You’re in the Picture – Controversy
August 28 – October 17, 2015
The Projects
FAT Village, Ft. Lauderdale
The curatorial theme for Possessed is inspired by the rampant trend of “selfies” at art exhibitions. I am inviting artists that create striking, colorful, provocative, 3-dimensional artworks, to creatively respond to the narcissism of the viewer.
Consider how you would display your artwork, or create an installation that will entice viewers to “Strike a pose” next to your work. You can either honor, or critique this selfie trend.
– Lisa Rockford, Curator
My installation, “You’re in the Picture”, consists of four 4’ W x 6’ H foamboard panels. Each depicts a collaged scene where a person is taking a selfie while standing or positioned in front of or in a scene of destruction or torment. Each panel has an oval-shape cut-out in place of the head. Viewers instinctively pose by sticking their head through the reverse side while a friend or whoever they’re with takes a picture of them as if the person posing were the ones taking their selfie. There’s the guy blithely posing in front of the atomic bomb explosion. There’s a woman taking a selfie with a backdrop of a man’s bloody hand and face smashed into a cracked windshield. The most popular by far, the goofy bow-tie kid being eaten by a shark. An ice cream cone In one hand and his other clasping a cell phone on an outstretched arm.
And finally, the juxtaposition of controversy. The background is easily the most iconic image of the Vietnam War, Nick Ut’s Pulitzer Prize winning black and white photograph of a terrified, screaming, 9 year old, Kim Phuc, running from her napalm-bombed village, while in the foreground a profoundly unaware bikini-clad girl, tiki drink complete with cocktail umbrella in one hand, cell phone outstretched taking a selfie. It’s a scene that even John Waters might be repulsed by.
So it wasn’t a shock when some critics voiced very intense opinions. Some demanded that the offensive panel be removed (immediately). (One suggested replacing it with a bear attack). Written comments have included threats of legal action, news media and sponsor consequences. Heartfelt opinions, I thought, regarding the artists lack of sensitivity and legal if not moral transgressions.
Some comments were part of a Facebook discussion where I had posted many pictures of viewers/participants posing on the night of the opening. Some conversations took place in email and text messages. This is a collection of all the correspondence and comments along with my responses.
On the Friday before the opening Lisa Rockford gave an insightful 15 minute talk with slide presentation which led into a panel discussion with five of the artists. Here’s the questions Lisa asked the panel.
—what made you want to be part of this exhibit?
—how do you react when you see people taking selfies with artwork you love or your own artwork? Do you consider it a positive or negative thing ?
—why do you think people take selfies with artwork? (For example, Is it a sign of a short attn. span, or a sign that people have a lack of respect for art)?
—do selfies cause the viewer to relate more to the artwork or instead draw attention to themselves and away from the work?
When you make artwork, do you ever consider the audience or how the piece will be perceived?
Do you think that when celebrities take selfies in art museums that it helps their fans to have a greater appreciation for art?
#1 (email to Lisa Rockford)
Why?
I am known for controversial, strange, weird art, But this is the most vile thing I have ever seen.
Making light of a celebrity, a politician, no worries. But, to make light of the tragedy of Kim Phuc is obscene!
Running for her life as the Napalm is burning her to the bone, an act that she is still suffering from (to this day!) is nothing to make fun of!
Who thought this would be cute?
What has happened to the amazing art scene I created in the 90’s and early 2000’s?
Please remove this piece out of respect to Kim Phuc, the Vietnamese community and anyone with any sense of dignity.
Needless to say I’m appalled, saddened and in shock as to the disrespect the So. Fla. art community considers art!
Jeffrey Holmes
#2 Lisa Rockford reply to Jeffrey, cc Randy Burman
Jeffrey,
Thank you for expressing your concern.
The artist, Randy Burman, did not create the piece to make fun of Kim Phuc or the Vietnam moment, but instead to draw attention to the fact that people are desensitized enough now with tragedy that they will take selfies in front of tragedy happening behind them.
I will let Randy respond to your email and explain why he made the piece.
Lisa Rockford
#3 Randy Burman response to Jeffrey Holmes
You had me at, “I’m known for controversial, strange and weird art“… I want to know more about your work.
But first, thank you for your heartfelt concern. I share your sensitivity and horror when seeing the Kim Phuc image.
There were others who were at the the exhibition opening who shared your sentiment. My own wife was willing to pose at each of the “You’re in the Picture” cut-out stations except this one.
Although, really, how much better is the station where the person is taking a selfie while standing in front of an atomic bomb explosion? Disrespectful to the citizens of Nagasaki and Hiroshima and anyone with a sense of dignity?
To anyone who is aware of the history of the Kim Phuc image, what it specifically depicts and how it reflects upon a nation’s failed belligerent and militaristic policy of aggression resulting in the death of so many innocent lives, this image is the definition of horrific.
Other powerfully shocking and iconic images, like the recent Syrian child found floating face down, the train station entrance to Auschwitz with “Arbeit macht frei” wrought in iron, planes crashing through the twin towers, or people jumping from those same towers, all have the ability to make us feel repulsed at what actually happened in the moment. When we see (what we interpret as) a crass exploitation or gratuitous use of the image we are doubly-angered and even indignant. Understood.
It gets worse.
I observed many visitors to the exhibition who apparently had no knowledge whatsoever of the image. I saw several people taking selfies and group shots standing in front of the work hiding Kim Phuc (not intentionally, just obliviously) by posing next to the woman in the bathing suit… completely oblivious to what the juxtaposition of the images implied. I found that ignorance horrific.
The artistic intent, however, was not to disrespect Kim Phuc, the Vietnamese community or anyone with a sense of dignity. What the work is expressing is that as a result of technological advances, media over-saturation, and rampant consummersim we, as a society and individuals, have become desensitized to tragedy and horror while simultaneously we have raised navel-gazing and self-obsession as specifically expressed in selfie-taking, to a level that everything is always all about us. Where everything is simply a background for us to pose against.
The work in no way intents to “make light” of any of the situations depicted, but contrarily, the entire work, each of the four stations of “You’re in the Picture” are actually in alignment with your sense of outrage and indignation.
