 |
|
Monday through Thursday at 9am and 8pm; Friday at 9am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bridgeport Mural Sparks Censorship Debate
|
|
About two weeks ago, Chicago artist and muralist Gabriel Villa began painting a mural on the outside wall of a bar and liquor store in Bridgeport. The mural depicted three Chicago Police Department blue light cameras that carried the CPD logo along with other images, like a crucified Christ, a deer head and a skull. Villa says it was not meant to disrespect the police or the city. The mural was recently painted over, at the behest of 11th Ward Alderman James Balcer.
Is this a case of censorship? Jon Pounds is the executive director of the Chicago Public Art Group which supports and protects public works of art. Scott Hodes is an attorney who has long championed artists’ rights. Alderman Danny Solis, who has a number of murals in his ward, and Alderman Balcer did not respond to our invitation to join the conversation.
Update: Streets and San take blame
Related: Daley 'It was a mistake'
Related: Artist mulls legal action
Photos: Before and after
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
miche the killer, humboldt pk // Tuesday, May 19, 2009 @ 11:20 AM
yes. this is a case of censorship. no "if"s. no "and"s. no "but"s. Chicago politics is full bunch of servantile infants who don't hesitate to use their sadistic force and power to make a point and, I think, would love an opportunity to recreate the '68 Dem. Nat. Convention.
|
|
Mike, West Lafayette, Indiana // Tuesday, May 19, 2009 @ 12:01 PM
Of course it is censorship. WBEZ needs to get beyond that question, and explore the viewpoint of the alderman and larger city government. I believe this is another example of a philosphy of governance that has been in place for many years now: the same philosophy that justified the elimination of Maxwell Street, the dismantaling of the huge public housing projects, and many other acts meant to bring about the 'suburbanization' of the city. That is not to say that this shift has been entirely negative or positive. But it certainly is real and ongoing. It is changing the very nature of Chicago and other great urban centers in America. While it attempts to eliminate some of the worst exploitation and abuses of urban life, its goal seems to be a white, middle-class artistic and cultural sense that isn't desired by many in the city.
It would be better to empower folks living in the city to take more control of their own cultural environment. This defacing is a powerful example of how that isn't happening.
|
|
Robert, Over By Dere // Tuesday, May 19, 2009 @ 4:03 PM
I think the attention being paid to the artist and the issue of censorship in general is good.. but this is also a property issue. the state illegally trespassed on private property and defaced it, essentially. the issue of defacing it is not as big a deal as the idea that a singular govt. agent can determine that the state should take control of the property of a private citizen. this is really very serious and should not be seen as a minor issue. also, since there is a lot of attention being paid to the issue, and since the alderman has embarrassed himself so thoroughly, there is another concern which also has to do with the rights of private citizens. since balcer is a part of the sociopathic daley bridgeport cadre, he is not able to recognize that he is a criminal. there may be repercussions against the owner of the property, the owner who commissioned the mural. since we are coming to the defense of the artist, we need to also send a clear message to the city that they need to lay off the owner of the property and their family. this would be a good way to stave off attacks, bring the likelihood of harassment to the forefront, and be sure the alderman knows that everyone is taking notes. because this is chicago, and sometimes you have to avoid those little “coincidences”.
|
|
Jeff Huebner, Humboldt Park // Wednesday, May 20, 2009 @ 4:39 PM
Ald. Balcer in cahoors with city officlas have pulled a similiar coup before, though n a much more culturally institutional way. In 2002, a Public Art Program advisory panel--narrowing 80 Illinois sculptors down to 5--failed to select an artist to design a veterans memorial for the renovated Soldier Field (the Toilet Bowl). The public art committee--which wanted something "conceptual" and "transcendent" rather than your traditional bronze statue--expected to begin the vetting process all over again, in hopes of selecting the proper artist and project in an open, democratic way. Instead, the Chicago Park District and the Lakefront Redevelopment Project took the project away from the PAP, went behind everyone's back, and unilaterally gave the $200,000 commission to a local husband-and-wife figurative sculpture team, who didn't even know about the project. The two city officials behind this back-door decision were Balcer (a Vietnam vet), who said he was enamored of classical realist military statues, and Lee Bey, then the Mayor's deputy chief of staff. How did they arrive at this choice? Because, as I reported (Reader, Aug. 2, 2002), it just so happened that the same sculptors once did a life-size bronze bust of Richard J. Daley that sits in the current Mayor's office (or did, several years ago.) "They decided not to use a tried-and-true public art process," said fromer Public Art Program director Mike Lash. History marches on, as veterans like Balcer presumably served to safeguard freedom of expression.
|
|
|
|
|
|  | |
