer, if they are not majority in the U.S. or even locally, their feelings should be simply ignored even when we are talking about the gigantic mural in a public building in their town?

While the L.A. Times was discussing the issue with a simplistic approach, there were a lot more thoughtful and considerate comments beneath the articles on the website for proper discussions on point.

One commentator through his comment asked questions. Wasn’t the placement of the Mural insensitive? Shouldn’t it matter that the community

14 | P a g e

members will be most often confronted with these images to "get over" their traumatic associations? If we value the diversity of our ethnic communities, shouldn’t some measure of autonomy be tolerated? (Jack Din)

“The artist here is described as 'innocent', but ignorance of history is not an excuse, especially when it's about a public mural on a school located in the largest Korean-American community in the US. This isn't a matter of censorship,9 but of being aware of the context of the local community and their history. If a public mural projecting Buddhist symbol (a swastika sign with different meaning, colors, design and angle) was displayed in the largest Jewish community10, no artist would be portrayed as 'innocent' nor removing the mural will be called deplorable” (emphasis added) even if the artist did not mean any hatred. (ShiaJO). 8. He Did Not Know? But Now He Knows. Then, What?

While investigating on the hate symbol issues, I recently learned about the Sig Rune the original meaning of which in the ancient times is a victory and the sun, but during World War II, it was used by Nazi military units most responsible for the genocidal killing of millions of Jews in the Holocaust.

Before learning this or knowing only the ancient meaning thereof, if an artist makes a badge

having the symbol as an artwork, puts it on his jacket and visits a Jewish community, the person will likely hear from a Jewish person about what it means and why it would offend the Jewish community. The artist would likely say, “I did not know about it, nor meant to offend anybody.” However, the conversation should not, and would not, stop there.

While it may be different depending on different individuals, further responses of a mature and respectful person would be “I am sorry if I hurt your feelings in anyways while I did not mean it at all.”, not “I did not mean any offense, I simply had no idea about the symbol, and therefore, I will keep it even in the Jewish towns because it is an innocent art.” 9 National Coalition Against Censorship states on its website “When private individuals agitate to eliminate TV programs they dislike, or threaten to boycott the companies that support those programs with advertising dollars, they are certainly trying to censor artistic expression and interfere with the free speech of others. But their actions are perfectly legal; in fact, their protests are protected by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.” (emphasis added) (https://ncac.org/resource/what-is-censorship). 10 “Contextmatters.” said Anti-Defamation League director Amanda Susskind.

15 | P a g e

Again, the discussion does not stop there in reality. While at the beginning, the artist did not know about the meaning of the Sig Rune, now he knows. What is the artist going to do after knowing about the Sig Rune being a hate symbol? The same question goes to Blume, Knight, Fairey and Stanton.

Of course, different persons may have different thoughts. The question really is what a mature, caring and respectful person (not an immature, selfish and disrespectful person) should do after learning about the symbol, especially in Jewish towns?

Very likely, the response from Blume, Knight and Fairey would be that the issues are different between the Mural and the Sig Rune because the Mural does not look like the rising sun flag, while the above example of the Sig Rune is the Sig Rune itself.

How about another hypothetical situation where the artist has created this picture presenting different shapes, thickness, number of lines, ratio, colors and other elements presenting different messages? Shouldn’t the mature, caring and respectful person’s response be that “I would never keep it at least in the Jewish towns”, notwithstanding that the Sig Rune in fact had good

meanings like victory and sun and the artist did not know about the Sig Rune being a hate symbol too?

Again, in fact, the question came from the example of the Sig Rune itself. Shouldn’t the mature, caring and respectful person’s response be that “I would not keep it at least in the Jewish towns”? If yes, why so? For it is a matter of being respectful as a community member to another in the diversified society.

Unlike the L.A. Times, LAUSD properly understood this question, and tried to answer on point. LAUSD Superintendent Martinez understood the above, and showed proper care and respect for the survivors and their community by stating “The artist’s good intentions are not the issue. As beautiful as they might be, Confederate statues have memories and mean a lot of different things to different people. It’s the same thing here because for many older generations of Koreans, this mural might evoke memories of the past.” (emphasis added) (Blume 12/11/2018). Knight mischaracterized it to be “caving in” which shows his complete failure to understand what the issue really is.

