February 13, 2006
Self-Censorship In Seattle

At a Belltown art gallery.

When Seattle artist Kurt Geissel learned that the Taliban had destroyed Afghanistan’s historic and beautiful Bamiyan Buddhas in spring of 2001 he got angry.  Then he got creative.  He carved a realistic miniature likeness of one of the Buddhas into the pages of a Koran and called it "Koran with a Buddha Shape Carved Into It."  According to Geissel initial reaction to the work was mostly positive.  The carving was done in detail that would elicit praise no matter the material.  Geissel was also encouraged that his close group of artist friends viewed the work as both startling and inspiring.

Geissel was invited to show the piece at Roq la Rue as part of an exhibit criticizing many religions.  Just a few days after the exhibit opened, the owner of the gallery, Kirsten Anderson, asked him to remove it, because she was afraid.

And if you read the entire article, you will learn that a PI reporter played an interesting part in this entire affair.

(By way of Ginny at Chicago Boyz.)

Posted by Jim Miller at February 13, 2006 01:14 PM | Email This
Comments
1. This 'hide under your bed and maybe the boogie man will go away' mindset is what we have to look forward to if Democrats regain control of Congress and the Presidency. Libs have little understanding of history and what made America great, therefore they will have little stomach for defending this nation and our way of life.

Islamic leaders are testing us to see if they will have to fight us for control or whether we will mimic the French and just hand them the keys. If the Democrats are in power, you'd better be ready to lock and load, because Islam will be coming for us.

Posted by: Saltherring on February 13, 2006 01:36 PM
2. They sure don't make reporters like they used to!!!
Fear seems to be the operative word.
Fear of what???????????
Why????????
Are these reporters afraid of ALL Muslims?
If not, which ones?
How do these reporters identify which Muslims to be afraid of?
Isn't it Racist for reporters to fear Muslims because of the color of their skin and beliefs?
Isn't it criminal for reporters to stereotype?
Shouldn't ALL Reporters be willing to first of all be killed BEFORE they point any fingers???

Gee, it appears these limpd*cks are beginning to understand just how difficult the President's job is!!!! They attack Bush for wiretapping, interrogation methods etc. etc.............

Perhaps Reporters should be the first group to opt out....in other words make a stand that
IF THE GOVERNMENT BECOMES AWARE OF ANY TERRORIST PLOT TO KILL SOMEONE LIKE FANCHER, CONNELLY et al, THEY SHOULD IGNORE IT IF IT WERE OBTAINED BY POLITICALLY IMPROPER MEANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is great!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on February 13, 2006 01:38 PM
3. What happend to the people of the Middle East? They were doing algeba and navigating all over the place, well ahead of the barbarians in Northern and Western Europe. Then Islam hit and they stopped moving forward.

Islam looks like a religion stuck in the past and in dire need of the equivalent of a Protestant Reformation.

Posted by: Libertarian on February 13, 2006 01:44 PM
4. Very true libertarian...I wonder if the democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq (eventually) will turn that around. Maybe free people in those nations can contribute something to society other than suicide bomb belts and oil.

Posted by: Palouse on February 13, 2006 01:54 PM
5. Oh, and how could I forget opium (from Afghanistan). I hear it's still the number one export.

Posted by: Palouse on February 13, 2006 02:07 PM
6. The LEFTIST REPORTER Mantra--
American's must be willing to die before allowing our civil rights to be eroded by intrusive government!
(Psssssst...except of course for us cowardly reporters. Let me know if you get any illegal wiretap info from some raghead threatening to hurt my sorry a$$.....hell, beat it out of 'em!)

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on February 13, 2006 02:08 PM
7. Ms Regina Hackett and editors of PI,

re: your article of Dec 20, 2002, admonishing SAM
for not standing up to its' critics and cancelling a show. Kudos for the abundance of high-sounding words and sentiment in the article.

How would you like your crow, hot or cold?

Posted by: dan on February 13, 2006 02:18 PM
8. Regina Hacket is a relentless socialist.

She's way, way left, and an unpleasant person to boot.

Was / is big in the notion public viewable art is not owned by individuals or private groups, but actually owned by the people.

Communist in word and deed...

Posted by: righton on February 13, 2006 03:20 PM
9. Basically what the trhust is that if you threaten and behead enough, then liberal will respect your religion.

Posted by: pbj on February 13, 2006 04:10 PM
10. Saltherring - they are already here -- the upper classes from many mid-east countries have been coming here in droves - since the early 1960's -- under the phony guise of 'foreign students' -- good ol' uncle sugar educating the poor downtrode'en of the turd world so they can go back and 'improve' the lot of their poor widdle countries >> at least 80% are probably still here and most of the other 20% in Canada or Europe -- the building of the street base has begun - UNDER CLINTON/GORE -- by the deliberate importation of MUSLIMS from the most primative and backwards parts of Africa >> many of whom seem to have been deliberatly brought to the Seattle area - witness last weeks demo >> to see the direction we are headed - see Michelle Malkin's post re the Paris demos over the weekend --


Libertarian >> -- with all due respects - wise up -- I did -- a few years ago I thought the same thing re islam having a reformation -- sorry -- watching the events of the last few years and learning more of the reality religion of slavery -- the seeds of a reformation are not contained within the basic fabric of islam as it was within Judaism and Christianity -- nO WAY - NO HOW

Posted by: Bill on February 13, 2006 04:35 PM
11. When I interviewed Hackett for the story she was so choked with fear that she couldn't even bring herself to utter the word "Muslim" when I asked her again and again why she had Anderson pull Geissel's work from the gallery. She kept repeating..."there are people...there are people..."

The cowardice of the left is bottomless. Bottomless.

Posted by: Doug Anderson on February 13, 2006 05:37 PM
12. The Buddhas were beautiful. I would like to see Mr. Geissel's work. Does anyone know where you can see it?

Posted by: Peggy U on February 13, 2006 05:42 PM
13. They won't show this, but places like SAM will happily show naked man/boy statues in the park. puh-leez

Posted by: Me on February 13, 2006 09:35 PM
14. A city that thinks it's cute to have a huge statue of Lenin prominently displayed is suddenly concerned about political correctness? If this gallery owner had received threats, she should have reported them at one to the police and newspapers. Cockroaches don't like to have light on them. But, no, we have to be "sensitive" to these fanatics because they might get upset. Newsflash here, o mighty lobotomized liberals: these scum are already upset with us and just looking for any excuse to come back to blow up more planes and buildings. If you don't think that can't happen, your head is lodged so far up it would take a team of surgeons a week to remove it. People like you still don't understand the significance of Krystalnacht. Do us all a favor and renounce your citizenship at once so you can move to one of these muslim countries to show your solidarity. You certainly have shown more interest in defending their way of life instead of ours.

Posted by: Burdabee on February 13, 2006 10:37 PM
15.
If this gallery owner had received threats...

Heck, seeing as how we're talking about the enlightened state of Washington, if the owner felt threatened she could have armed herself. The gallery being her place of business, she wouldn't even need a Concealed Pistol License to legally have a firearm there. (I'm assuming she's not a felon.) But I suppose that would mean too much realisting thinking about the kind of opposition that such a piece might encounter...

Posted by: Kirk Parker on February 13, 2006 11:20 PM
16. Bill,

I agree with you, they ARE already here, and probably in numbers sufficient to force the libs into hiding. Funny....I haven't seen any postings on this subject from the usual trolls . Probably sneezing too hard from all the dust bunnies under the bed.

I also agree there will be no Islamic "reformation". It's hard to reform anything without a head.

And remember, libs, they'll come for you in your cities first. I'm sure, in the interest of diversity, you'll welcome them with parades and flowers (see Sudentenland and Austria in 1939).

Posted by: Saltherring on February 14, 2006 05:35 AM
17. I just had a scarier thought. A Muslim "holy" man running for governor or senator will probably gather the support of the left and given the voting problems (no purple ink to contend with) he may actually win the election. Imagine your next governor being a fascist (holy) Muslim and Shari law being the rule of the day. On the other hand maybe it's not so bad after all when you consider that a Muslim zealot is barely distinguishable from the exiting Washington Queen. Unless of course the turban is donned.

Posted by: Snuffy on February 14, 2006 07:27 AM
18. from the owner's blog http://www.drmenlo.com/roqlarue/


http://www.drmenlo.com/roqlarue/uploaded_images/Sister_at_Mercy-795257.jpg

nun panties are all good because catholics won't hurt you

Posted by: err head on February 15, 2006 01:32 AM
19. It's just not fair when people speak truth to power and power hits back. These artists are brave only when they know they're insulting someone who won't retaliate.

Old Lutheran women are one thing; insulting a young muslim man is just not prudent.

Posted by: mark on February 15, 2006 12:39 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?