KSU to reinstall artwork removed from its museum
by Nikki Wiley
March 17, 2014 04:00 AM | 3709 views | 2 2 comments | 12 12 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Some visitors to the museum protest the decision.<br>Staff/Leo Hohmann
Some visitors to the museum protest the decision.
Staff/Leo Hohmann
KENNESAW — Kennesaw State University plans to reinstall a commissioned artwork that was removed from the Zuckerman Museum of Art following accusations of censorship from students and artists.

The controversial work titled “A Walk in the Valley,” included text from an 1899 letter written by Corra Mae Harris, a 19th century Georgia author, that seemed to defend a lynching. Harris spent much of her writing career at a homestead in Cartersville, which was donated to the university in 2008. 

Ruth Stanford, an associate professor of sculpture at Georgia State University, was hired by KSU to create a display based on the homestead to run in the university museum’s new “See through Walls” exhibit.

But her art was removed from the display by KSU President Dan Papp just two days before the museum’s opening day March 1.

After months of work, Stanford had created a large, three-dimensional installation made of wood, paper and mixed media. She had collected writings of Harris and placed them across her work. On the back wall, Stanford had pasted part of the text from Harris’ 1899 inflammatory letter, which included racially offensive language.

Papp’s decision was met with objection from artists and some KSU students.

Several protesters attended the museum’s opening holding large black signs with the word “CENSORED” written in white letters. Others wore black T-shirts with images of Stanford’s art on the back and covered with the word “Censored.”

More than 1,375 people have signed an online petition on moveon.org encouraging Papp to reinstall Stanford’s artwork. 

The National Coalition Against Censorship also sent a letter to Papp encouraging him to reinstate the art, based on a freedom-of-expression stance. 

At the time, the university said the subject matter was “not aligned with celebratory atmosphere of the museum’s opening,” and it would be displayed at a more “appropriate later time.”

KSU announced in a prepared statement this week it plans to have the art on public view no later than March 25. It is planned to run through April 26.

Stanford released a prepared statement of her own saying she continues to disagree with university administration on the removal of her work, but she has come to an agreement with the university that the work should be restored.

“This has been a difficult experience, but I hope that the conversations it has generated about art, place, history, academic freedom, and free speech have been, and will continue to be, productive,” Stanford said.

In an email to the MDJ, Stanford added, “I am happy that my work is going back in the show so that viewers can see it and form their own opinions. However, despite my best efforts I feel that KSU largely continues to control the conversation. The conversation should be about censorship, and KSU does not want to talk about that.”

The university also plans to provide “explanatory materials,” KSU’s statement said, and host public programs addressing the “complexity and controversial nature” of Corra Harris, who was the subject of the art removed from the university’s museum.

“The university’s administration deeply appreciates Ruth Stanford’s thoughtful consideration and deliberation in this matter and her willingness to remain engaged in dialogue with university officials,” the statement said.

“Kennesaw State University officials also reaffirm the administration’s full support for academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas. Our intention is to use this entire experience as a learning and engagement opportunity for all of our stakeholders.”

Comments-icon Post a Comment
Crystal Ball Reader
March 17, 2014
I don't mind this art display if they have a similar display showing how Sam Holt, a black man connected to this issue, was chopped up while alive, burned, and his body parts sold after a lynch mob murdered him for standing his ground.
March 17, 2014
It seems rather odd that the MDJ has run two articles on this issue but cannot print the text that is supposedly controversial. Is the quote too risque for MDJ readers? If you don't have the journalistic integrity to publish the actual text that is central to the story, then don't even publish the story in the first place.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides