Protesters attempt to pull down the statue
The killing of George Floyd on May 25th, 2020 triggered the destroying of statues that represent the racist figures around the world. For instance, protesters in the U.S and U.K spray-painted, beheaded, threw, or broke down the statues.
Creating artwork is often characterized by making a new thing. Then, can we say the destroying of racist figure statue as an artwork? In my opinion, the destroying of the racist statue can also be seen as an artwork. How it could be called an art, while the protester is not making something new, instead demolish it?
The protesters attacked the statues because it was regarded as a symbol of legitimacy for racist social structures. The target of this action was not only to destroy the statue but to draw global attention to the racism issue which was getting worse these days.
The statues were seen as ‘living symbols’. The statue has an ‘organic’ connection with the referents, which is racism. The vandalizing or humiliating against the statue is like a mutilation of a living body of racism, but this is more than just a destruction, it is a ‘creative destruction’.
The term ‘creative destruction’ was coined by W.J.T. Mitchell–an American media theorist. He expressed this term in his book, What do Pictures Want? (2005).
The protesters destroy ‘the image of racism’ that is represented by the statues, and at the same time create a secondary image, i.e., anti-racism. By destroying the statue, the protester supersede the previous image of racism with a new image, which is, the opposition of racism. (cf. Mitchell, 2005: p.18). They also demolish the stereotype of racism and offer a new view of human race equality and equity.
This ‘creative destruction’ can be seen as an effort to create an artwork. Like an artist, the protesters are making a new image through their actions.
What’s Next?
The demolition of the statue is not enough. ‘Creative destruction’ leads to social commitment. (Mitchell, 2005: p.26). It demands to establish a fair and open society. The ‘creative destruction’ does not aim to legitimize the iconoclasm or the destruction of icons and images that are usually based on political and religious reasons. An example of iconoclasm is the destroying of Buddhist statues by fundamentalists in Afghanistan. The iconoclasm is not a way out when we are dealing with different races, ideologies, or religions. In the future, I hope iconoclasm is no longer needed because what we need is to turn the ignorance and narrowness into the openness of mind to orchestrating the differences in society.