• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

“The Assassination of Hillary Clinton/The Assassination of Barack Obama” Art Exhibit

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gaborn

Member
Updated, 3:30 p.m. | 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 station 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.

Shortly after 11:30 a.m., Mr. Arboleda called reporters to let them know that he had been released.

“The Secret Service had to do a whole questionnaire with me,” he said. “It was about an hour of questioning. They asked if I owned guns, if I was a violent person, if I had ever been institutionalized.”


Mr. Arboleda answered no. Nonetheless, he said the Secret Service asked him if he would voluntarily take down the exhibition title from the window.

“I’m renting that space; the space was allocated for an exhibition and it’s my right to put those words up,” he said. “They said it could incite someone to do something crazy, like break the window. It’s terrible, because they’re violating my rights. If someone breaks a window, they’re committing a crime.”

He added, “The exhibition is supposed to be about character assassination. It’s philosophical and metaphorical.”

He said he had not yet decided whether to take down the exhibition’s title, saying he first needed to speak to representatives of the building’s owner.


Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, speaking to reporters at 1 Police Plaza around noon, said, “I am not certain he has been arrested,” then added, “He put up signs indicating the assassination of Senator Clinton and Barack Obama. And we notified the Secret Service. This individual is being spoken to. He apparently made statements that had to with their reputation. This is all under investigation.”

Asked whether the artwork was being seen as dangerous, Mr. Kelly said: “Obviously, it sounds totally inappropriate. We need more information as to what the purpose of it was. As I say, apparently he made some statements that he was referring to their reputations … don’t know, we will have to get more information. But he is being questioned now by our detectives and the Secret Service.”

Mr. Kelly was also asked why the artist would be questioned at all. “Why would we question him?” he responded. “Well, we want to determine what his motives are. Obviously they could be interpreted as advocating harm to protectees; both of the senators, of course, are now being provided Secret Service protection, that’s why the Secret Service was interested; both of them are federal employees, so, ah, of course it is a concern to federal authorities as it is to ourselves. Our lawyers are researching it and will determine if there are any violations of law; right now he is being questioned.”

(In fact, when Mr. Kelly spoke, Mr. Arboleda had already been released from custody a short while earlier.)

Special Agent Eric P. Zahren, a spokesman for the Secret Service in Washington, emphasized in a telephone interview that the agency did not seek to shut down the show.

“We did not shut down that exhibit or request that anybody else shut it down,” Agent Zahren said. “This was brought to our attention, we went out there and had a conversation with the individual, but we did not shut it down.”

According to Mr. Arboleda’s Web sites, he was born in Boston in 1981 and lives in New York City. His family moved to Medellín, Colombia, shortly after he was born, and lived there until 1992. He holds a master’s degree in architecture from the Catholic University of America and has been trained in photography, painting, fashion design and graphic design. His first solo show, “The New Vitruvians,” was presented at Tribeca Issey Miyake in 2007.

Assassination has been the subject of many cultural products, including even a Stephen Sondheim musical, “Assassins.” But in the post-9/11 context, recent comments touching on assassination during this political season — including references by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton — have hit a nerve, and have been followed by apologies.

The safety of Mr. Obama, the presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee, has been an issue. When he was assigned Secret Service coverage in May 2007, it was the earliest point in a campaign that a candidate had been given protection. In February, Jeff Zeleny of The Times wrote a Political Memo on the “hushed worry” on the minds of many Obama supporters; it mentioned how his wife, Michelle Obama, had voiced concerns about his safety.

“Checkpoint,” a 2004 novel by Nicholson Baker, purported to plumb the thoughts of a would-be presidential assassin. In 2006, a British digital-television station commissioned a 90-minute film, “Death of a President,” about the aftermath of a fictional assassination of President Bush by a sniper.

