Comments on: The Art of the Mural: Judy Taylor, Milan Kundera and Jose Clemente Orozco http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/04/the-art-of-the-mural-judy-taylor-milan-kundera-and-jose-clemente-orozco/ Informed reflection on the events of the day Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:00:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.23 By: Michael Corey http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/04/the-art-of-the-mural-judy-taylor-milan-kundera-and-jose-clemente-orozco/comment-page-1/#comment-5882 Mon, 11 Apr 2011 14:52:38 +0000 http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/?p=4072#comment-5882 I don’t think that I actually commented on the censorship issue, but I will at the end of these comments. For me, the issue raised by the mural had more to do with the contestation for meanings and memories — what is selected to be remembered, and what by default may be overlooked or possibly forgotten.

I am also concerned with the glorification of confrontation and forgetfulness about tragic consequences. Unless we understand the price paid for perceived glory, then we are condemned to suffer tragic consequences. In my view the strike of 1987 was tragic. I don’t believe that all of the workers at Jay permanently losing their jobs was worth some of the subsequent community benefits that could have been achieved through other means, and have been achieved through other means in other communities.

I don’t have a problem with the mural remaining in place. We know that it was created from a specific perspective. While some might say we must have the courage that the workers at Jay had in 1987, other might say we cannot make the same mistakes, and allow tragic situations like this to repeat. Lessons can be learned by thoroughly considering all aspects of the strike of 1987.

I asked in Vince’s first post on the issue if narratives accompanied each panel on the mural. If there were narratives, then I would have liked to know how the situations depicted are portrayed. Vince didn’t think that there were narratives. If narratives depicted only narrow aspects of the situation, then I would have liked to seen broader aspects considered.

]]>
By: Vera Zolberg http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/04/the-art-of-the-mural-judy-taylor-milan-kundera-and-jose-clemente-orozco/comment-page-1/#comment-5880 Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:27:30 +0000 http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/?p=4072#comment-5880 Michael Corey’s thoughtful reply, in which he lauds “alternatives to conflict and confrontation” in labor relations, has much to be said for it. I believe he implies that Taylor’s mural in which she relies too much on the historian, Charles Scontras’s interpretation of some of the events she highlights results in a biased account. In that sense, Corey appears to be justifying Governor LePage’s act of censorship. This is a not particularly subtle attack on the artist and the historian, which conveniently ignores the departure of a great deal of American industry from states where labor rights are relatively protected to “Right to Work” states and, eventually, to nations with far lower labor costs. Not having seen the art work except in the news account, I cannot judge it either aesthetically or as a reportage, but it does appear to present a fair account of the state’s labor development.

]]>
By: Michael Corey http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/04/the-art-of-the-mural-judy-taylor-milan-kundera-and-jose-clemente-orozco/comment-page-1/#comment-5867 Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:06:46 +0000 http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/?p=4072#comment-5867 Artist Judy Taylor worked with labor historian Charles Scontras to choose scenes to capture Maine’s labor history. Scontras stated, “Maine is a bit more than the stereotypical romantic images that have become commonplace and marketed by our gift and souvenir shops … Maine was not Nirvana. The creative roles of dissent, protest, conflict, and the demand for social justice in the workplace of the state, form an integral part of our historical legacy.”

I wasn’t aware of the mural until the controversy arose, but panel 10 of 11 caught my interest, the one depicting the strike at IP’s Jay mill in 1987 (for some reason Taylor on her website identifies it as “The Strike of 1986”). This strike has been extensively written about. The conduct of the company, the union and outside organizers contributed to the tragic results: all union workers needlessly lost their jobs, and the mill was restarted as a non union facility in sharp contrast to a another mill owned by a different company which introduced elements of interest based problem solving to resolve issues. The other mill was owned by Champion International and was located in Bucksport, Maine. At the time, I worked for Champion; however, I was not directly involved with these negotiations.

Those who valorize the strike at Jay point out that local-union members helped improve environmental problems at the Jay mill. Case studies have been written about the strike and the subsequent actions, many from an organized union perspective. Environmental improvements elsewhere occurred without the job losses and rancor.

For me this raised the question of what is chosen for inclusion in this type of mural, by whom and why. My guess is that it is much easier to identify hardships brought about through confrontation rather than meaningful gains achieved through collaboration.

Interest based problem solving was refined in ensuing years, including a successful application in Champion’s Sartell Mill in Minnesota in 1995. An interesting discussion of it was published in the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law on March 1, 2003 by Caryn L. Beck-Dudley and Steven H. Hanks, “On Virtue and Peace: Creating A Workplace Where People Can Flourish.” The article concludes as follows,

“The case of the Sartell Mill holds out hope that organizations can choose to become virtuous organizations that exhibit membership, integrity, holism, excellence, and judgment. Before these virtues can result in human flourishing, however, the organization and its participants need to choose to act on the virtue of peaceableness. Because one participant cannot choose peace without the cooperation and choice of peace by other participants, it is imperative that all members of an organization understand the benefits peace can bring. In the case of Sartell Mill, peace brought with it an organization that improved its productivity. It also enabled its employees to live fuller lives and created a place where individuals wanted to work. This, in and of itself, seems to be a worthy goal.”

In Taylor’s mural, it might have been interesting to include a depiction of the negotiations at the neighboring Bucksport Mill which was an early adapter of interest based problem solving. The process did not go smoothly, but going through it helped refine the process and impart a different approach to resolving difficult issues. Sartell was a beneficiary of what transpired at Bucksport, as were other locations. It seems to me that these types of memories might provide alternatives to conflict and confrontation. The selection of what is chosen to remember in artwork does have an impact on how things on done today.

]]>
By: vince carducci http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/04/the-art-of-the-mural-judy-taylor-milan-kundera-and-jose-clemente-orozco/comment-page-1/#comment-5866 Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:58:24 +0000 http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/?p=4072#comment-5866 I appreciate Jeff’s distinction between political culture and cultural politics, and I agree that the notions apply to lesser works as well as greater. (This in response to Gary Kulak’s comment about Taylor’s work being “pedestrian.” Like Orozco, the Maine mural too has an aesthetic community in mind, for better or worse from a so-called high art perspective. The aesthetic dimension has a political underpinning as Jeff notes. This is true in the case of “art for art’s sake,” which presumes “disinterestedness,” itself a culture-bound concept as Pierre Bourdieu has demonstrated.) Jeff thinks my definition of propaganda is too broad. Perhaps it is. But in this case I see a difference between the Mexican muralists, who in the United States at least were given more room for self-expression. Taylor’s work was done on specification and guided by a particular agenda. It’s noteworthy in this regard that she adjusted her style to accommodate these circumstances. None of this should be read in a pejorative sense as the Cold War embrace of aesthetic autonomy did with respect to the art of the American Scene and social realism (small “s” and “r”) in general. I might agree with Kulak that the “History of Maine Labor” isn’t cutting-edge art. The difference is I’m not troubled by that. I see the field of cultural production as a continuum and from vantage point where this artwork was intended to sit, it works just fine.

]]>