Well the shark is really just for fun, although it too, still comments on our pre-disposition to capture every moment of our lives – including taking a selfie even as terrible things are happening to ourselves – as we are being devoured by a (metaphoric?) shark.
The commentary is that, WE SHOULD KNOW BETTER AND HERE’S PROOF THAT WE DON’T. And for further proof, as if the depictions alone were not enough, when people, had the explicit opportunity to pose or not with these horrific scenes, they often concluded, “no problem”.
On a secondary note I should add that part of my practice has to to with the questioning the legitimacy of using appropriated images.
#4 Jeffrey Holmes response to Randy Burman
Thanks for getting back to me as no one else has even bothered to respond.
Tragic, and disappointing at the very least.
While I am not a fan of a several paragraph diatribe to ‘explain’ the art as I’ve seen way to much crap art by some ‘art school’ grad.
The art should be able to stand on it’s own without explanation.
The audience I saw is there for the ‘scene’, the Food Trucks and the Car Rally (WTF?) not the art.
This is not the audience Ft. Lauderdale had 15 years ago.
Not a fan of ‘misappropriating’ other peoples images either as I have had more art & ideas stolen from me including LoCastro and Steve Stitch. Both have taken great liberties with my work. And that’s just the beginning!
I know the art world very well having created an art scene in FL years ago.
“L’art Noir’ & ‘Galerie Macabre’ (which the latter was stolen from me as well)
I gave LoCastro his first show, have exhibited the Collins and Christians Penis monster, produced shows at the Chili-Pepper, Poor House, Curator for the Broward Art Guild ‘Controversy Show’.
(Their best ever!) I created the St. Claude Arts District in New Orleans after Katrina, producing the first gallery exhibition in NOLA after Katrina and was even arrested for my art by the National Guard (a whole troop!) and thrown in the Angola South jail!
(and No I am NOT a ‘graffiti’ artist)
I have won numerous awards and accolades for my efforts in Ft. Lauderdale & New Orleans.
I am the creator of the Scavenger art hunt held every year in Ft. Lauderdale (that Sticht misappropriated btw)
I have exhibited artists from Mark Motherbaugh to Skip Williamson of Playboy fame and beyond.
“Best Local Art Show Ft. L. 2000” City Link
“Worst Loss for the Art Scene 2001” City Link
“Best Artist to Skip Town 2002” New Times
Times-Pic New Orleans Top 10 Art Events 2005 & 2007
I know art and It takes a LOT to offend me!!
I could understand what you were going for with some of the pieces but next to a wall of faces and some other other images, the piece lost itself in it’s message.
Had it been a bit more cohesive with the background subjects it might actually work.
While using images of a disaster is in poor taste in my opinion.
Kim Phuc is a single individual, but,
I just have 3 words for using the particular image of Kim Phuc.
It’s a child.
Jeffrey
#5 Randy Burman response to Jeffrey Holmes
Hi Jeffrey.
In reference to “no one else responding” I did post your letter (withholding your name) and my response on my Facebook page. You’re welcome to add your thoughts, opinions, beliefs, whatever in that thread – where – others have commented pro and con.
My measure of success for – You’re in the Picture, (and in particular: “Napalm Girl” with selfie-taker) installation is: Did it create a space for dialogue?
You know I’m not nearly as accomplished as you, and let me add my sincere respect for many of your efforts, save the I don’t know what to call it, don’t mean to be offensive, but sour grapes, I’m not sure what, might be justified, but really none of my business). I mean I have my own axes to grind and it probably wouldn’t look pretty in print. I recently suggested to a curator that I could do an exhibition of just drawing of rejected proposals and rejection notices. I’m sorta familiar w LoCastro’s work. Not familiar with yours. However, the line “Christians Penis Monster”, is in first place now right now as my favorite group of words for the day.
I appreciate your strong opinion concerning the decency on this issue. It’s not my opinion. I can see it from your perspective and I don’t have a problem with that. I like that there are many ways to look at the same thing and have different interpretations. I think more earnest opinions are helpful.
The art I make is apparently very cerebral. I’m interested in the space one occupies when confronted with juxtapositions, dichotomies, and strangely, or perhaps aestically – grids and patterns. I believe humans are pattern-seeking primates. Some of my work is metaphorical. It can involve physical interaction. I honestly don’t know WTF it is, I’m just trusting that there’s some reason why I have the ability to conceive and manifest artistic concepts, and it’s for just that reason that I feel compelled to see what this creative process produces. Pretty much uncensored. Believe me, I’m just as surprised as anyone when I review what I’m doing. I have reservations, big time! I’m always thinking to myself, WTF? This is crazy. A trait, I’ve always appreciated in others, truth be told. My process is observing and trusting what happens when the opportunity presents itself to encounter and interact with concepts.
__
#6 Facebook comment Ken Lywood
Randy there is no way I can accept the use of the iconic photo of a Vietnam child in terror as a backdrop for American trite. As you know it is napalm bombs dropped by America from which she is fleeing. Perhaps there are lofty hidden purposes to this but I see it as blasphemy .
#7 Facebook Tom Martin
For someone who has singlehandly created a decade long “art scene”, I am appalled at their misunderstanding of a fundamental role of art in society.
#8 Facebook Jeremy Chestler
“I created”? Please! It took a movement to make our art scene a legitimate “scene”, it took a group of different organizations and artists… and a good deal of help from the fairs, including the original Art Miami that predates Art Basel. It’s a strong work with powerful imagery. If it didn’t offend and outrage people, it would be a failure.
#9 Facebook Jee Park
I am not Vietnamese, but as an Asian person who has been following Vietnam War history closely I immediately knew your intention. To me it was a good example of people’s insensitivity and preoccupation with their own vanity.
#10 Facebook Minh Ng
No. The intention is to showcase the ignorance and as a Vietnamese-American, it is offensive, lacking respect to the victim of war and their ancestors. As an Asian-American, you need to understand that this is appalling and uncalled for. Kim Phuc is a real person. Her village has just been bombed. She had to rip off burning clothes- BURNING CLOTHES. She was hiding in a temple. This is a human being. Not an image. If she saw this in person…don’t you think she would have wanted to punch the people in the face who are taking a selfie with the most horrific experience of her life?