NYT Blog

I think the end of the story really says it very well. There's no way this should've been shut down, other SITTING PRESIDENTS have had similar artistic work depicted about them being assassinated, it's a contemporary speech issue. This has nothing to do with advocating for either candidate's assassination (at least apparently) this has to do with irrational and outmoded content based fears.
 
What's the point of something like this? Why would anyone even want to think about something like this? What if someone put up an exibit of "The Assassination of Yazmany Arboleda's Mom and children"? It's just not cool and I don't want to see things like that while I'm walking down the street trying to enjoy my day.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Dark Octave said:
What's the point of something like this? Why would anyone even want to think about something like this? What if someone put up an exibit of "The Assassination of Yazmany Arboleda's Mom and children"? It's just not cool and I don't want to see things like that while I'm walking down the street trying to enjoy my day.

There are pictures of the exhibit, its not like that at all, its "charachter assassination".. its actually pretty well done.
 

Gaborn

Member
Dark Octave said:
What's the point of something like this? Why would anyone even want to think about something like this? What if someone put up an exibit of "The Assassination of Yazmany Arboleda's Mom and children"? It's just not cool and I don't want to see things like that while I'm walking down the street trying to enjoy my day.

So don't look. That's the same objection to adult book stores. People think forms of expression that make them uncomfortable shouldn't be allowed or defended, or aren't worth it to them, and it really is disgusting. The first amendment isn't intended to protect every day speech that most people don't object to, it's intended to protect from interference speech people DO generally disagree with.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
attention whore.

LOOK AT ME I AM AN ARTIST!!!!!!

He should be allowed to continue, but that is what he is.
 

Gaborn

Member
Stinkles said:
attention whore.

LOOK AT ME I AM AN ARTIST!!!!!!

I'm pretty sure you could say that about... well, any artist. Isn't art meant to be displayed? Art isn't usually created for the artist, it's created for the public to view it.
 
If it's about the "character assassination" of both candidates label it so....when I see "assassination" I immediately think of murder. This doesn't help with the fears many people have about the Obama being a target...
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
It's slightly off-topic, but this reminds me of a lecture we were given when I started college, about network and internet usage. The guy giving it, the network admin, told us of a story of one student in a previous year who had jokingly said something about assassinating the US president, on the web. Within days, the police were around, saying they'd be informed by the FBI of this, and they were investigating it etc., that they'd traced the comment to this IP address..

The whole thing sounded a bit ludicrous to me, but it seemed like a very 'out-there' story to raise if it didn't actually happen.

edit - to clarify, I'm not even in the US, this was a university in Ireland.
 

Gaborn

Member
Shawnwhann said:
If it's about the "character assassination" of both candidates label it so....when I see "assassination" I immediately think of murder. This doesn't help with the fears many people have about the Obama being a target...

Exactly the point though. Art is often by nature controversial. The title is intended to get you upset and to pay attention. The actual exhibit is about their character assassination rather than that of their body, but that's only a detail I'd say. People have always had assassination fears about any President and any Presidential candidate, that hasn't stopped other exhibits books and movies about other fictional assassinations against presidents, and in most of THOSE cases it was of them physically rather than their character.
 
Gaborn said:
So don't look. That's the same objection to adult book stores. People think forms of expression that make them uncomfortable shouldn't be allowed or defended, or aren't worth it to them, and it really is disgusting. The first amendment isn't intended to protect every day speech that most people don't object to, it's intended to protect from interference speech people DO generally disagree with.
You can't help but see big letters of the title. It's unpleasant. If he wants to fantasize about what would happen if these people were killed and make art or write a book about it, that's on him, but I don't need to see it plastered all over a building that I can't avoid seeing.

An adult bookstore is a business that serves a purpose. It makes money no different from Starbucks. Some people don't like it, but it's not referring to harming other living human beings, like this exibit is.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Gaborn said:
I'm pretty sure you could say that about... well, any artist. Isn't art meant to be displayed? Art isn't usually created for the artist, it's created for the public to view it.


