Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Yazmany Arboleda: Assassination and Art

UPDATE, June 20, 2008: Yazmany Arboleda makes his case.

In the past several weeks I have been called a racist, a sexist, and a media whore. I have been criticized, critiqued and questioned (not the least of which involved the NYPD and the United States Secret Service). I have been labeled one of the three assholes of the apocalypse and a commentator on this blog referred to my work as a hoax and cheap stunt and to me personally as a crackpot.

My name is Yazmany Arboleda and I am an artist. Most recently, my two installations, "The Assassination of Barack Obama" and "The Assassination of Hillary Clinton" made headlines when law officials detained me over the use of the word "assassination" in my exhibit. The reactions that followed have sparked numerous dialogues about politics, art and the law. My goal was to create a mirror through which we might perceive the way traditional and online media continues to preach racism, sexism, ageism, and homophobia. I created The Assassinations to better understand how American society communicates and how visual codes appeal to cultural stereotypes, prejudices, desires, and fears. The result has been a maelstrom of dialogue more passionate and pervasive than I ever anticipated.
__________________

From the New York Times:
This morning, a Boston-born performance artist, Yazmany Arboleda, tried to set up a provocative art exhibition in a vacant storefront on West 40th Street in Midtown Manhattan with the title, “The Assassination of Hillary Clinton/The Assassination of Barack Obama,” in neatly stenciled letters on the plate glass windows at street level.

By 9:30 a.m., New York City police detectives and Secret Service agents had shut down the exhibition, and building workers had quickly covered over the inflammatory title with large sheets of brown paper and blue masking tape. The gallery is across the street from the southern entrance to The New York Times building.

The police officers declined to answer any questions, and at first would not permit reporters to speak with Mr. Arboleda, who was wearing a black T-shirt and making cellphone calls from inside the makeshift gallery.

Later, Mr. Arboleda, who is 27, said in an interview: “It’s art. It’s not supposed to be harmful. It’s about character assassination — about how Obama and Hillary have been portrayed by the media.” He added, “It’s about the media.”

Mr. Arboleda said the exhibition was to open on Thursday and run all day.

The interview was abruptly ended as Mr. Arboleda was led off to the Midtown South police precinct for what he called an interrogation.

Reached by telephone this morning, Eric Joza, the building manager for the building at 264 West 40th Street, between Eighth and Seventh Avenues, said: “I had no idea what he was going to do. All I knew is that he was an artist and was going to use the store for two days: today and tomorrow.” There are offices above the storefront.

Mr. Joza would not identify the building’s owner, and he would not disclose the terms of the lease or the previous occupant of the storefront, beyond saying that the storefront had been vacant.

Mr. Arboleda has even set up elaborate Web sites, one for Mrs. Clinton and one for Mr. Obama.

Is this censorship?

Is this the infringement of Arboleda's civil rights? Is the Constitution being shredded?

What do you think, libs?

Is it wrong that Arboleda can't show his art?

Why is there this sort of reaction over an artist's expression when it comes to a work dealing with the MEDIA assassination of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?

That didn't happen when
"Al Brandtner's work titled 'Patriot Act,' which depicted a sheet of mock 37-cent red, white and blue stamps showing a revolver pointed at Bush's head," was displayed at a college art gallery in Chicago.



The Secret Service sent agents to investigate a college art gallery exhibit of mock postage stamps, one depicting President Bush with a gun pointed at his head.

The exhibit, called "Axis of Evil: The Secret History of Sin," opened last week at Columbia College in Chicago. It features stamps designed by 47 artists addressing issues such as the Roman Catholic sex abuse scandal, racism and the war in Iraq.

...Secret Service spokesman Tom Mazur would not say Tuesday whether the inquiry had been completed or whom the Secret Service had interviewed, but he said no artwork had been confiscated.

The investigation began after authorities received a call from a Chicago resident.

"We need to ensure, as best we can, that this is nothing more than artwork with a political statement," Mazur said.

The exhibit's curator, Michael Hernandez de Luna, said the [Secret Service] inquiry "frightens" him.

"It starts questioning all rights, not only my rights or the artists' rights in this room, but questioning the rights of any artist who creates — any writer, any visual artist, any performance artist. It seems like we're being watched," he said.

This exhibit was NOT shut down.

Even so, the lib media focused on the heavy-handedness of government officials and the chill wind of censorship.

Then there was the film, Death of a President, Gabriel Range's sick fantasy of the assassination of President George W. Bush. It was heartily supported by free speech proponents and those with BDS.

Why is Yazmany Arboleda's exhibition different?

I hope all the Lefties will stand up for Arboleda and demand that his art be shown.

It would be very hypocritical if they didn't.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree with you more, but the MSM will ignore anything that doesn't further their 'cause'

Mary said...

True. The lens of their cause colors everything.

Anonymous said...

Regardless of the artistic merits, Yazmany Arboleda's exhibition violates no law. Police interference with Arboleda's lawful activities and Arboleda being hustled away for interogation by the Secret Service begs the question of who might the law-breakers be in this story.

Akhenaten_IX said...

Are you all crazy? Why do most artists/bohemians and other colorful characters choose to ignore practicality and logic when it comes to analysis and discourse?

If you yell fire in a crowded theater, you will go to jail. Is that a violation of free speech? No. Its a protection of the liberty and safety of others.