Very likely, one may ask “will we have a neighborhood-by-neighborhood definition of art, driven by an ever-shifting critical mass of shared ethnic and cultural experiences?” (Mitch Paradise). This question leads us to the next issue.

16 | P a g e

9. Is This Hate Symbol Issue Only for Koreans? Is the rising sun flag a local issue? The common misunderstanding on the issues of the rising sun flag or the Japanese Imperialists’ atrocities is that it is an issue between Koreans and Japanese. The first response thereto would be how about the Nazi Swastika and the German Nazi’s atrocities? Would it be the issue between only Germans and Jews? While I am sure non-Asians’ or even second or third generation of Asian Americans’ understanding would be superficial, I would not go over here the details as to how many civilians in Asian countries were raped, tortured, enslaved, experimented and killed because it would require extensive amount of time to go over, which in fact should be taught by schools.11

In fact, it is not only about Asians who suffered. As everybody should know, Japanese Imperialists attacked the Pearl Harbor, and mistreated, abused, tortured and killed American prisoners of war during World War II. Not only the United States, but also many other countries such as the United Kingdom, China, the Soviet Union, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France, the Netherlands and the Philippines held military tribunals to punish thousands of Japanese war criminals. Obviously, below12 is only a small part of Japanese atrocities against American soldiers, never taught by anyone in the U.S.

George HW Bush has not only served as President of the United States

but also as a pilot during WWII - a pilot who survived being shot down over the Pacific during an American air raid on the Japanese-controlled island of Chichi Jima in September of 1944. Nine airmen survived being shot down during the raid, but Bush was the only one that managed to avoid capture, a result of bailing out of his plane earliest, luck in procuring a life raft, and protection by covering fire from American planes to keep Japanese boats at bay. Though Bush’s escape was harrowing and terrifying, the eight other surviving airmen were doomed to experience worse…

All were beaten, tortured, and eventually killed by beheading, impalement, or being clubbed, but the crimes against them did not end with death. According to Bradley’s sources, Major Sueo Matoba had prisoners’ flesh prepared for an officers’ feast and a party in his quarters, and Captain

11 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/new-teacher-s-guide-comfort-women-be-distributed-across-california-n959021 12 http://www.pacificatrocities.org/blog/torture-execution-and-cannibalism-on-chichi-jima-and-george-hw-bushs-narrow-escape ; see also https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2018/12/01/george-hw-bush-pearl-harbor-changed-everything-world-war-ii-made-him-hero/?utm_term=.28605fba77a8

17 | P a g e

Shizuo Yoshii hosted a similarly grim feast of his own. General Yoshio Tachibana and Rear Admiral Kunizo Mori, the army and navy commanders of the island, were two notable participants in the acts of cannibalism. Four American airmen were executed for the purpose of being partially consumed, with flesh being removed from their thighs and their livers being served as

“delicacies.” On Chichi Jima, the

guilty officers committed cannibalism for both alleged physical and spiritual benefits as well as further showing dominance over their captives as revenge for American air raids. Of Bush’s eight fellow

airmen, the bodies of four were butchered for cannibalistic purposes: Marve Mershon, Floyd Hall, Jimmy Dye, and Warren Earl Vaughn… (emphasis added). 10. Importance of the Lessons

The real problem is not only failing to know about Japanese Imperialists horrible misconducts, but failing to understand what lessons we should learn and why they are important. For decades, we always had a good example showing the differences between one who learned proper lessons and another who failed to do so.

18 | P a g e

The German Chancellor would never honor Nazi war criminals in German National Cemetery and officially call the Nazi soldiers the nation’s heroes. The German Chancellor would not deny the German government’s involvement in the Holocaust nor refuse to apologize therefor. The German Chancellor would not claim the Nazi Swastika is the German national flag and therefore the German army, navy and air force should use it. The German Chancellor would not vigorously try to re-arm Germany.