#11 Facebook Jee Park
Believe me I totally understand this is very sensitive issue especially if you are Vitemanese American. Yes, she is a real person, but not forgotten image. However, I believe art can be controversial to open the conversation. I know artist’s intension was not insult Kim Phuc, but reveals people’s insensitivity.
#12 Facebook Randy Burman reply to Minh Ng
I do want to thank you for your righteous indignation. And I want you to understand that I do not denigrate your opinion or sensitivity.
Jee is correct. The point of this collaged work which juxtaposes debatably the most well known, and yes horrific, iconic image of the Vietnam war with a totally unaware, narcissistic bikini-clad selfie taker, cell phone camera in one hand, tiki cocktail complete with paper umbrella in the other, is meant to stimulate discussion. On many levels. On our collective amnesia in regards to the responsibility for the horrors perpetuated in Vietnam (and by extension) other misguided military interventions. The work is also a statement about our collective and individual obsession with ourselves to the degree that we have become inured to what is truly horrific. How we use whatever is happening around us (no matter how horrific) merely as background to assert our own inflated sense of self. Simultaneously, while exploring the important dialogue and investigation into the sensitive topics of collective unconsciousness and political, social and cultural responsibility there is the subject of what are the legal and creative issues confronting artists who employ artistic appropriation. Especially in a world where the availability of images has become ubiquitous. It may not be a question of breaking a law as much as a question of whether the law is any longer relevant and in what context.
In a text message, a person who shares your sensitivity suggested that this particular image could be replaced with a different image, perhaps a bear attack. The writer went on to say that another image in the series, the atomic bomb in the background of a selfie-taker, was not as offensive. Or even the Twin Towers. Would a descendent of anyone who lived through the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagasaki agree? Or anyone who experienced loss on 9/11?
Here’s something to consider. In my artistic practice stuff just has a way of happening. Most often, while I may have an intent, I do not have a definitive concept of what the result will be. I often question the validity of what I produce. This work with the child Kim Phuc, in particular, raised many of the same doubts, echoing your concerns closely. And yet, a large part of my process is to trust what emerges. Yes, it may make me look like a fool, or insensitive, or prove to be dismal failure, but I can’t shake the sense that as an artist I’m obligated to trust and share my unique contribution. It’s one of the properties I appreciate in the art work of others. An artist’s ability to create new perspectives is why we find the artistic process so fascinating. It’s risky exploring the unknown and full of dangers. But I’m not sure an artist has a choice. To not be true to them selves is not really an option. Artist’s are all in. They stand naked. Exposed. They leave the judgements to others.
That said, I will admit that when I thought of having a selfie-taker pose in front of the death camp gates of Auschwitz where the wrought iron sign cynically reads, “Arbeit Macht Frei”, I thought, “That’s pushing it a little too far.” Outdone by reality however, someone posted in this thread, a selfie-taker actually doing just that. My point being, that the dialogue is not one-sided. I agree with you in many ways. What I do not agree with you on however, is on censoring what this or any artist has to say. And as importantly, the discussion of your concerns.
To that end, may I propose an open discussion where we, and others who support or disagree with your view and mine are able to further the dialogue. I feel fairly certain that the curator and people responsible for operating The Projects space would agree to host a public meeting at The Projects.
#14 Mihn Ng
Randy, have you approached Kim Phuc to get her sign off on you using the image of her childhood in this light? Have you approached Nick Ut, the photographer to have the rights to use this image in this light? Have you surveyed the Vietnamese community to get feedback about your project prior to submitting it for the public? Your curator had hesitation and made suggestion that you use a different image. The venue and exhibition sponsor did not want pictures taken with your exhibition. Everyone I spoke to last night about the image and your intent told me they were disgusted and felt insulted-bad taste. Have you thought about the people who are taking selfies and have no clue about the subject matter and sharing it in public? If your intent was to educate, I would applaud you. Your intent, however, was to humiliate patrons of the arts. Working for an organization who fund major art projects and advocating for the Flagler Art Village and its sense of community…as an artist myself who appreciates education through the arts and shock value art…this type of provocation and shock value is indignant, lack sensitivity and lack media ethics.
#15 Facebook Randy Burman reply to Minh Ng
“Your intent, however, was to humiliate patrons of the arts.” Really? After all the responses (mine and others) to your (welcome) criticism this is your takeaway?
#16 Facebook Manita Brug
Yes the piece has accomplished a remarkable thing, “selfie” indignation” when a person’s response to an artwork is about censoring the artwork on behalf of “others’ based on one’s own reaction.. seems to me there is something similar going on in KY
#17 Facebook Clara Varas
Possessed is an exhibition which either celebrates or critiques the “selfie” should be apparent, specially to another artist, the work is taking an obvious critical stance. Some of the most Horrid and appalling images in history are depicted here, In my opinion, this work is not making light of human suffering, on the contrary, it is holding a mirror to society, reflecting our inability to be fully present, the frigid callousness of the self absorbed and the undeniable absurdity of the whole thing.
#18 Facebook Kim Lively Wakefield
Outrageous and disrespectful in my opinion, this is not considered “Art” in my eyes.
#19 Facebook Stephen Malagodi
“Confrontation with a photographed moment of agony can mask a far more extensive and urgent confrontation.
Usually the wars which we are shown are being fought directly or indirectly in “our” name. What we are shown horrifies us. The next step should be for us to confront our own lack of political freedom. In the political systems as they exist, we have no legal opportunity of effectively influencing the conduct of wars in our name. To realize this and to act accordingly is the only effective way of responding to what the photograph shows. Yet the double violence of the photographed moment actually works against this realization. That is why they can be published with impunity.” John Berger, Understanding a Photograph, July 1972
We have so internalized this process that by now, 2015, it seems perfectly normal and artistic~ to employ such images as entertainment devices in our narcissism. We do so with impunity. We need not bother to consider at all our lack of effective power, nor do we want to.