Yep, but this smacks of marketing, rather than the baseline intent of the original piece(s). I think it's disgraceful that authorities tried to intervene. Every resource that's spent on stupid zero level shit like this is a resource not being spent on real threats. Same as the garbage we go through at the airport.
 

Gaborn

Member
Dark Octave said:
You can't help but see big letters of the title. It's unpleasant. If he wants to fantasize about what would happen if these people were killed and make art or write a book about it, that's on him, but I don't need to see it plastered all over a building that I can't avoid seeing.

An adult bookstore is a business that serves a purpose. It makes money no different from Starbucks. Some people don't like it, but it's not referring to harming other living human beings, like this exibit is.

Well, as already noted the exhibit is about their character rather than their physical body. Still though, you certainly CAN ignore something like that if you wish, and words don't by themselves harm anybody. Would you object to a giant billboard (assuming some asshole company was willing to rent the space) that said "Barack Obama is an (N-word)?" I'd find it objectionable, but I'd defend that. Or someone with one that said "Bush Is a Jackass" or "Libertarians are puppies sunshine and ice cream idiots" or... well, anything you care to mention. The right to free speech is entirely expansive in the public square so long as you're not advocating violence (which this exhibit isn't) or actually defaming a private citizen (a public citizen has a much higher standard as to whether something is defamatory).

Stinkles - Yes it's marketing. I'm glad you agree it shouldn't have been stopped though.
 
Gaborn said:
Well, as already noted the exhibit is about their character rather than their physical body. Still though, you certainly CAN ignore something like that if you wish, and words don't by themselves harm anybody. Would you object to a giant billboard (assuming some asshole company was willing to rent the space) that said "Barack Obama is an (N-word)?" I'd find it objectionable, but I'd defend that. Or someone with one that said "Bush Is a Jackass" or "Libertarians are puppies sunshine and ice cream idiots" or... well, anything you care to mention. The right to free speech is entirely expansive in the public square so long as you're not advocating violence (which this exhibit isn't) or actually defaming a private citizen (a public citizen has a much higher standard as to whether something is defamatory).

Stinkles - Yes it's marketing. I'm glad you agree it shouldn't have been stopped though.

I'm with you on this exhibit, but not the N-word billboard. That's dergogatory and invades the public's personal space with objectionable content.
 

bone idle

Member
40 years ago...

"in early 1968, Kennedy announced his own campaign for president, seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party. Kennedy defeated McCarthy in the critical California primary but was shot shortly after midnight on June 5, 1968, dying on June 6."

(from the Robert Kennedy wikipedia page)

coincidence?
 

Gaborn

Member
worldrunover said:
I'm with you on this exhibit, but not the N-word billboard. That's dergogatory and invades the public's personal space with objectionable content.

Well, first I think it'd be an idiotic idea, it'd turn people off to their message if they simply don't like the man. it'd probably be banned under public decency laws (same with the "jackass" billboard I postulated) which I can understand. But my general point wasn't the specific example (which I thought of mainly for shock value without really thinking about them) but the general point that people are allowed to make negative commentary about a candidate, even shockingly negative (but probably not profane content like that). A better example, if someone came up with a website like... *googles* Obamaisanidiot.com and put their website on a giant billboard (same with any other candidate obviously, and no, not a website, I just checked) I wouldn't object to that.

bone idle - I sincerely hope its just a coincidence. We don't need anything happening to any of our Presidential candidates.
 

bone idle

Member
Gaborn said:
I sincerely hope its just a coincidence. We don't need anything happening to any of our Presidential candidates.

I just thought the date of this exhibition/story seemed planned to parallel the assassination of RFK. Probably a marketing drive. Of course, I too hope there are no more assassinations.
 
bone idle said:
I just thought the date of this exhibition/story seemed planned to parallel the assassination of RFK. Probably a marketing drive. Of course, I too hope there are no more assassinations.

He bought the space for these two days specifically. I doubt it was a coincidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom