Addressing Racism or Creating it?
Of the many
reasons to go to an art gallery surely among the more important is, as it
always was, to find a space that is separate from the distractions and worries
of the everyday world.
In such a
place, shared with others who feel likewise, a congenial and contemplative
atmosphere is created which allows one’s mind to settle and then best
appreciate the interest, craft and especially beauty of the images viewed – or
the challenge posed by works so intended. And from this comes the little
epiphanies, delights, puzzles and spiritual renewal which art can bring. Beauty
and delight can be found everywhere, of course, but can best find deliberate
focus in the places dedicated to it. All that is needed, then, for the gallery
to work its magic, is that the space is respected for what it is. This respect
is the visitor’s responsibility, but takes place under the auspices and
protection of the custodians.
In our
current age of national mental breakdown and perpetual racial outrage, such a
space with its attendant protection is needed more than ever. And for this
reason, those who would destroy us, especially target those places of refuge, like
our sports venues (see post, Follow, Follow, ….from July) and like our art galleries. And so, visitors to
our National Gallery on The Mound find the following reminder of our White
guilt and worthlessness, included in a threat to find more of the same hiding
within our art. Seeing this sign is like
Kryptonite to the art-lover’s soul - as intended!
Here, the
source of ancestor pride coverts to shame and the tonic we hope for in visiting
the gallery becomes the poison.
Consider the
NLP wording, which subtly indicates they would not be pleased to receive
criticism- because such would be racist, obviously. Note too, the vagueness of
the threat to research: Who is doing what, to what standard with what
measurable goal and for whom? And why is the gallery concerned with
equality and anti-racism anyway – has it been such a bastion of prejudice, one
wonders, for almost its entire existence? Sarcasm doesn’t work here, of course,
and the thinking person knows not to bother asking what this waffle means, but
the threat is real, as is the destructive power behind it. And we note the coda – commitment to equality
– that justifies anything really, even as it means nothing but subversion of
our culture.
This statement
gives the appearance of foolishness, but don’t mistake the golems for the
master behind it. The intent is evil, for the goal is to create a new Original
Sin from which Whitey’s mind will not escape- with the law as a back-up,
naturally. Slavery is referenced, but Black people are not the overseers of
this plantation.
Meanwhile, in the gallery’s anti-racism research laboratory deep underground, top dollar justice consultants 1 will peer into the souls of our ancestors for alleged offenses against the 21st Century. And they will find them: Any moderately wealthy person from the past would be the beneficiary of family investments in bonds and schemes that linked to the colonies and plantations, either directly or indirectly through various mercantile interests - hence racist! Or worse, even family members in the direct employ of our great empire of conquest and trade, or (Oh, the shame!) married into it. And naturally, our ancestors held opinions that were typical for their society's age. Examined thusly, without prejudice, one would find that virtually the gallery's entire collection, indeed even its existence, from its founding, management, bequests, loans and purchases all riddled with wrongthinkers, and ripe for tearing down; or, should we model our displeasure with our ancestor’s wrong opinions in the French fashion, a la Notre Dame!
And why not;
why stop there? What about visitors entering the gallery with racist or anti-equality
attitudes, shouldn’t they too join the banned art? And here’s the rub, eventually they will!
Returning to the theme of our blog, our children in school are getting brought
up with this thinking; haircuts, swimming, cutlery, puddings, exams, keyboards,
milk, good manners, reading, etc, etc, etc, are all outed as racist and
elitist. The gallery’s commitment will make sense to them, but not go far
enough for their well-stoked fire of righteous indignation. Eventually, then, someone
will burn it down – we’re asking for it!
There is no end to this: religious art no doubt offends some and invites firstly criticism and eventually machetes. Domestic scenes (a particular favourite of mine) are claimed as demeaning the role of women. Family settings proselytise for the patriarchy. The Dutch masters deny, by their technical brilliance, the supposed equal merit of a tribal shaman's mask. In painting David Hume's2 portrait, Allan Ramsey surely exposes himself as an equal in racist crimethink - away with both of them! This ride never ends...
I have visited British art galleries all my life, and although have seen works of dubious merit and intentionally subversive garbage, I have never seen or heard tell of works which were intended to (or actually did) offend the sensibilities, or otherwise sought to, demean ethnic others, or any other identity group within our society – indeed, the opposite is the case. Realistically, such art does not exist in public galleries in our country–if it exists at all.3
However, the
alleged offenses matter little and the truth not at all. For the real intent is
not to combat racism and other alleged prejudices, but to create them. A
resentment is awakened in ethnic others’ to European excellence in art, then
given legitimacy and a weapon of expression. How can this end well for anyone
involved?
For ethnic others’
driven to slow anger by our apparent endless racism, which even resides in that
art which we believe to be the highest expression of our aesthetic. And for us older
palefaces, lost and confused in a miasma of gas-lighting and lies, anti-white
smears and psychological warfare. Our refuges breached and our erstwhile
protectors, in fact, a fifth column – who, we note, will be pleased to receive
information which supports their work. Such overwhelming self-righteousness is nicely
balanced by their betrayal of our art and the fragile public space in which it
lives.
What think
ye?
1. Such Racism Researchers should have due recognition: I recommend a National Art Zero-tolerance Initiative uniform and accoutrements, perhaps this could be abbreviated to an acronym to better fit onto their armbands. They could also do in-house checks for potential staff apostasy as kind of internal police, perhaps modelled on a certain European pattern of recent memory. For such checks they would be issued sidearms; a Luger would be a good choice.
2. The 18th Century Scottish enlightenment philosopher has recently been outed as a racist and, as a disrespect to his memory, BLM-loving Edinburgh University has removed his name from one of its buildings so as 'not to give offense'. In this act, I believe, they have done him a favour; the former David Hume Tower was a typical '60s Lego-style concrete box and immensely ugly to his memory.
3. I have read
fairly recently (last five years) of two examples of exhibition artworks that
were explicitly racist. These featured, and arguably promoted, the genocide of White
people; their alleged intent was a riposte to White privilege. They were not UK
based.
Art which promotes identity pride, or celebrates it, is of course a commonplace in which we as native Whites happily partake. With one exception.
