logo
Can you mount an art exhibition about race in the age of Trump?

Can you mount an art exhibition about race in the age of Trump?

Yahoo20-07-2025
It is one of the most evocative works from the American Civil War: A sculpture of a Black man who had escaped from slavery helping an injured White Union soldier lost in hostile territory.
When it was unveiled in 1864, John Rogers' 'The Wounded Scout, a Friend in the Swamp,' was celebrated for its anti-slavery message and patriotic tone. But in 2025, a Smithsonian exhibition, 'The Shape of Power: Stories of Race and American Sculpture,' asked visitors to reconsider the message behind the piece.
On display, the sculpture is paired with a description that prompts viewers to consider how the work, and others by Rogers 'reinforced the long-standing racist social order,' despite its pro-Union and emancipation sentiment.
The exhibition's efforts to challenge enduring ideas about race and American sculpture became a subject of President Donald Trump's ire earlier this year. In an executive order, he condemned the exhibition for stating that 'sculpture has been a powerful tool in promoting scientific racism,' that 'race is a human invention' and that the United States has used race 'to establish and maintain systems of power, privilege, and disenfranchisement.'
'Museums in our Nation's capital should be places where individuals go to learn — not to be subjected to divisive narratives,' the executive order said.
Trump has championed a cultural agenda built around celebrating, as the executive order put it, 'shared American values' and 'unmatched record of advancing liberty, prosperity, and human flourishing,' and he has put Vice President JD Vance, who serves on the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, in charge of stopping government spending on exhibits that don't align with that agenda.
That has forced the Smithsonian into an awkward position.
In June, the Smithsonian began a review of content in its museums. The institution has repeatedly said it is committed to being 'free from political or partisan influence' – but the review has raised serious questions over whether the world's largest museum complex will curb candid discussions about the country's past, beginning with exhibits like 'The Shape of Power.'
Sasa Aakil, a young artist who helped with 'The Shape of Power,' said that it would be 'catastrophic' if the Smithsonian were to change many of its exhibits.
'America has never been good at truth. That's why so many people are doing the work that they're doing. That's why this exhibition exists.'
Humbler displays, notable reactions
For the amount of attention it garnered from the president, the exhibition at the Smithsonian's American Art Museum has a surprisingly humble, intimate feel.
Tucked away on the third floor of a sprawling neo-classical building shared with the National Portrait Gallery in downtown Washington, the exhibit holds 82 sculptures dating from 1792 to 2023. The pieces are arranged according to a series of topics with prompts asking visitors to consider how they encounter the pieces.
A large passage of text on the wall at the exhibition entrance says: 'Stories anchor this exhibition,' and that through it, visitors can discover how artists used sculpture to 'tell fuller stories about how race and racism shape the ways we understand ourselves.'
The stated goal of for the exhibit is 'to encourage visitors to feel invited into a transparent and honest dialogue about the histories of race, racism, and the role of sculpture, art history and museums in shaping these stories,' its curators have written.
Ferdinand Pettrich's 'The Dying Tecumseh,' for example, portrays a Shawnee warrior's death during the War of 1812. Completed in 1856, he is shown in a relaxed pose, reclining as if asleep.
In reality, he died in battle and his body was mutilated by American soldiers.
Pettrich, according to the exhibit, made the sculpture as political propaganda for Vice President Richard Mentor Johnson, who had claimed he killed Tecumseh and made the alleged act part of his campaign slogan. It also reinforced racist ideas about Native Americans during a time when the United States was rapidly expanding westward, the exhibit said.
Yards away from Hiram Powers' 'Greek Slave,' a famous 19th century sculpture, is Julia Kwon's 'Fetishization,' a 2016 work featuring a hollow, female torso wrapped with a vibrant patchwork of silk bojagi, Korean object-wrapping cloth. The intention, Kwon told CNN, is to comment 'on the gravity and absurdity of the objectification of Asian female bodies.'
Asked about its objections to the exhibit, Lindsey Halligan, a White House official who Trump has tasked with helping to root out 'improper ideology' at the Smithsonian, told CNN in a statement: 'The Shape of Power exhibit claims that 'sculpture has been a powerful tool in promoting scientific racism,' a statement that ultimately serves to create division rather than unity.'
