The George Washington High School Murals in SF

[ricv64]

I am quite upset that a small but LOUDLY vocal group have pushed through the destruction of these historical murals

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/art ... 080624.php


https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/nat ... 074876.php

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/georg ... co-1594663


please sign the petition

https://www.change.org/p/san-francisco- ... lang=en-US

[dero316]

The most rustling part to me is the quoted 600k cost of painting it over is justified as reparations for “past wrongs for Americans”. So now the school board can hand out tax payer money for reparations?

[Kramerica]

I can see how black kids going to school don't want large murals depicting slavery in their face everyday. Even if the intent of the message is critical, that's not necessarily how it will be interpreted by everyone. I haven't ever been to the school but I imagine a mural that large is fairly unavoidable if you are a student there. I tend to agree with the preservation of art but it's more the location that calls this into question.

[dero316]

Will they let Pawnee keep the mural inside their city hall?? Where does it stop??

[maddog76]

The most rustling part to me is the quoted 600k cost of painting it over is justified as reparations for “past wrongs for Americans”. So now the school board can hand out tax payer money for reparations?

From what I read it seems it will cost only a few thousand to paint over mural, the rest is for legal fees when they are sued by people who don't want it removed.

[dero316]

Sounds about right.


Late last month, the president of the San Francisco school board said that getting rid of the murals would cost at least $500,000, but perhaps as much as $845,000.

Arnautoff created the murals to protest both the genocide of Native Americans as well as slavery and oppression of African-Americans at a time when few openly discussed these aspects of American history.

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.”


So this mural was painted to bring attention to oppression and they want to get rid of it because they feel offended? Maybe they should just add a few narrative plaques.




.

[ricv64]

I can see how black kids going to school don't want large murals depicting slavery in their face everyday. Even if the intent of the message is critical, that's not necessarily how it will be interpreted by everyone. I haven't ever been to the school but I imagine a mural that large is fairly unavoidable if you are a student there. I tend to agree with the preservation of art but it's more the location that calls this into question.

The school is 64% Asian . The clips I've seen of people complaining are mostly white with one latina ...None are students . There were complaints in the 70's and a counter mural was painted and another in the 80's . Both those artists don't want the disputed murals taken down