#20 Facebook Minh Ng
Trust me, Kim Phuc’s foundation, Nick Ut, The Knight Foundation who funded this exhibition, Wholefoods and soon AP will know about your usage of this iconic copyrighted image that changed the Viet Nam war, the horrific experience of the victim of war, and the ancestors of victims of war. How do you honestly think a Vietnamese decent would feel when they see ignorant people take a selfie with this image- especially after asking the selfie picture taker if they know what this image means- and the selfie taker had NO CLUE. Do you know what it feels like to have a paragraph in the history books about the war? Do you know what it feels like to be named Minh and have your classmates call you a communist? Do you understand what it feels like to have ancestors who have DIED from the bombings? My grand-fathers, my family, homes destroyed, country ripped apart?
You ruined my artful experience, you ruined my appreciation of the arts, and as a fellow artist myself, I question your artistic intention and your lack of respect for media ethics. You brought back many childhood memories of what it means to be an immigrant in this country. I had a good cry tonight from the experience you put me through, an emotional night where I am so livid I can’t get over this and want to take legal actions against you if you do not take this offensive illustration of art down. The Asian-American community is strong and resilliant. We were born this way, and trust me, I will do everything in my power as a citizen of the U.S. who appreciates the first admendment and freedom of speech to get you to take this image out of your exhibition and apologize to the Vietnamese community.
#21 Facebook Tiny Montiel
I am just sorry that someone found this necessary or shocking enough to share it with the world..How ugly can we become..I would never call this Art out of respect to people creating Art..Just for the record this is strictly my opinion so if I offend anyone I do not care..Just sayin..
#22 Facebook Stephanie McGuire
I think you have accomplished something here….any time it opens a new discussion…well Randy Burman…you are a kind sensitive man who would never hurt a living soul…this is just a reminder of the complacency of recent years…
#23 Facebook Kathryn Roscoe
I’ve read this entire comment thread, and thought about it, and almost cried from the well-written emotion in Minh’s posts. Still, on Randy’s behalf, I just want to say that I think what is really upsetting is being confronted with the reality that a lot of people have a shallow understanding/awareness of horrible things that are happening around them (or have happened), and an overdose of self-interest in its place. That’s what’s awful, that’s what makes me want to cry. That people are taking selfies in front of horrific scenes, and not even knowing what they depict. THAT is awful. What Randy is doing is opening our eyes to it, and it’s a hard thing to see. His main objective might not be to educate, but it certainly has value in that it shows a snapshot of the sad state of humanity. And it wakes you up, and makes you feel. And that is what art does. I think it would be such a dishonor to the artistic community to pursue censoring this piece.
#24 Facebook Stephen Malagodi
Like Charlie Hebdo: cheap shots, exploitation and snark masquerading as profound insight. Nevertheless people are “free” to make what they want (mostly) and others are free to consider it.
John Cage asked the question ” How do we allow people to be free without them becoming foolish?” He never answered, but I will; We don’t.
Humanity, like the rest of creation is free to be stupid and worse. Or, as John Giorno has said, “I’m a firm believer in giving a man enough rope to hang himself.”
#25 Facebook Michael Dakota
There are no rules for art. The purpose is to get reactions
#26 Facebook Evo Love
I thought the work was powerful! It was deep on so many levels.
And let me say, I am Happy to see you defending your work.
I know Randy personally, both he and his wife… And let me say they are not the kind of people with ill intent. What I love about Randy’s work most of the time is the irony in mostly all the pieces I have seen by him. If you follow him as a fan of his work – you would know that about him. The work is always smart and clever and has that double meaning I enjoy.
I, like others – read all the comments and considered all sides. And I can see how some would be highly offended but I will also say this… Because of the new technology and the obsession everyone has with the selfie and recording every moment and sharing it with the world, that’s what made the work, the commentary for me so strong… I’m sure standing there as the artist who created it and seeing all the reactions to the piece by different generations was like being in a psychology class 101. The older generations – pissed, horrified and in shock… The newer generations… Not knowing about history, theirs or otherwise. And happily taking a picture to post on twitter, Facebook, etc. that very night!
I would say those images and reintroducing them is a way of not FORGETTING history and by Randy creating such an installation showed just how many had no regard or knowledge of it…
I wonder how many of those young folk was schooled that night on just what it meant to take a selfie with Kim. I’m sure most likely they feel like an asshole. ( this piece keeps giving way after the show)
After hearing about so many – young an old – taking a selfie when a bear is 6 feet away & getting killed, all in the name of a cool picture to post…. The last picture ever taken. It makes you think ” what has the world come down to?”... And wasn’t that the Point of the piece, to some extent?
Another aspect of how successful the show might of been was due to the very fact that it was SELFIE DRIVEN. Kind of brilliant way to market & promote the work/ show… And most likely not intentionally but naturally due to the narcissism of the audience. Again To me – it’s brilliant.
Like I said by seeing those images, it made me think about history, it made me relive those events in my mind and made me question all sorts of aspects of the piece and that’s what great art should do.
Yes it is hard to see the image of Kim and others running for their lives & knowing their demise, but it makes me more upset that a lot of people in this country and the world, don’t know why! By Randy bringing the image back to life, and by the very backlash of the work, it makes people discuss history
#27 Facebook Randy Burman
What a sensitive, thoughtful and well articulated comment/response Evo. Thank you for contributing to the dialogue. You’re a 100% correct about the artist observing the reactions to the work by different generations was like being in a psychology class 101. I wish that more people who experienced the work could get out of it what you did. I’m gratified for the dialogue on the various issues the work has stirred up. A local art professor and writer sent me this relevant link concerning the artist’s reaction to the selfies that participants would take. http://bit.ly/1K9a2qm
#28 Text Message (pending permission to use name)
Is what’s happened is that there is some offense to your use of a widely circulated image in you work? if so, all i could think of is Kara Walker who eplicitly encouraged people to take selfies with her work at the domino sugar factory knowing that the output could be offensive. she was okay with all the silly, racist, sexist selfies. My take is that she understood she lives in a complex world and that to have her work seen as a hermetically sealed historical timecapsule of slavery and to denigrate those taking selfies would be elitist. My point is it’s good for you for creating complex work. the work brings up questions and that’s what good art does.