'While it's important to confront history with honesty, framing an entire medium of art through such a narrow and accusatory lens overshadows its broader cultural, aesthetic, and educational value,' Halligan said in a statement.
'Instead of fostering dialogue or deeper understanding, the Shape of Power exhibit's approach alienates audiences and reduces complex artistic legacies to a single, controversial narrative. After all, it's hard to imagine Michelangelo thinking about racism as he chiseled David's abs – he was in the relentless pursuit of artistic perfection, not pushing a political agenda.' (Michelangelo's work is not part of the exhibit.)
Some see value in the president's push to reshape the museums. Mike Gonzalez, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, expressed optimism about the Smithsonian's review, arguing that the institution should not mount exhibitions that examine the US through 'a prism of the oppressed and the oppressor.'
'I think, you know, you have to tell the whole story, not a small part of the story that is designed to make people feel grievances against their own country,' he said.
But critics say the administration's review has the potential to undermine the nation's ability to understand its complicated history through art.
Examining art from the past has the potential to hit at the core of how Americans understand their country, Northwestern University art history professor Rebecca Zorach told CNN, and that's the value of exhibitions like 'The Shape of Power.'
'Art provides ways to process these issues. I think some people are afraid of what it means to kind of have that opportunity,' Zorach said. The administration's claims of a 'divisive, race-centered ideology' are a 'real caricature' of what museums and other cultural institutions are trying to do, she said.
It was also 'astonishing' that the administration would dispute a scientifically accepted view that race is a construct, she added.
Probing questions
Sasa Aakil, a 22-year-old artist who was a student collaborator on 'The Shape of Power', told CNN the exhibition was not designed to make people feel resentment towards their country, but to consider the broader context of the art.
She recalled the first time she saw 'The Dying Tecumseh.' It unnerved her, she said, especially as she learned more about the distorted version of the history the artwork relayed.
For Aakil, the statue is a reminder that museums have always made some people uncomfortable.
'Many of these sculptures were always problematic, were always painful and were always very violent. And this exhibition is forcing people to see that, as opposed to allowing people to live in a fantasy,' she said.
Another piece, 'DNA Study Revisited' by Philadelphia artist Roberto Lugo, is intended to push back against the ways sculpture has been used to bolster ideas about racial classifications.
In a self-portrait, Lugo uses different patterns that correspond to parts of his ancestry, drawing from Spanish, African, Portuguese and indigenous peoples of the Caribbean.
Lugo told CNN that he believes art is 'a way for us to understand the world through someone else's experiences.'
'Through exhibitions like this, I hope we can begin to normalize storytelling from diverse communities,' he added. 'Every story matters, and art gives us a voice in a world where we have too often been silenced.'
While it's unclear what changes, if any, the Smithsonian will make to 'The Shape of Power,' the institution has changed exhibits that have drawn controversy in the past.
In 1978, religious groups sued over an evolution exhibition that they alleged violated the First Amendment, but a court sided with the Smithsonian, and the National Museum of Natural History kept the exhibit up.
But in 1995, the Smithsonian reduced the size and scope of an exhibit on Enola Gay, the B-29 bomber that dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, after veterans' groups and lawmakers complained about what it said about World War II.
And in 2011, the National Portrait Gallery, which shares the same building as the American Art Museum, debuted 'Hide/Seek,' the first major museum exhibition on gender and sexual identity at the Smithsonian.
The show featured the video 'A Fire in My Belly' by the late artist David Wojnarowicz, which includes a scene where ants crawl over a crucifix, prompting uproar from the Catholic League and conservative members of the House of Representatives. It was quickly removed, but not without criticism from those that argued that the Smithsonian was capitulating to homophobic censorship.
The planned run for the 'The Shape of Power' exhibition began November 8, 2024, and is to continue through September 14. The Smithsonian did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story.
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump looms large over a Fed likely to again defy his call for cuts
Trump looms large over a Fed likely to again defy his call for cuts