Even if German Chancellor attempts to do any of the above, German people would not allow it. In fact, German Chancellor apologized for Holocaust on multiple times, criminalized the display or possession of the Nazi Swastika and the Sig Rune, and either disbanded or transferred its armed forces to a multinational level such as Multinational Corps North East. Germans learned proper lessons very loud and clear, and would always be the very first ones to fight against the hate crimes and the white supremacists. Germans would never display the Nazi swastika flag at sports games to cheer German athletes.

On the other hand, literally all of the above things that German Chancellor would never do and German people would never tolerate, have been continuously, officially and systematically done by Japanese Prime Minister, and even worse, Japanese people see no problem with it.

It is not about the difference of the peoples between Germany and Japan, but the difference of the education between Germany and Japan.

19 | P a g e

Most Americans also find no problem with Japanese Prime Minister;

officially designating and visiting the graves of Imperialist war criminals at Yasukuni Shrine13; officially calling the war criminals national heroes; officially denying Japanese government’s involvement in the atrocities such as sex slaves, Unit 731, multiple massacres including Nanjing Massacre, forced labors as laborer and soldiers, and atrocities including cannibalism committed against POWs including American soldiers; and officially refusing to apologize14 thereabout; officially using the rising sun flag for its army, navy and air force; and vigorously rearming Japan. Japan now is about to acquire its first aircraft carrier since World

13 Yasukuni Shrine in its Book of Souls has 1,068 war criminals convicted of war crimes by a post-World War II court. Of those, 14 are convicted Class A war criminals. 14 “Apologizing is part of being a grown-up nation. Japan did terrible things to people who are still alive, and whose children have suffered from the legacy in powerful ways. That the prime minister cannot bring himself to say the words “I’m sorry” does them no credit. Psalm 51:17 teaches: “A broken and contrite heart, dear God, You will not despise.” To humble oneself is not an act of humiliation, but one of spiritual grandeur.” (emphasis added) Rabbi David Wolpe at http://time.com/3997990/japanese-prime-minister-apology/.

20 | P a g e

War II as well as one hundreds of F-35 stealth jets, etc. in addition to what they have already had.

One may say that it should be up to a country’s own decision as to arming itself. Maybe that is how it should be. Germany has made its own decision. Likewise, Japan is also making its own decision. However, there is a big difference between the two as to whether they learned proper lessons from the history. If we fail to learn proper lessons, we would also fail to prevent such a tragic history from repeating.

World War II in Europe is a good example. Right after the end of World War I, the peoples in Europe including Germany did not learn proper lessons. In violation of the Treaty of Versailles, the German Rearmament began as soon as the treaty was signed, on a small, secret and informal basis, but it was massively expanded after the Nazi Party came to power in 1933. The rearmament program quickly increased the size of the German officer corps, and organizing the growing army would be their primary task until the outbreak of World War II in September 1939.

Again, I would not ask us to argue back and forth about the issue of Japanese Rearmament itself. However, I would ask all of us to consider the differences of conducts and statements between German Chancellor and Japanese Prime Minister. I would ask all of us to see the differences between the ones who learned proper lessons and the others who did not. I would ask all of us to see the differences as to how Germany and Japan are treating the Nazism, the Imperialism and their symbols. Are they trying to prevent the tragic history from repeating, or promote it? I ask all of us to ask ourselves whether we are learning proper lessons.

In this context, it would be a mistake to say that the rising sun flag is a matter of the local community in Koreatown, or the atrocities committed by Japanese Imperialists are the matters of only apologies and adversary sentiment between Korea as a victim and Japan15 as an offender. However, Knight titled his so-called critique on 12/13/2018 “LAUSD caves to claims of racism on a school mural. It’s deplorable.” (emphasis added), which again shows he was off the point. 11. False Statement: Trivialization

Blume continuously and deliberately tried to trivialize the issue as a matter raised by a small group of extreme and voluble Korean activists. At the very

15 Again, I love Japan and its people as well as Japanese Americans in the U.S. However, it is such a tragedy even for Japanese people themselves that Japan unlike Germany still shows that it did not learn lessons from history yet.

21 | P a g e

first news conference on December 6, 2018 at the RFK Library where Blume was present, a Korean resident Kisuk Jun presented to Superintendent Martinez the petitions signed by 1,000 residents, and dozens of organizations from not only Korean but also Chinese communities also co-signed the WCC letter on November 15, 2018.