August 28 – October 17, 2015
The Projects
FAT Village, Ft. Lauderdale
The curatorial theme for Possessed is inspired by the rampant trend of “selfies” at art exhibitions. I am inviting artists that create striking, colorful, provocative, 3-dimensional artworks, to creatively respond to the narcissism of the viewer.
Consider how you would display your artwork, or create an installation that will entice viewers to “Strike a pose” next to your work. You can either honor, or critique this selfie trend.
– Lisa Rockford, Curator
My installation, “You’re in the Picture”, consists of four 4’ W x 6’ H foamboard panels. Each depicts a collaged scene where a person is taking a selfie while standing or positioned in front of or in a scene of destruction or torment. Each panel has an oval-shape cut-out in place of the head. Viewers instinctively pose by sticking their head through the reverse side while a friend or whoever they’re with takes a picture of them as if the person posing were the ones taking their selfie. There’s the guy blithely posing in front of the atomic bomb explosion. There’s a woman taking a selfie with a backdrop of a man’s bloody hand and face smashed into a cracked windshield. The most popular by far, the goofy bow-tie kid being eaten by a shark. An ice cream cone In one hand and his other clasping a cell phone on an outstretched arm.
And finally, the juxtaposition of controversy. The background is easily the most iconic image of the Vietnam War, Nick Ut’s Pulitzer Prize winning black and white photograph of a terrified, screaming, 9 year old, Kim Phuc, running from her napalm-bombed village, while in the foreground a profoundly unaware bikini-clad girl, tiki drink complete with cocktail umbrella in one hand, cell phone outstretched taking a selfie. It’s a scene that even John Waters might be repulsed by.
So it wasn’t a shock when some critics voiced very intense opinions. Some demanded that the offensive panel be removed (immediately). (One suggested replacing it with a bear attack). Written comments have included threats of legal action, news media and sponsor consequences. Heartfelt opinions, I thought, regarding the artists lack of sensitivity and legal if not moral transgressions.
Some comments were part of a Facebook discussion where I had posted many pictures of viewers/participants posing on the night of the opening. Some conversations took place in email and text messages. This is a collection of all the correspondence and comments along with my responses.
On the Friday before the opening Lisa Rockford gave an insightful 15 minute talk with slide presentation which led into a panel discussion with five of the artists. Here’s the questions Lisa asked the panel.
—what made you want to be part of this exhibit?
—how do you react when you see people taking selfies with artwork you love or your own artwork? Do you consider it a positive or negative thing ?
—why do you think people take selfies with artwork? (For example, Is it a sign of a short attn. span, or a sign that people have a lack of respect for art)?
—do selfies cause the viewer to relate more to the artwork or instead draw attention to themselves and away from the work?
When you make artwork, do you ever consider the audience or how the piece will be perceived?
Do you think that when celebrities take selfies in art museums that it helps their fans to have a greater appreciation for art?
#1 (email to Lisa Rockford)
Why?
I am known for controversial, strange, weird art, But this is the most vile thing I have ever seen.
Making light of a celebrity, a politician, no worries. But, to make light of the tragedy of Kim Phuc is obscene!
Running for her life as the Napalm is burning her to the bone, an act that she is still suffering from (to this day!) is nothing to make fun of!
Who thought this would be cute?
What has happened to the amazing art scene I created in the 90’s and early 2000’s?
Please remove this piece out of respect to Kim Phuc, the Vietnamese community and anyone with any sense of dignity.
Needless to say I’m appalled, saddened and in shock as to the disrespect the So. Fla. art community considers art!
Jeffrey Holmes
#2 Lisa Rockford reply to Jeffrey, cc Randy Burman
Jeffrey,
Thank you for expressing your concern.
The artist, Randy Burman, did not create the piece to make fun of Kim Phuc or the Vietnam moment, but instead to draw attention to the fact that people are desensitized enough now with tragedy that they will take selfies in front of tragedy happening behind them.
I will let Randy respond to your email and explain why he made the piece.
Lisa Rockford
#3 Randy Burman response to Jeffrey Holmes
You had me at, “I’m known for controversial, strange and weird art“… I want to know more about your work.
But first, thank you for your heartfelt concern. I share your sensitivity and horror when seeing the Kim Phuc image.
There were others who were at the the exhibition opening who shared your sentiment. My own wife was willing to pose at each of the “You’re in the Picture” cut-out stations except this one.
Although, really, how much better is the station where the person is taking a selfie while standing in front of an atomic bomb explosion? Disrespectful to the citizens of Nagasaki and Hiroshima and anyone with a sense of dignity?
To anyone who is aware of the history of the Kim Phuc image, what it specifically depicts and how it reflects upon a nation’s failed belligerent and militaristic policy of aggression resulting in the death of so many innocent lives, this image is the definition of horrific.
Other powerfully shocking and iconic images, like the recent Syrian child found floating face down, the train station entrance to Auschwitz with “Arbeit macht frei” wrought in iron, planes crashing through the twin towers, or people jumping from those same towers, all have the ability to make us feel repulsed at what actually happened in the moment. When we see (what we interpret as) a crass exploitation or gratuitous use of the image we are doubly-angered and even indignant. Understood.
It gets worse.
I observed many visitors to the exhibition who apparently had no knowledge whatsoever of the image. I saw several people taking selfies and group shots standing in front of the work hiding Kim Phuc (not intentionally, just obliviously) by posing next to the woman in the bathing suit… completely oblivious to what the juxtaposition of the images implied. I found that ignorance horrific.
The artistic intent, however, was not to disrespect Kim Phuc, the Vietnamese community or anyone with a sense of dignity. What the work is expressing is that as a result of technological advances, media over-saturation, and rampant consummersim we, as a society and individuals, have become desensitized to tragedy and horror while simultaneously we have raised navel-gazing and self-obsession as specifically expressed in selfie-taking, to a level that everything is always all about us. Where everything is simply a background for us to pose against.
The work in no way intents to “make light” of any of the situations depicted, but contrarily, the entire work, each of the four stations of “You’re in the Picture” are actually in alignment with your sense of outrage and indignation.
Well the shark is really just for fun, although it too, still comments on our pre-disposition to capture every moment of our lives – including taking a selfie even as terrible things are happening to ourselves – as we are being devoured by a (metaphoric?) shark.
The commentary is that, WE SHOULD KNOW BETTER AND HERE’S PROOF THAT WE DON’T. And for further proof, as if the depictions alone were not enough, when people, had the explicit opportunity to pose or not with these horrific scenes, they often concluded, “no problem”.
On a secondary note I should add that part of my practice has to to with the questioning the legitimacy of using appropriated images.
#4 Jeffrey Holmes response to Randy Burman
Thanks for getting back to me as no one else has even bothered to respond.
Tragic, and disappointing at the very least.
While I am not a fan of a several paragraph diatribe to ‘explain’ the art as I’ve seen way to much crap art by some ‘art school’ grad.
The art should be able to stand on it’s own without explanation.
The audience I saw is there for the ‘scene’, the Food Trucks and the Car Rally (WTF?) not the art.
This is not the audience Ft. Lauderdale had 15 years ago.
Not a fan of ‘misappropriating’ other peoples images either as I have had more art & ideas stolen from me including LoCastro and Steve Stitch. Both have taken great liberties with my work. And that’s just the beginning!
I know the art world very well having created an art scene in FL years ago.
“L’art Noir’ & ‘Galerie Macabre’ (which the latter was stolen from me as well)
I gave LoCastro his first show, have exhibited the Collins and Christians Penis monster, produced shows at the Chili-Pepper, Poor House, Curator for the Broward Art Guild ‘Controversy Show’.
(Their best ever!) I created the St. Claude Arts District in New Orleans after Katrina, producing the first gallery exhibition in NOLA after Katrina and was even arrested for my art by the National Guard (a whole troop!) and thrown in the Angola South jail!
(and No I am NOT a ‘graffiti’ artist)
I have won numerous awards and accolades for my efforts in Ft. Lauderdale & New Orleans.
I am the creator of the Scavenger art hunt held every year in Ft. Lauderdale (that Sticht misappropriated btw)
I have exhibited artists from Mark Motherbaugh to Skip Williamson of Playboy fame and beyond.
“Best Local Art Show Ft. L. 2000” City Link
“Worst Loss for the Art Scene 2001” City Link
“Best Artist to Skip Town 2002” New Times
Times-Pic New Orleans Top 10 Art Events 2005 & 2007
I know art and It takes a LOT to offend me!!
I could understand what you were going for with some of the pieces but next to a wall of faces and some other other images, the piece lost itself in it’s message.
Had it been a bit more cohesive with the background subjects it might actually work.
While using images of a disaster is in poor taste in my opinion.
Kim Phuc is a single individual, but,
I just have 3 words for using the particular image of Kim Phuc.
It’s a child.
Jeffrey
#5 Randy Burman response to Jeffrey Holmes
Hi Jeffrey.
In reference to “no one else responding” I did post your letter (withholding your name) and my response on my Facebook page. You’re welcome to add your thoughts, opinions, beliefs, whatever in that thread – where – others have commented pro and con.
My measure of success for – You’re in the Picture, (and in particular: “Napalm Girl” with selfie-taker) installation is: Did it create a space for dialogue?
You know I’m not nearly as accomplished as you, and let me add my sincere respect for many of your efforts, save the I don’t know what to call it, don’t mean to be offensive, but sour grapes, I’m not sure what, might be justified, but really none of my business). I mean I have my own axes to grind and it probably wouldn’t look pretty in print. I recently suggested to a curator that I could do an exhibition of just drawing of rejected proposals and rejection notices. I’m sorta familiar w LoCastro’s work. Not familiar with yours. However, the line “Christians Penis Monster”, is in first place now right now as my favorite group of words for the day.
I appreciate your strong opinion concerning the decency on this issue. It’s not my opinion. I can see it from your perspective and I don’t have a problem with that. I like that there are many ways to look at the same thing and have different interpretations. I think more earnest opinions are helpful.
The art I make is apparently very cerebral. I’m interested in the space one occupies when confronted with juxtapositions, dichotomies, and strangely, or perhaps aestically – grids and patterns. I believe humans are pattern-seeking primates. Some of my work is metaphorical. It can involve physical interaction. I honestly don’t know WTF it is, I’m just trusting that there’s some reason why I have the ability to conceive and manifest artistic concepts, and it’s for just that reason that I feel compelled to see what this creative process produces. Pretty much uncensored. Believe me, I’m just as surprised as anyone when I review what I’m doing. I have reservations, big time! I’m always thinking to myself, WTF? This is crazy. A trait, I’ve always appreciated in others, truth be told. My process is observing and trusting what happens when the opportunity presents itself to encounter and interact with concepts.
__
#6 Facebook comment Ken Lywood
Randy there is no way I can accept the use of the iconic photo of a Vietnam child in terror as a backdrop for American trite. As you know it is napalm bombs dropped by America from which she is fleeing. Perhaps there are lofty hidden purposes to this but I see it as blasphemy .
#7 Facebook Tom Martin
For someone who has singlehandly created a decade long “art scene”, I am appalled at their misunderstanding of a fundamental role of art in society.
#8 Facebook Jeremy Chestler
“I created”? Please! It took a movement to make our art scene a legitimate “scene”, it took a group of different organizations and artists… and a good deal of help from the fairs, including the original Art Miami that predates Art Basel. It’s a strong work with powerful imagery. If it didn’t offend and outrage people, it would be a failure.
#9 Facebook Jee Park
I am not Vietnamese, but as an Asian person who has been following Vietnam War history closely I immediately knew your intention. To me it was a good example of people’s insensitivity and preoccupation with their own vanity.
#10 Facebook Minh Ng
No. The intention is to showcase the ignorance and as a Vietnamese-American, it is offensive, lacking respect to the victim of war and their ancestors. As an Asian-American, you need to understand that this is appalling and uncalled for. Kim Phuc is a real person. Her village has just been bombed. She had to rip off burning clothes- BURNING CLOTHES. She was hiding in a temple. This is a human being. Not an image. If she saw this in person…don’t you think she would have wanted to punch the people in the face who are taking a selfie with the most horrific experience of her life?