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump looms large over a Fed likely to again defy his call for cuts

President Trump will loom large over the Federal Reserve's policy meeting this week, even if the central bank does what the market expects and keeps interest rates on hold. Trump and other top White House officials have been hammering Fed Chair Jerome Powell for months over his wait-and-see rate stance and his insistence that more time is needed to assess how the president's tariffs will affect the path of inflation. The president took that message directly to the Fed last Thursday as he toured a $2.5 billion renovation of the central bank's headquarters and confronted Powell in person while the two argued in front of reporters over the true costs of the project. "I just want to see one thing happen, very simple: Interest rates have to come down," the president told reporters. Traders widely expect the Fed's Federal Open Market Committee to defy Trump and once again keep rates unchanged this Wednesday, as they have for every other meeting so far in 2025. The market expects the first cut of 2025 to happen on Sept. 17, the third-to-last meeting of the year. But at least two of Powell's colleagues are warming to Trump's near-term rate cut call, which could produce some disagreement this week behind closed doors in Washington. One Fed governor, Christoper Waller, has already hinted that he may publicly dissent Wednesday if his colleagues vote to keep rates unchanged. His opinion is that any inflation from Trump's tariffs will prove to be temporary, and he's concerned that the labor market may soon worsen. But many other Fed officials have backed Powell in his view that more time is needed to assess the impact of Trump's tariffs on inflation. They also note that the labor market is holding up, removing any urgency to act in the way that Trump wants. Read more: How the Fed rate decision affects your bank accounts, loans, credit cards, and investments "This is a campaign of undermining the chairman's credibility and really trying to undermine his public support in the face of what I think is the real objective, and that is to get a lower rate environment in place," former Kansas City Fed president Esther George said. A Powell press conference following the meeting on Wednesday gives the Fed chair a new chance to respond to the White House's escalating pressure campaign and mounting questions about the $2.5 billion renovation of two Fed buildings along the National Mall. Trump considered firing Powell in recent weeks but has now appeared to back away from doing so, telling reporters this past week that "he is going to be out pretty soon anyway" — a reference to the fact that Powell's term as chair is up in May. While touring the Fed's construction site on Thursday, Trump said of firing Powell: "To do that is a big move, and I just don't think it's necessary." Read more: How much control does the president have over the Fed and interest rates? New headaches But that doesn't mean the White House is going to let up on Powell. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent this past week called for a review of the central bank's $2.5 billion project and an "exhaustive internal review' of its non-monetary policy operations. He argued that "significant mission creep and institutional growth have taken the Fed into areas that potentially jeopardize the independence of its core monetary policy mission." The Fed also got another new headache last week when a money manager — and Trump ally who recently served as an adviser to the Department of Government Efficiency — filed a lawsuit arguing that the central bank is violating a 1976 federal law by keeping its policy meetings behind closed doors. That money manager, Azoria Capital, is asking for a Washington, D.C., federal court to issue a temporary restraining order compelling the FOMC to open its deliberations to the public this week. Some on Capitol Hill are also getting louder about more scrutiny of the Fed. Rep. Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania, a subcommittee chair on the House Financial Services Committee, is reportedly moving forward with a congressional investigation of the Fed, according to PunchBowl News, even as many of his Senate colleagues have shied away from that idea. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, another Trump ally, formally requested that the DOJ investigate Powell for perjury over June comments about the renovations, although that is seen as a long shot at best. House Speaker Mike Johnson said in an interview with Bloomberg reporters and editors last week that he is "disenchanted" with Powell and is even open to modifying the 1913 act that created the Fed. That would be a major change, but it is not expected to come before Congress in the near term, as the House of Representatives went home Wednesday evening for a recess that is scheduled to last for the rest of the summer. Powell has repeatedly stated that he does not intend to leave as chair until his term is up, that his removal is "not permitted by law," and that he was honest and transparent about the Fed's construction project while testifying before Senate lawmakers on June 25. In a July 17 letter to White House budget director Russ Vought, Powell wrote that "we take seriously the responsibility to be good stewards of public resources" and offered a point-by-point response to Vought's concerns about cost overruns and certain design elements. Read more: What experts say about the possibility of additional rate cuts 'I do think it's damaging' Trump and his allies have taken to several new lines of attack against Powell, even beyond the building renovation, as they argue for rates to be as many as three percentage points lower. They cite what they predict will be savings on US debt if the rate is lower, as well as how a lower rate would make borrowing for a home less expensive in the US. Trump has even hinted that he has more than just Powell to blame for the fact that rates have remained unchanged since he took office. "The Board should act, but they don't have the Courage to do so!" Trump wrote on his social media platform this past week, referring to the larger Fed Board of Governors on which Powell serves. StoneX senior adviser Jon Hilsenrath told Yahoo Finance that he expects Trump's attacks to eventually extend to the regional Fed presidents based around the country. They have rotating positions on the Fed body that makes the final call on rates. The president does not appoint the regional Fed bosses, who are instead chosen by banks in those Fed districts. One of them, Chicago Fed president Austan Goolsbee, defended Powell in a July 18 interview with Yahoo Finance, calling the Fed chair a "totally honorable guy." He also expressed concerns about Fed independence. "It pains me to hear people actively discussing whether the central bank should be independent. There's nothing good can come of discussion like that." George, the former Kansas City Fed president, said of the president's pressure campaign targeting building renovations: "I do think it's damaging." "It's when we undermine institutions and create suspicion in the public that something is wrong here, I think credibility suffers," she said. "This is a time when the Fed needs its independence," George added. "It is a time when, yes, lower rates would help the federal government, but we know countries that have gone down that path, and we know in this country going down that path does not produce good outcomes in the long term." Last Thursday, though, Trump sounded confident during his tour of the Fed's headquarters that Powell would see things his way. "I think he's going to do the right thing,' the president said. "Everybody knows what the right thing is.' Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices

The coming battle among YIMBYs
The coming battle among YIMBYs

Fast Company

time23 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

The coming battle among YIMBYs

The YIMBY ('yes in my backyard') movement has achieved remarkable growth in the past few years, uniting people across the political spectrum who share a common belief: It should be easy to build more housing. You can find shared interests among unlikely alliances when you step out of political tribes. People who label themselves as socialists and capitalists are standing at town hall podiums to support and promote abundant housing. High fives! Hooray for unity, right? Insert record scratch. Socialists and capitalists have economic worldviews that are incompatible with each other. There's definitely consensus about the ends (plenty of homes), but the means will be hotly debated. The clash was inevitable, and the recent book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, Abundance, has keyboard warriors starting to realize there are a host of competing opinions on how to get past the gatekeepers who would have homes remain scarce. You might think something as apolitical as a townhouse wouldn't be a lightning rod for a populist left-versus-right debate. The reason is economics. Considering the surge in populism in recent years, it's worth understanding why economics, not 'neighborhood character,' is at the heart of the argument. The Socialist YIMBY Socialist YIMBY advocates believe housing should be universally accessible, treated fundamentally as a human right rather than a commodity to be bought and sold for profit. Prominent democratic socialists, like New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and Minneapolis mayoral candidate Omar Fateh, argue for 'decommodifying' housing, where the government would guarantee homes. Market forces are not part of the equation. A socialist YIMBY is going to want state-managed housing solutions, price controls, rent freezes, and strict regulations on private ownership. Mamdani even said he'd be open to the abolition of private property if it meant getting people places to live. Socialist YIMBYs build their case on fairness, social justice, and community stability. They argue that a free market creates disparities, displaces vulnerable populations, and commodifies essential human needs. The belief here is that removing profit motives from housing reduces speculation, stabilizes communities, and ensures housing stability and equity, prioritizing human dignity and communal well-being above private gain. The Capitalist YIMBY Capitalist YIMBY advocates believe in leveraging market mechanisms. To them, the root cause of housing shortages lies in artificial restrictions imposed by zoning laws, burdensome permitting processes, and other bureaucratic interference. Their economic rationale hinges on the concept of supply and demand, and prices as crucial signals. Capitalist YIMBYs argue that when the price of a type of home goes up in an area, it signals to developers, investors, and builders that demand is high and supply low. Rather than suppressing these signals through artificial price controls, they propose getting rid of laws that prohibit housing and streamline approval processes in order to spur rapid and flexible housing production. They argue that robust competition among builders and investors inherently leads to diverse housing options, lower overall costs, and more innovation in housing solutions. The Perplexed YIMBY A person is standing at the philosophical crossroads to abundant housing and two fellow YIMBYs are giving conflicting directions: 'We have to go left.' 'No, we have to go right.' Socialists look at capitalist solutions as inherently exploitative, always creating more inequalities, and they believe profit motives are what make homes too expensive. Capitalists look at socialist solutions as inevitably leading to inefficiencies, housing shortages, and stagnation. When I've asked people about their take on this conflict, a common response is something like 'We'll have enough homes for everyone if building regulations are relaxed and the government is in charge of low-income housing.' I believe that's wishful thinking, since it brings us right back to the fundamental disagreement on economics. A capitalist will say, 'There is a market for small and modest housing, so get the government out of the way.' The socialist will say, 'We don't believe you.' I truly believe that populists on the left and the right want there to be enough homes for everyone. But it's also clear that the populist left and right will forever treat each other like they're living in a cartoon or comic book. 'I'm the good guy and you're the bad guy.' In spite of their shared interest in abundant housing, the socialist YIMBYs and capitalist YIMBYs are never going to agree on the means to the end. The best first step is something both sides claim to support: getting rid of the local regulatory barriers that are preventing anyone from building a granny flat, a townhouse, a duplex, etc.