Knowing all of these, Blume never called us “residents”16 or “Asian”. Rather, continuously and deliberately, Blume called us “[l]ocal activists” (Blume 12/11/2018), “Korean groups” (Blume 12/11/2018), “Local activists” (Blume 12/11/2018), “local Korean activists” (Blume 12/14/2018) and “[t]he protests of the Wilshire Community Coalition — with its long list of local groups and scholars” (Blume 12/11/2018).

This shows a deliberate choice of mischaracterizing words, which is deplorable. He chose “local activists”, not residents, neighbors, parents, victims, nor survivors, even after interviewing the survivors and their descendants. By saying local activists, Blume attempts to imply a small group of aggressive and extreme people who are trying to control the entire community and put random censorship based on silly offensive feeling that are not really shared by the people.

Indeed, Knight picked it in exactly the same way, and in very childish ways criticized Koreans based on such deliberately mischaracterized misperception which is simply false. Knight stated the issue was raised by “[a] small but voluble Korean American neighborhood group” (emphasis added) (Knight 12/19/2018) and “Protesters” (Knight 12/19/2018) wearing “a small NIMBY outfit”. (Knight 12/13/2018).

Probably misled by Blume’s and Knights’ mischaracterization, one of the Kennedy descendants said, “We cannot allow small groups to dictate what is and what is not public art.” (emphasis added) (Blume 12/16/2018). Fairey also said, “The most extreme voices should not define the community.” (Blume 12/16/2018). Then, The L.A. Times Editorial again called us “some Korean activists and community groups” (emphasis added) (Editorial 12/18/2018).

In those L.A. Times’ articles, critiques and editorial, which is to be nationally reputable as opposed to locally refutable, there was no care or respect for residents, neighbors, parents, victims, or survivors. Rather, they continuously and deliberately

16 Please double check with me. I did try to see if Blume ever called us “residents”, but failed to find it in Blume or Knight’s articles. I hope at least a few times Blume did so but I missed, in order to prove there was a minimum level of decency of the so-called journalism and the so-called articles. Please let me know if I missed it.

22 | P a g e

mischaracterized and trivialized the issue as if it is nothing but a protest by a small group of extreme and voluble activists. Even worse, Knight has made it extremely silly by saying “The WCC attack came 18 months later, in the fall of 2018 — just weeks after Mayor Eric Garcetti inaugurated the first “bridge shelter””.17 Reading this, I laughed. It was such a childish failure to differ being in a chronological order from being in a causal relationship. Knight either did not know the so-called first bridge shelter is in LA Downtown, not Koreatown, or was attempting to deliberately mischaracterize the whole discussion anyways. Either way, it is stupid or deplorable.

Maybe he thinks anything earlier causes everything later. How about the Mural issue being raised after the World Series Games? How about this issue being raised after the anti-semantic attacks, the neo-Nazis’ rallies, and the continuously disregarded complaints about the Mural from Korean residents over the time? Not knowing enough at all, simply sitting at the desk, he threw an “easy, high-profile” false, silly and irresponsible accusation that only proves his laziness and ignorance. 12. False Statements: Personal Attack on Stanton

Knight stated “The Wilshire Community Coalition’s letter even goes so far as to imply that the artist meant to terrorize its neighborhood, citing sections of the Penal Code of California. Yet, every citation requires proof of harmful intent to qualify a mural for removal, which is a direct attack on the artist’s integrity. I’m no lawyer, but the letter is, if not slanderous, surely shameful. That LAUSD has given credence to such nonsense is dispiriting.” (Knight 12/13/2018).

The WCC letter on the second page in fact expressly stated that “We understand that the Artists of the RFK Mural Festival claim did not intend to offend anyone or promote hate crimes” and quoted Stanton’s explanations about what he meant to draw.

Further, the letter on page 6 quoted the Penal Code to explain “[t] he law requires one to take it down even if one commits such offense in reckless disregard of the risk of terrorizing because of the display of such symbols” (emphasis added), which clearly refers to the issue of the school continuing to display the Mural, not Stanton having drawn the Mural with any bad intent.

In addition, right thereafter, the letter also discusses three exemplary incidents including Zara’s pajama incident where no hatred was intended but prompt actions were taken by schools and Zara.