That piece of filth that Arboleda tried to pass off as art is the equivalent of some idiot yelling fire in a crowded theater.

He should be thankful that the police shut him down. If not, his gallery might have been torched.

Akhenaten_IX said...

Let me also say that it can be dangerous to reach beyond one's grasp.

Referring to the future commander-in-chief's daughters as nappy headed hos can't be a great idea. Neither is it tasteful.

Anonymous said...

I personally worked with Yazmany on chosing this space for his event and I think what he's done is great. It proves how the media easily influences everyone and hes showing that to the world.

Mary said...

I'm going to assume that the comment of "anonymous, 5:01 PM, June 05, 2008" is a bit of performance art.

Personally, I don't care for it. It's vulgar.

jaxx said...

arboleda got exactly what he wanted -- his exclusive concern is with the publicity he could generate this way. there's nothing interesting about it.

i don't think this is an example of anybody's free speech being violated, and i also don't find the exhibit offensive. the whole controversy was manufactured by arboleta - it's just a publicity stunt.

i went on and on about it on my own blog this morning. please stop by if you like:

www.getangrywithme.com

Akhenaten_IX said...

Jaxx is right (partially). This was a publicity stunt pure and simple.

However including the image of two small children in conjunction with the word "hos" is distasteful to say the least.

Let me just say that controversy as a marketing ploy is a savvy business move, however, it doesn't say a lot about the artist's talent level.

ValleyGrrlie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ValleyGrrlie said...

Both websites that Mr. Arboleda set up are not functioning: Is this his doing, or did the Thought Police have their way with him?

In the timeless words of the great prog-rock band, Rush:

"CONFORM OR BE CAST OUT".

Mary said...

Both websites are up now.

Mary said...

Perhaps the sites crashed due to heavy traffic.

M.W. said...

yazmany is concerned exclusively with publicity. before his "arrest" he posted and publicized this ridiculous assassination show. it was a fake, computer generated images on fake websites.

years ago I had the "honor" of studying with yazmany. he exhibited himself to be a manipulative and plagiarizin, as well as a liar, chanign where he was from, what nationality he was to suit his day-to-day purposes. in short, he is a hack.

i wouldn't trust him or pay him any attention---he’s not even disgusting enough to be interesting.

Mary said...

I can't verify your comments, but you provide an interesting perspective.

Anonymous said...

People are not free to say whatever they like in this country and everyone knows it. There are some groups that it is acceptable to disrespect and nobody says "boo" about and other groups that when spoken against get you demonized. I believe say what you want just be ready to defend it possibly with your life.

Deb said...

I wonder how he (or his family) would feel if someone tried to open an exhibit entitled "Assassination of Yazmany Arboleda"? What goes around, comes around.

Mary said...

Personally, I find the "assassination art" objectionable, whether its subject is Bush or Hillary or Obama.

That's not the point of discussion for me. The double standard is the issue.

Anonymous said...

Nothing invovling the assisination of a president or potential president should be illustrated. The aritst way of trying to use his freedom of speech was not responsible. Yes, America gives freedom of speech but come on people use common sense. You do not go around saying displaying this about assassinating a president. And like someone said its probably a stunt. How come the other presidents like Bill Clinton, McCain..did not get a display. And he had to know in his simple minded brain that this would cause controversy. The assassination of an black man and women who are trying to become president is what people see. This is a new change for America so displaying that is screaming for attention.

And for the people who think the cops were denying freedom of speech, go back in your box and regain common sense. Callin someone daughters nappy headed hos should not be displayed in public.

Mary said...

True, Arboleda's subjects were Obama and Hillary.

But, as I noted in my post, other "artists" have used President Bush in their assassination "art."

Those displays were not shut down.

Again, I'm not advocating assassination art. I'm merely pointing out the double standard.

Unknown said...

While I support your right to say whatever you want to say in the public square, I can also take note that the Obama exhibit seemed a much more personal and offensive than anything I saw in the Clinton exhibit. Though there were stabs at Clinton, they appear to be more in the direction of her fashion and past political history (things that can change) while Obama's is based on his culture and skin tone (something that cannot be changed). I think we are going to have to come to an understanding in our society that these kind of depictions and descriptions do not carry equal weight. Obama, and even African Americans who are not interested in voting for him (or even those not interested in voting for anyone) are more vulnerable to the damage that can be caused by the willingness of those not of the Black Community to attempt to make an issue of his heritage. The display is based more on how the media deals with "Black" people, than with how the media has dealt with this particular MAN, while the attacks on Hillary really only besmirch her personally, not the entire culture of "White" women.

Jared Hassan Foles
World Eater Recordings, NYC

Mary said...

I think one has to consider the point of Arboleda's work.

Was he engaging in promoting one candidate over the other?

Moreover, an artist isn't bound by a Fairness Doctrine.

Ardoleda created what he did.

Was he even-handed in his depictions of Obama and Hillary?

I don't think he was required to be.

Remember, this is art.

Mary said...

I won't dignify your comment.

Mary said...

Yeah, well, I don't care for that "art."

This is important:

Note that I didn't delete your "art," baby.

Anonymous said...

I AGREE WITH Akhenaten_IX. ANYONE WHO THINKS THAT AWFUL DISPLAY WAS ART HAS SERIOUS PROBLEM. HE IS CRAZY AND THE POLICE HAD EVERY RIGHT TO SHUT IT DOWN.