#11 Facebook Jee Park
Believe me I totally understand this is very sensitive issue especially if you are Vitemanese American. Yes, she is a real person, but not forgotten image. However, I believe art can be controversial to open the conversation. I know artist’s intension was not insult Kim Phuc, but reveals people’s insensitivity.
#12 Facebook Randy Burman reply to Minh Ng
I do want to thank you for your righteous indignation. And I want you to understand that I do not denigrate your opinion or sensitivity.
Jee is correct. The point of this collaged work which juxtaposes debatably the most well known, and yes horrific, iconic image of the Vietnam war with a totally unaware, narcissistic bikini-clad selfie taker, cell phone camera in one hand, tiki cocktail complete with paper umbrella in the other, is meant to stimulate discussion. On many levels. On our collective amnesia in regards to the responsibility for the horrors perpetuated in Vietnam (and by extension) other misguided military interventions. The work is also a statement about our collective and individual obsession with ourselves to the degree that we have become inured to what is truly horrific. How we use whatever is happening around us (no matter how horrific) merely as background to assert our own inflated sense of self. Simultaneously, while exploring the important dialogue and investigation into the sensitive topics of collective unconsciousness and political, social and cultural responsibility there is the subject of what are the legal and creative issues confronting artists who employ artistic appropriation. Especially in a world where the availability of images has become ubiquitous. It may not be a question of breaking a law as much as a question of whether the law is any longer relevant and in what context.
In a text message, a person who shares your sensitivity suggested that this particular image could be replaced with a different image, perhaps a bear attack. The writer went on to say that another image in the series, the atomic bomb in the background of a selfie-taker, was not as offensive. Or even the Twin Towers. Would a descendent of anyone who lived through the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagasaki agree? Or anyone who experienced loss on 9/11?
Here’s something to consider. In my artistic practice stuff just has a way of happening. Most often, while I may have an intent, I do not have a definitive concept of what the result will be. I often question the validity of what I produce. This work with the child Kim Phuc, in particular, raised many of the same doubts, echoing your concerns closely. And yet, a large part of my process is to trust what emerges. Yes, it may make me look like a fool, or insensitive, or prove to be dismal failure, but I can’t shake the sense that as an artist I’m obligated to trust and share my unique contribution. It’s one of the properties I appreciate in the art work of others. An artist’s ability to create new perspectives is why we find the artistic process so fascinating. It’s risky exploring the unknown and full of dangers. But I’m not sure an artist has a choice. To not be true to them selves is not really an option. Artist’s are all in. They stand naked. Exposed. They leave the judgements to others.
That said, I will admit that when I thought of having a selfie-taker pose in front of the death camp gates of Auschwitz where the wrought iron sign cynically reads, “Arbeit Macht Frei”, I thought, “That’s pushing it a little too far.” Outdone by reality however, someone posted in this thread, a selfie-taker actually doing just that. My point being, that the dialogue is not one-sided. I agree with you in many ways. What I do not agree with you on however, is on censoring what this or any artist has to say. And as importantly, the discussion of your concerns.
To that end, may I propose an open discussion where we, and others who support or disagree with your view and mine are able to further the dialogue. I feel fairly certain that the curator and people responsible for operating The Projects space would agree to host a public meeting at The Projects.
#14 Mihn Ng
Randy, have you approached Kim Phuc to get her sign off on you using the image of her childhood in this light? Have you approached Nick Ut, the photographer to have the rights to use this image in this light? Have you surveyed the Vietnamese community to get feedback about your project prior to submitting it for the public? Your curator had hesitation and made suggestion that you use a different image. The venue and exhibition sponsor did not want pictures taken with your exhibition. Everyone I spoke to last night about the image and your intent told me they were disgusted and felt insulted-bad taste. Have you thought about the people who are taking selfies and have no clue about the subject matter and sharing it in public? If your intent was to educate, I would applaud you. Your intent, however, was to humiliate patrons of the arts. Working for an organization who fund major art projects and advocating for the Flagler Art Village and its sense of community…as an artist myself who appreciates education through the arts and shock value art…this type of provocation and shock value is indignant, lack sensitivity and lack media ethics.
#15 Facebook Randy Burman reply to Minh Ng
“Your intent, however, was to humiliate patrons of the arts.” Really? After all the responses (mine and others) to your (welcome) criticism this is your takeaway?
#16 Facebook Manita Brug
Yes the piece has accomplished a remarkable thing, “selfie” indignation” when a person’s response to an artwork is about censoring the artwork on behalf of “others’ based on one’s own reaction.. seems to me there is something similar going on in KY
#17 Facebook Clara Varas
Possessed is an exhibition which either celebrates or critiques the “selfie” should be apparent, specially to another artist, the work is taking an obvious critical stance. Some of the most Horrid and appalling images in history are depicted here, In my opinion, this work is not making light of human suffering, on the contrary, it is holding a mirror to society, reflecting our inability to be fully present, the frigid callousness of the self absorbed and the undeniable absurdity of the whole thing.
#18 Facebook Kim Lively Wakefield
Outrageous and disrespectful in my opinion, this is not considered “Art” in my eyes.
#19 Facebook Stephen Malagodi
“Confrontation with a photographed moment of agony can mask a far more extensive and urgent confrontation.
Usually the wars which we are shown are being fought directly or indirectly in “our” name. What we are shown horrifies us. The next step should be for us to confront our own lack of political freedom. In the political systems as they exist, we have no legal opportunity of effectively influencing the conduct of wars in our name. To realize this and to act accordingly is the only effective way of responding to what the photograph shows. Yet the double violence of the photographed moment actually works against this realization. That is why they can be published with impunity.” John Berger, Understanding a Photograph, July 1972
We have so internalized this process that by now, 2015, it seems perfectly normal and artistic~ to employ such images as entertainment devices in our narcissism. We do so with impunity. We need not bother to consider at all our lack of effective power, nor do we want to.