17 In fact, this started from Blume stating “while the mural was part of a 2016 project, Local Activists began raising objections this fall.” (Blumes 12/11/2018).

23 | P a g e

“I’m no [art critic], but [Knight’s writing] is, if not slanderous, surely shameful.”

13. Omission of the Simple Truth: What Should Have Been Done One simple truth that none of the L.A. Times articles ever discussed is that keeping the gigantic mural in the middle of the Koreatown at a public school as a public building would continue to hurt Koreans and other Asians living and working nearby, notwithstanding how Blume, Knight or Fairey may think on their own. There were so many childish and silly comments stating it looks different to them so they do not feel anything, which completely fails to address where all of these discussions started from and deplorably fails to show minimum level of respect and care about Koreans and other Asians. Sheperd Fairey’s comment was even more appalling when he said “A small group should not control the entire community” (emphasis added), which shows a complete lack of respect and care about minority groups. It is not about censorship. Rather, it is about doing what should have been done before the Mural was drawn. The City Ordinance No. 182706 in fact requires prior notifications about the location and the contents of a mural to the City Councilman’s office, the Neighborhood Council and the public, as well as meetings with the community members before the mural is drawn. One of the purposes of the mural regulations is that consideration will be given to equalizing the opportunity for messages to be displayed, and adequacy of message opportunity will be available to sign users without dominating the visual appearance of the area. Section 22.119(b)(3) states the Department of Cultural Affairs shall include a neighborhood involvement requirement, and specifically, the rules shall include a requirement that an applicant for mural approval send notice of that application to the Neighborhood Council which has jurisdiction over the area of the City. Further, the section requires that “No mural shall be registered until the applicant certifies that he or she has completed this neighborhood involvement requirement.” Per the ordinance, the City’s Department of Culture specified the procedures including public meeting after minimum 14 days prior notices by mails and postings.18 The application for approval requires, before the application is submitted, the applicant; (1) posted notice of meeting at the mural location 14 days prior to the meeting date; (2) mailed notice of the meeting to applicable City

18 https://culturela.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Private_Property_OAMural_app_pkg_Rev0218.pdf

24 | P a g e

Council District office, Neighborhood Council, and Business Improvement District 14 days prior to the meeting date; and (3) held a meeting to discuss the mural proposal with the local community near the proposed mural location during evening or weekend hours. We are investigating whether these procedures were really followed, and how the registration of the Mural was obtained from the City’s Department of Culture. To the extent we know so far, it did not happen. It obviously did not involve Korean/Asian Communities in the neighborhood. Had there been proper discussions with the community, the community and Stanton would have not been “stunned” and “disappointed”. Below are the comments that should have been heard before the Mural is drawn, which The L.A. Times completely failed to discuss. While I do not necessarily agree to them in their entirety, they are generally making legitimate points for discussions.

“There should have been effort on the part of LAUSD to get community input before putting in the mural. Ultimately with a piece of art, regardless of the artist's good intent, we have to be responsive and sensitive to what the art's affect is on the actual experience of the people who live there. The conversation reminds me of the problem of gentrification - lack of sensitivity of those in power to impose their singular desires and vision on nondominant communities with rich histories already in place”. (emphasis added) (juliateachla)

“How stupid to put this in Koreatown. Leave the face and paint ou[t] the Ray's. It's not intended to be Native American. Someone who knows nothing about history okayed this mural. I suppose there were no Koreans around who could be asked if there were any problems with the mural before it was painted on the wall.” (emphasis added) (MissMarple) “It was Koreatown before it was a school. There's nothing wrong with the image, but the placement is insensitive. A mural depicting a Hindu swastika isn't inherently offensive (unless you're a bigot), but its placement on a Jewish community center or in the heart of a traditionally Jewish enclave would be out of order. It's not up to the community who will be most often confronted with these images to "get over" their traumatic associations. If we value the diversity of our ethnic communities, then some measure of autonomy has to be tolerated. There's either room for us all or there isn't, and this seems more a case of white men sh*tting where they want, and then claiming it's all about "freedom" and "censorship." It's about respect and cultural sensitivity.” (emphasis added) (Jack Din)

“Although it was never the intent of the artist to depend a Japanese Rising Sun imagery of imperialism, colonialism, and racism, I completely understand how the Korean American community feels. An artist should take into

25 | P a g e

consideration the perceptions of the community, especially if his/her politics are aligned with theirs (as I am assuming related to RFK).” (emphasis added) (Larry Shinagawa).

