Artist pulls show from National Portrait Gallery over censorship concerns
Why it matters: Artist Amy Sherald alleged the Smithsonian-owned art museum, which confirmed the show's removal, considered excluding one work in Sherald's show that depicts the Statue of Liberty as a transgender woman.
The big picture: The complete show, "American Sublime," was slated to debut in September and would have been the museum's first show by a Black contemporary artist. The piece in question was "Trans Forming Liberty."
"While we understand Amy's decision to withdraw her show from the National Portrait Gallery, we are disappointed that Smithsonian audiences will not have an opportunity to experience American Sublime," the Smithsonian said on Thursday in a statement to Axios.
Zoom in: Sherald, who didn't immediately respond to Axios' request for comment, told The New York Times the museum feared backlash from President Trump. She said she had been "informed that internal concerns had been raised" at the Portrait Gallery regarding the painting.
"These concerns led to discussions about removing the work from the exhibition," she said.
"I entered into this collaboration in good faith, believing that the institution shared a commitment to presenting work that reflects the full, complex truth of American life," Sherald wrote in a letter to Smithsonian secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III on Wednesday, per the Times.
A Smithsonian spokesperson told Axios the museum never wanted to remove Sherald's painting, but include an additional video to "contextualize the piece."
"The Smithsonian strives to foster a greater and shared understanding," the spokesperson said.
"By presenting and contextualizing art, the Smithsonian aims to inspire, challenge and impact audiences in meaningful and thoughtful ways. Unfortunately, we could not come to an agreement with the artist."
Sherald said, per the Times:"The video would have opened up for debate the value of trans visibility and I was opposed to that being a part of the 'American Sublime' narrative."
Context: The Trump administration has threatened to pull funding from a wide range of institutions — from hospitals to Harvard — if they acknowledge, let alone protect, LGBTQ+ people or people of color.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
22 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump wants to speed up Rupert Murdoch's deposition because the media mogul is 94 and had 'health scares'
President Donald Trump wants to depose Rupert Murdoch as soon as possible. On Monday, Trump's lawyers asked a federal judge to force Murdoch to sit for a deposition for his lawsuit on an expedited basis, arguing that the News Corp. executive is 94 years old and his "recent significant health scares" could hinder his ability to show up in court for a trial. "Murdoch has suffered, or is continuing to suffer, from multiple health issues," Trump's filing notes. The filing goes on to note reports that Murdoch collapsed during an interview with a journalist several years ago and was hospitalized after getting COVID-19, among other health issues in recent years. The request from Trump's lawyers comes in a lawsuit the president filed against Murdoch and News Corp. over a Wall Street Journal article about Trump's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. According to the Journal report, Trump wrote a "bawdy" letter for Epstein's 50th birthday that included a cryptic message. "Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret," the letter said, according to the Journal, which also reported that it featured an illustration of a nude woman and featured Trump's signature. The Journal article did not accuse Trump of any sexual misconduct related to Epstein. Epstein's 50th birthday, in 2003, was well before he pleaded guilty to sex crimes and registered as a sex offender. Epstein died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on a separate set of criminal charges for sex trafficking. Trump's lawsuit says the Journal "concocted this story to malign President Trump's character and integrity" and that "no authentic letter or drawing exists." "If the purported letter in the Article somehow actually exists, which it does not, and the Defendants have it in their possession, which they do not, Murdoch has easy access to it," Trump's attorneys wrote in their Monday filing requesting an expedited deposition of Murdoch. The Journal has said it stands by its reporting. A News Corp. spokesperson didn't immediately respond to a request for comment about Trump's Monday filing. US District Judge Darrin Gayles, who is overseeing the defamation lawsuit in Miami federal court, asked Murdoch to respond to the request for an expedited deposition by August 4. On Monday, Trump told journalists that he had a "breach" with Epstein because the pedophile hired employees who had worked for him. "He stole people that worked for me," Trump said. "I said, 'Don't ever do that again.' He did it again, and I threw him out of the place — persona non grata."
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Why is the Trump administration really holding up MBTA train shells?