#20 Facebook Minh Ng
Trust me, Kim Phuc’s foundation, Nick Ut, The Knight Foundation who funded this exhibition, Wholefoods and soon AP will know about your usage of this iconic copyrighted image that changed the Viet Nam war, the horrific experience of the victim of war, and the ancestors of victims of war. How do you honestly think a Vietnamese decent would feel when they see ignorant people take a selfie with this image- especially after asking the selfie picture taker if they know what this image means- and the selfie taker had NO CLUE. Do you know what it feels like to have a paragraph in the history books about the war? Do you know what it feels like to be named Minh and have your classmates call you a communist? Do you understand what it feels like to have ancestors who have DIED from the bombings? My grand-fathers, my family, homes destroyed, country ripped apart?
You ruined my artful experience, you ruined my appreciation of the arts, and as a fellow artist myself, I question your artistic intention and your lack of respect for media ethics. You brought back many childhood memories of what it means to be an immigrant in this country. I had a good cry tonight from the experience you put me through, an emotional night where I am so livid I can’t get over this and want to take legal actions against you if you do not take this offensive illustration of art down. The Asian-American community is strong and resilliant. We were born this way, and trust me, I will do everything in my power as a citizen of the U.S. who appreciates the first admendment and freedom of speech to get you to take this image out of your exhibition and apologize to the Vietnamese community.
#21 Facebook Tiny Montiel
I am just sorry that someone found this necessary or shocking enough to share it with the world..How ugly can we become..I would never call this Art out of respect to people creating Art..Just for the record this is strictly my opinion so if I offend anyone I do not care..Just sayin..
#22 Facebook Stephanie McGuire
I think you have accomplished something here….any time it opens a new discussion…well Randy Burman…you are a kind sensitive man who would never hurt a living soul…this is just a reminder of the complacency of recent years…
#23 Facebook Kathryn Roscoe
I’ve read this entire comment thread, and thought about it, and almost cried from the well-written emotion in Minh’s posts. Still, on Randy’s behalf, I just want to say that I think what is really upsetting is being confronted with the reality that a lot of people have a shallow understanding/awareness of horrible things that are happening around them (or have happened), and an overdose of self-interest in its place. That’s what’s awful, that’s what makes me want to cry. That people are taking selfies in front of horrific scenes, and not even knowing what they depict. THAT is awful. What Randy is doing is opening our eyes to it, and it’s a hard thing to see. His main objective might not be to educate, but it certainly has value in that it shows a snapshot of the sad state of humanity. And it wakes you up, and makes you feel. And that is what art does. I think it would be such a dishonor to the artistic community to pursue censoring this piece.
#24 Facebook Stephen Malagodi
Like Charlie Hebdo: cheap shots, exploitation and snark masquerading as profound insight. Nevertheless people are “free” to make what they want (mostly) and others are free to consider it.
John Cage asked the question ” How do we allow people to be free without them becoming foolish?” He never answered, but I will; We don’t.
Humanity, like the rest of creation is free to be stupid and worse. Or, as John Giorno has said, “I’m a firm believer in giving a man enough rope to hang himself.”
#25 Facebook Michael Dakota
There are no rules for art. The purpose is to get reactions
#26 Facebook Evo Love
I thought the work was powerful! It was deep on so many levels.
And let me say, I am Happy to see you defending your work.
I know Randy personally, both he and his wife… And let me say they are not the kind of people with ill intent. What I love about Randy’s work most of the time is the irony in mostly all the pieces I have seen by him. If you follow him as a fan of his work – you would know that about him. The work is always smart and clever and has that double meaning I enjoy.
I, like others – read all the comments and considered all sides. And I can see how some would be highly offended but I will also say this… Because of the new technology and the obsession everyone has with the selfie and recording every moment and sharing it with the world, that’s what made the work, the commentary for me so strong… I’m sure standing there as the artist who created it and seeing all the reactions to the piece by different generations was like being in a psychology class 101. The older generations – pissed, horrified and in shock… The newer generations… Not knowing about history, theirs or otherwise. And happily taking a picture to post on twitter, Facebook, etc. that very night!
I would say those images and reintroducing them is a way of not FORGETTING history and by Randy creating such an installation showed just how many had no regard or knowledge of it…
I wonder how many of those young folk was schooled that night on just what it meant to take a selfie with Kim. I’m sure most likely they feel like an asshole. ( this piece keeps giving way after the show)
After hearing about so many – young an old – taking a selfie when a bear is 6 feet away & getting killed, all in the name of a cool picture to post…. The last picture ever taken. It makes you think ” what has the world come down to?”... And wasn’t that the Point of the piece, to some extent?
Another aspect of how successful the show might of been was due to the very fact that it was SELFIE DRIVEN. Kind of brilliant way to market & promote the work/ show… And most likely not intentionally but naturally due to the narcissism of the audience. Again To me – it’s brilliant.
Like I said by seeing those images, it made me think about history, it made me relive those events in my mind and made me question all sorts of aspects of the piece and that’s what great art should do.
Yes it is hard to see the image of Kim and others running for their lives & knowing their demise, but it makes me more upset that a lot of people in this country and the world, don’t know why! By Randy bringing the image back to life, and by the very backlash of the work, it makes people discuss history
#27 Facebook Randy Burman
What a sensitive, thoughtful and well articulated comment/response Evo. Thank you for contributing to the dialogue. You’re a 100% correct about the artist observing the reactions to the work by different generations was like being in a psychology class 101. I wish that more people who experienced the work could get out of it what you did. I’m gratified for the dialogue on the various issues the work has stirred up. A local art professor and writer sent me this relevant link concerning the artist’s reaction to the selfies that participants would take. http://bit.ly/1K9a2qm
#28 Text Message (pending permission to use name)
Is what’s happened is that there is some offense to your use of a widely circulated image in you work? if so, all i could think of is Kara Walker who eplicitly encouraged people to take selfies with her work at the domino sugar factory knowing that the output could be offensive. she was okay with all the silly, racist, sexist selfies. My take is that she understood she lives in a complex world and that to have her work seen as a hermetically sealed historical timecapsule of slavery and to denigrate those taking selfies would be elitist. My point is it’s good for you for creating complex work. the work brings up questions and that’s what good art does.