So, there's a targeted harassment campaign and doxxing by Mail and Sun against the curator of the @RoystonMuseum and claims of vandalism and terrorism for a thread detailing what affects or doesn't affect bronze statues...as a joke. Because people on Twitter don't get nuance.
Not sure how to break it to the ardent defenders of racist statues littering the UK but they are...bronze statues outside. Already exposed to the elements. Already deteriorating. And as a consequence already damaged. Via nature. Not vandalism. The whole thread was a joke
Public works are subjected to their environment...constantly. It's not a museum environment. I'm sorry to break it to you but public statues go through a lot. Rubbed. Tagged. Painted on. (Worse.) Because that's their function? To be physically accessible to the public.
Critically commenting on the purpose of statues commemorating slavers and commenting on their fragility with musings on what tomato juice can do to *already disease-ridden public bronze statues* is not tantamount to inciting vandalism. It's. A. Joke. Because guess what.
Colston's statue taken down via direct action has provoked a conversation, SHOWN that these statues have NO right to be in this space. They have no use as a reflection of our current values. Nor do they have an aesthetic value as objects LITERALLY DESIGNED TO BE DAMAGED OUTSIDE.
(And anyone reading the tweets before jumping to massive conclusions might understand the joke linking shaming a static, inanimate object for representing someone racist and tomato-pelting - which...do I even have to explain the historical precedence of throwing ripe tomatoes?)
The best thing a public statue can wish for is to be interacted with or created in ways that reflect its environments' current values. In 2020, makeshift memorials spring up to commemorate murdered black people and slavers' statues join the bottom of the sea.
These statues don't belong in a museum because they are designed to face the outdoors. And museums already have looted artefacts and problematic objects they need to reinterpret to deal with. There's already enough work without taking in wrecked bronze public art racist statues
A museum curator's role isn't to dogmatically protect every piece of outdoor public art "because it's art". Public art is inherently designed to run its course. And if the NATURAL corrosion of racist statues doesn't tell you they have run their course, anti-racist action will.
It doesn't make any sense to condemn a curator who is doing what the heritage sector SHOULD be doing in 2020: using heritage MUSEUM collections to elevate local voices which are still not celebrated as much as they should be in museums.
A curator isn't a dogmatic guardian of objects at the expense of human pain but someone whose role it is to understand how to adapt their research and practice to allow for more audiences to engage with heritage. And speaking out against racism and colonial legacies is part of it
Museums have been built on colonial violence and are still filled with racist objects and artworks. And it's not just a bonus exercise to understand how our approach to heritage must be critical to reflect this. It is a full part of the job.
And our sector can only change if we challenge the status quo.
