Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism.
The British pavilion at the Venice Biennale has a rather direct engagement with the country’s current war efforts, and yet the piece that was recently deemed too inflammatory and effectively censored was actually aimed at injustices against endangered birds.
A banner and posters with the words “Prince Harry Kills Me” splayed across them were part of artist Jeremy Deller’s installation for the pavilion, a jab at the royal figure for his alleged 2007 violence against an endangered avian. Unfortunately, the banners are now resting in London while the remaining works get their time in the international sun.
As the Guardian reports, the British Council decided that the pieces were best omitted from its global art showcase because of fear they would be interpreted as referencing the 2011 fatal attack on Britain’s Kabul headquarters, and that more attacks on soldiers would be encouraged. (It should be noted that this decision came before a soldier was brutally murdered on the streets of London, although tensions about such incidents are continuously high.) A council spokesman reportedly said: “We asked Jeremy to reconsider the banner and poster […] on the grounds that it could potentially be misconstrued in environments where the British army is currently deployed and perceived to be disrespectful of those who had lost their lives.”
So the banners had to stay home in England, even if Deller’s stated meaning had nothing to do with the incident. Deller said that the work actually refers to when Prince Harry was blamed for killing two protected and endangered hen harriers at Sandringham House. There’s still a mural of one of the protected and endangered birds in the installation, though, which transitions into a look at Britain’s involvement in recent wars. So in a way the birds get their Venice tribute, although without the textual vitriol.
“Black infants in America are now more than twice as likely to die as white infants—11.3 per 1,000 black babies, compared with 4.9 per 1,000 white babies, according to the most recent government data—a racial disparity that is actually wider than in 1850, 15 years before the end of slavery, when most black women were…
he ownership of images has a long and nuanced legal history, which has evolved dramatically in recent years as cultural standards and photographic technologies have rapidly advanced
The show, which honors the 50th anniversary of an exhibition history once ignored, continues a series of projects documenting Wilmington’s contemporary art scene.
Renty and his daughter Delia. Renty was an enslaved African, kidnapped from the Congo, sold and forced into slave labor on the South Carolina plantation of B.F. Taylor
What is the relation between possessing a person, possessing their image, and dispossessing their progeny
As a scholar of African American history and photography whose work has focused on the status of violent images in museums and archives, I fully support the validity of Ms. Tamara Lanier’s claim and the amicus brief.
Two K-12 art teachers will each receive a $1,000 cash gift and an additional $500 to put toward classroom art supplies. Nominations are due October 31.
The daguerreotypes of Renty Taylor, Delia, Drana, Alfred, Jack, George Fassena, and Jem remained in an unused storage cabinet until 1975, when it was discovered by an employee of the Peabody Museum.
I am writing in support of the amicus curiae brief submitted by Professor Ariella Aïsha Azoulay of Brown University for the full restitution of the daguerreotypes of Renty Taylor and his daughter Delia, currently held by Harvard University, to their familial descendant, Tamara Lanier.
We cannot be indifferent to the long-lasting effects of photography. The photographs at the center of Lanier v. Harvard are relentless in making Renty and Delia Taylor work and perform as slaves. The pain inflicted on them has not ceased. Photography has the capacity to propagate harm, and we have the moral obligation to interrupt…