“I have yet to read any suggestion that we simply modify the background and leave the heart of the piece intact. Having done commission work as a designer and digital artist for decades, I don’t understand why the artist can’t take into account the needs of his client and the community at large. It would be one thing if the piece was intended to make a political statement from the beginning, but presumably the assignment was for a decorative piece that paid homage to the location. (Philip Hindenach). 14. Learning Lessons: the Cocoanut Grove

The L.A. Times articles refers to the Cocoanut Grove as “the Old Hollywood hangout” (Editorial 12/18/2018), “a celebrated local gathering spot” (Editorial 12/18/2018), a nightclub once the epicenter of the Ambassador complex (Knight 12/19/2018), a “playground of L.A.’s elite back when the novel phenomenon of Hollywood was a major driver of the city’s booming growth” (Knight 12/13/2018), to a celebrated local gathering spot (Editorial 12/18/2018) and “one of Hollywood’s top watering holes” for decades, “where Big names both relaxed and performed” and “the Academy Awards” were repeatedly hosted. (Blume 12/11/2018).

Through this issue, I got to learn also about the Cocoanut Grove as well as Hattie McDaniel, an actress who was playing the role of Mammy in “Gone with the Wind”.

26 | P a g e

The 12th Academy Awards were held at the famed Cocoanut Grove

nightclub in The Ambassador Hotel. McDaniel arrived in a rhinestone-studded turquoise gown with white gardenias in her hair. (Seventy years later in 2010, a blue-gown– and white-gardenia–clad Mo'Nique, one of 11 black actors to win Academy Awards since, was the only one to pay homage to McDaniel while accepting her best supporting actress Oscar for Lee Daniels' Precious.) McDaniel then was escorted, not to the Gone With the Wind table — where Selznick sat with de Havilland and his two Oscar-nominated leads, Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable — but to a small table set against a far wall, where she took a seat with her escort, F.P. Yober, and her white agent, William Meiklejohn. With the hotel's strict no-blacks policy, Selznick had to call in a special favor just to have McDaniel allowed into the building (it was officially integrated by 1959, when the Unruh Civil Rights Act outlawed racial discrimination in California)….

White Hollywood pigeonholed her as the sassy Mammy archetype, with 74 confirmable domestic roles out of the IMDb list of 94 ("I'd rather play a maid than be a maid," was her go-to response). The NAACP disowned her for perpetuating negative stereotypes. Even after death, her Oscar, which she left to Howard University, was deemed valueless by appraisers and later went missing from the school — and has remained so for more than 40 years. Her final wish — to be buried in Hollywood Cemetery — was denied because of the color of her skin. (emphasis added) (Hollywood Reporter, 2/19/2015).19

Obviously, McDaniel was not allowed to “hangout”, “gather”, “play”,

“celebrate”, “relax” or “perform” at the Cocoanut Grove, the nightclub once the epicenter of the Ambassador complex and a playground of L.A.’s elite. The “L.A.’s elite” did not include McDaniel, the Oscar Award winner, “not one of the finalists”.

None of the majority of the residents in Koreatown including Latinos, Asians and African Americans would have been allowed to “hangout”, “gather”, “play”, “celebrate”, “relax” or “perform” thereat. Again, as the Superintendent Martinez said, “As beautiful as they might be, [the Cocoanut Grove] ha[s] memories and mean[s] a lot of different things to different people.

19 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/oscars-first-black-winner-accepted-774335

27 | P a g e

It’s the same thing here because for many older generations of [African Americans], this mural might evoke memories of the past.”

Am I suggesting the Cocoanut Grove itself is a problematic subject and therefore should also be removed? No. I am suggesting that things are not so simple as Blume, Knight and Fairey mistakenly believe. I am also suggesting that we are so ignorant about history and different perspectives, which often times causes us to make so-called “innocent homage” which may form insensible and insensitive attacks to certain communities, notwithstanding it was intended or not.

