As an organization committed to protecting the freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression, the National Coalition Against Censorship is alarmed by reports that the Smithsonian Institution’s National Portrait Gallery proposed amending the planned display of a painting because of fears that the work would attract the ire of President Donald Trump. The action is one more disturbing sign of the extent to which a pall of self-censorship has been cast across the country following the slew of Executive Orders and administrative actions issued earlier this year. Arts and culture institutions receiving government support are choosing to sacrifice the integrity of their programming for fear that diverging from the administration’s ideological imperatives would cost them their funding. In the case of the Smithsonian, which, though technically independent, currently receives sixty-two percent of its billion dollar plus budget from the government, such a cost could be fatal.
The painting in question, Trans Forming Liberty by Amy Sherald, portrays the Statue of Liberty as a transgender woman. It is one of 50 portraits that were to be featured in the National Portrait Gallery’s upcoming presentation of American Sublime, a traveling solo exhibition of Sherald’s work. According to the artist, Smithsonian Institution leadership proposed reconsidering installation plans for Trans Forming Liberty in order to avoid scrutiny of the President, whose Executive Orders have made it government policy to deny the existence of transgender people, and rid the Smithsonian of any content that contradicts his idea of “American Greatness.”
Sherald claims that the proposed changes entailed replacing the Trans Forming Liberty with a video documenting audience responses to the painting–some of which denigrate transgender individuals. Museum officials, meanwhile, claim that the proposed video would simply accompany and “contextualize” the painting. Regardless of which is true, the addition of such a video would do little to enrich the understanding of the work within the artist’s oeuvre. Rather, it would seem a vehicle to undermine the intent of the artist and the power of her vision. While the Smithsonian could have legitimately held an accompanying program discussing transgender issues, as well as offered materials relating to social disagreements over gender identity, the placement of a prominent video immediately next to the work in question inevitably alters its meaning and the integrity of the artist’s vision. It is unsurprising that Sherald decided to cancel the exhibition.
The Smithsonian Institution responded to Sherald’s decision stating, “we are disappointed that Smithsonian audiences will not have an opportunity to experience American Sublime.” Though that is indeed a lamentable outcome, it signals a far more distressing fact: in this new era of official government censorship, cultural institutions across the United States are censoring their own programming and betraying their responsibility towards the artists and artwork they display in order to avoid the wrath of the federal government. Liberty is, indeed, transforming, but, contrary to the joyful, proud and expansive transformation represented by Sherald, something sinister, shameful, and shriveled is replacing it.