Illegal immigrants storm US beaches as Coast Guard battles migrant surge that rose under Biden
Illegal immigrants storm US beaches as Coast Guard battles migrant surge that rose under Biden

Fox News

time24 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Illegal immigrants storm US beaches as Coast Guard battles migrant surge that rose under Biden

The rise in illegal immigration that took place by boats under the Biden administration has created unique dangers for law enforcement, according to a border security expert. Maritime illegal immigration, using boats to enter the U.S. illegally, rose during the Biden administration as a result of the political and economic crises of Haiti and Cuba, according to the Migration Policy Institute. In February 2023, the U.S. Naval Institute said that illegal immigrant interdiction operations were in a "state of emergency" due to societal turmoil in Caribbean countries. Along the border between the U.S. and Mexico in California, illegal immigrants attempt to cross into America using boats as well. On July 12, the U.S. Coast Guard interdicted three people who were trying to enter the U.S. illegally by boat and were apprehended at Imperial Beach in San Diego County, California. Two individuals said they were Mexican, while one said they were Turkish. In January, the U.S. Coast Guard intercepted a boat carrying 21 illegal immigrants that was headed toward San Diego. Coast Guard officials and Border Protection officials apprehended the illegal immigrants, who were from various countries. "They don't want anyone to drown and die trying to cross into the U.S. Illegally…" "Initial interviews revealed that all individuals claimed Mexican nationality, although subsequent checks identified two passengers as Guatemalan and Salvadoran nationals," the Coast Guard wrote in a press release. California isn't close to the only state having to handle migrant incursions along its shores. In February, the Coast Guard intercepted 132 Haitians on a boat south of the Florida Keys. The Coast Guard boarded the 30-foot vessel and processed the illegal immigrants before they were repatriated to Haiti, according to officials. "The Coast Guard will continue to prioritize strengthening our domestic integrity and disrupting attempts to enter the United States illegally by sea," said Coast Guard District Seven enforcement officer Lt. Zane Carter. "We are steadfast in our mission to safeguard America by securing our maritime borders." Simon Hankinson, senior research fellow in the Border Security and Immigration Center at The Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital that these interdictions create a unique danger for law enforcement authorities. "Well, I've seen a very different pattern, say, between the U.K. and France versus off the U.S. coast, where it seems to be a variety of, you know, if it's professional smugglers with really fast boats trying to bring people in and drop them off, then that's one thing for the Coast Guard to cope with," Hankinson said. "And if it is people organizing themselves in leaky boats with insufficient engines and overcrowded conditions, then it's a different thing. I think for the Coast Guard, for our law enforcement, that the issue of safety is obviously paramount." "They don't want anyone to drown and die trying to cross into the U.S. Illegally, even if they're not supposed to do it, but they're also probably worried about people carrying weapons who are trying to smuggle drugs and people in for money," he added. Hankinson said the U.S. should look at what's happening in the United Kingdom as a case study on what to avoid. The U.K. saw 19,982 cross the English Channel to enter the country in the first six months of 2025, according to Sky News. That figure is up almost 50% compared to the first six months of 2024. "You know, I was born in England. It's tragic what's happening there," he said. "You have a whole family of Palestinians who were allowed to stay, even though they'd applied under a program for Ukrainians. You know it's a sort of national suicide by generosity."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store