The company strongly denies any wrongdoing and MBTA general manager Phil Eng says But the incident is another setback for a star-crossed project that's been hampered by delays, cost overruns, a pandemic, and geopolitical tensions. Advertisement Massachusetts picked the Chinese company back in 2014 because it offered the low bid and promised to assemble the trains in Springfield with shells shipped from China. To then-governor Deval Patrick, the deal was a perfect two-fer, providing the T with bargain trains while creating several hundred blue-collar jobs in a part of the state that often feels overlooked by state transportation spending. For the company, meanwhile, the deal was supposed to be its entree into the American market. The company did Advertisement President Trump slapped tariffs on imported With that history, it's hard to take the slave labor concerns completely at face value. I don't mean to minimize the issue; obviously, if the company really did violate laws against importing slave-made products that would be a massive problem, and a reason for the state to bail on the contract immediately. But the way the administration and Congress have had it out for this company makes me wonder how genuine their concerns for its workers in China really are. The trains are now years beyond schedule. There's undoubtedly plenty of blame to go around for that, and I don't mean to let the company off the hook. But what if politicians hadn't spent so much energy trying to thwart CRRC? Why was the company that made something as socially useful as trains held to such a higher standard than ones making, say, smartphones? I get the concerns about Chinese dumping — ie, using artificially low prices to gain market share at the expense of American firms. China has been accused of anticompetitive behavior when it comes to solar panels and other goods. But the T's trains are being built by American workers, and with many American components. If US government pressure results in CRRC leaving the American market, the Chinese government will barely notice. But a lot of people in Springfield will. Advertisement This is an excerpt from , a Globe Opinion newsletter about the future of transportation in the region. Sign up to . Alan Wirzbicki is Globe deputy editor for editorials. He can be reached at
Miami Herald
23 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Why Scotland's protests about Trump should concern every American
'Convicted US Felon to arrive in Scotland,' read the headline on the front page of Friday's Scotland's newspaper, The National. The headline, referring to President Donald Trump, seemed like a joke, but it was real — and a sad commentary on how the people of Scotland view the president. I wasn't disheartened because I felt the paper was inaccurate — it wasn't. I was disheartened by the lack of respect in those words. The negativity didn't end with a headline. On Saturday, Trump played golf at his course in Turnberry, Scotland. Meanwhile, hundreds of protesters flooded the streets of Britain to protest his visit. The Stop Trump Coalition —'a group of campaigners across the UK determined to resist Trump and Trumpism' — organized the protests Saturday, which included signs protesters waved: 'No to Trump,' 'Trump not welcome' and 'Scotland Hates Trump.' Some protesters objected to Trump's policies on immigration, climate change and the war on Gaza — but the overwhelming focus was personal. They didn't reject the policy alone. They rejected America's president. Regardless of your personal feelings for Trump, this chilly reception should give you pause. I get it — Trump is a convicted felon. Yes, there are still questions about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. And no, Trump is not the statesman Americans are used to seeing in the Oval Office. But this disrespect for him extends to the office he holds. And that's bad for the United States now and in the future. In fairness, Trump isn't without culpability. He has spent years making politics personal, insulting opponents and threatening world leaders, often prioritizing personal feuds rather than focusing on policy. The vitriol on display in Scotland didn't come out of nowhere. Additionally, his own disregard for presidential decorum has created a permissive structure that allows others to abandon restraint and follow his lead. But as my mother used to say, two wrongs don't make a right. While our allies have previously disagreed with America's foreign policy, our critics generally respected the office, if not the occupant. During a visit to London in 2003, for example, protesters opposed former President George W. Bush's policy on Iraq and his relationship with Blair. The protests were over the Iraq War, not Bush's character flaws. A similar protest happened in 1984, when thousands of demonstrators in London rallied against then-President Ronald Reagan's nuclear policy during an economic summit. The protest was organized by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and when asked about its goal, Roger Spiller, a deputy president of the group, said, ''This is not an anti-American protest, but one opposing Mr. Reagan's policies.'' The protests in Scotland were different. They called Trump a dictator and a felon, focusing on his character and his presence in Scotland, rather than calling for policy changes. That distinction matters. When I first started in politics, there was an unspoken rule: Never call your opponent a liar. Now that's the starting point. And the lack of civility hasn't just taken hold here in America. It's been exported. It's sad but not surprising that this is where we find ourselves. Public vilification of the leader of the free world has serious implications. Some may argue that Trump deserves this type of backlash given his checkered history and questionable behavior. But that argument is short-sighted. When protesters attack the person rather than the policies, they're diminishing the institution itself. And if we normalize these personal attacks, it sets a precedent that won't end with Trump's presidency. We can — and should — debate policies. That's a hallmark of a healthy democracy. But when an American president is greeted with public disrespect by from citizens of an allied nation, it threatens something larger: the respect for democratic institutions. Preserving that institutional respect isn't about protecting Trump. It's about protecting the office of the presidency for whoever comes next. Mary Anna Mancuso is a member of the Miami Herald Editorial Board. Her email: mmancuso@