Shouldn’t we try harder to stop making, or at least make less often times, ourselves “belatedly stunned” only after finding out our ignorance resulted in hurting someone? Or at least, shouldn’t we be ready to apologize and learn instead of insisting everything is fine because no harm was intended?

I would say that now we are having “such happy days” because through this procedure, we hear more from each other, learn more from each other and be better community members to each other, and would hopefully be able to make our community a better place to live, so that our children will hear a lot less than now someone saying “I had no idea, but I didn’t mean it” without apologies. Do we not apologize when we step on someone’s foot even without intending to do so, out of respect and courtesy, instead of repeatedly screaming that nothing bad was intended and therefore, it should be all fine and we would keep our foot on another person’s foot? I hope and suggest that we discuss together on the issues in cooler, more thoughtful, mature and respectful voices as we are all learning together. 15. Conclusion: Discussion And Compromise

Again, one simple truth that The L.A. Times articles never mentioned was that I suggested at a meeting on December 13, 2018 and later that Stanton consider making changes to the background instead of taking down the whole Mural, which he refused to for his concern that it might become a precedent for other works of his. Stanton said he’d rather take down the whole Mural.

I also suggested that in the case we remove the whole Mural, the community could have a discussion together and decide on the contents of the new mural, which may deliver messages of harmonizing the communities such as having portraits of three historical figures together from each of African American, Latino and Korean communities that form the majorities in the neighborhood, for example, Martin Luther King Jr., Cesar Chavez, and Chang Ho Ahn, a California immigrant who fought against the Japanese Imperialism during World War II (The State Assembly recently passed a resolution declaring November 9, 2018 as the Dosan Ahn Chang Ho Day.). And I suggested that it would be great and mean a lot to the communities if Stanton could draw the new mural, which he said would think about. In this

28 | P a g e

context, Blume again misstated that the WCC “still wants the mural gone.” which again failed to, or deliberately omitted to, state the whole truth. (Blume 12/17/2018).

Below are the comments on the resolutions. Again, even though I do not necessarily agree to the comments in their entireties, they are presenting legitimate points and suggestions worth of discussing in mature, respectful and reasonable manners in a lot “cooler more thoughtful voices” than Blume, Knight and Fairey did.

“He should either replace, modify, or take down the painting. Since the mural is in the heart of Koreatown, it is important to take into consideration the community viewpoints. The community members are not condemning the artist. They are just declaring the reality that the imagery is highly offensive to most Koreans and Korean Americans. As a Japanese American, I completely understand. It would be highly offensive if someone put an image of bomb blast (perhaps meant to be a mushroom20) painted large in the heart of Japantown” (emphasis added) (Larry Shinagawa).

“I suggest that Stanton consider working with the Korean community and consider slightly altering his mural. We're not talking about adding extra apostles on Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper" here, just a touch-up. The students also need to learn about the art of compromise, too. The ability to compromise is the glue that keeps societies together, in case you hadn't noticed.” (JoeGal).

“Instead of removing the Ava Gardner/Cocoanut Grove mural, perhaps an additional mural or other artwork could be commissioned that reflects or expresses the Korean or Korean American experience of the war.” (Emmy G).

“I have yet to read21 any suggestion that we simply modify the background and leave the heart of the piece intact. Having done commission work as a designer and digital artist for decades, I don’t understand why the artist can’t take into account the needs of his client and the community at large. It would be one thing if the piece was intended to make a political statement from the beginning, but presumably the assignment was for a decorative piece that paid homage to the location.” (Philip Hindenach)

“May I suggest that adding to the artwork or covering the rays with another background would save the best part of the mural that pays tribute to the historic landmark.” (dbtaylor)

20 Of course, he did not mean to go after each and every mushrooms in the world! For sure, he knows the mushrooms have existed for probably even a longer time than human history including the entire history of the U.S. 21 Again, I did suggest so, which The L.A. Times completely failed to cover, which again cause the readers to believe that there was no such suggestion at all.

29 | P a g e

What am I suggesting as a solution? Let’s talk! The hope is that cooler, more thoughtful voices will emerge.