CHANGE MY LOCATION
Controversial mural to be altered in S.F.
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
)
This Mission district mural’s images have divided San Francisco’s Jewish community.
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - An emotional battle over a new mural in San Francisco’s Mission district that depicts the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been squelched after the supporting organization had its funding stalled and agreed to alter the controversial image.
At issue is a large mural in a parking lot on the corner of 24th and Capp streets, designed by local artist Eric Norberg and painted during the summer by more than 200 Mission district community members with an overall theme of breaking down physical and social walls.
One panel of the 117-foot wide and 10-foot tall mural, depicting Palestinians breaking through a crack in the Israeli security barrier, angered members of San Francisco’s Jewish community who said the image only portrays one side of the centuries-old conflict. The crack in the barrier is also shaped like Israel, and one Palestinian busting through wears a headscarf covering her face.
“The imagery took a radical position on a complex geopolitical issue that was out of touch with the international community, San Francisco and the overwhelming majority of Jews,” said Abby Michelson Porth, associate director of the Jewish Community Relations Council, which raised the issue.
The controversy ended up pitting some members of The City’s Jewish community against each other, with some saying the images were appropriate. HOMEY, the organization that received a city grant to create two murals, said the mural was meant to unite the Mission district. Members of the Art Commission simply said the work did what it was supposed to — start a dialogue.
HOMEY, or Homies Organizing the Mission to Empower Youth, was given a $34,400 neighborhood-beautification grant for the mural project, but it was stalled because of the controversy.
HOMEY and Norberg, however, have agreed to alter the images that some called divisive and hostile. The group has agreed to change the shape of the crack so it does not resemble a silhouette of Israel, add blue sky where the wall towered to reflect a brighter future, add an olive tree to symbolize peace, and remove the headscarf from the woman’s face. The Arts Commission approved the revisions Wednesday.
“Our intention was to draw parallels between the issues at the U.S.-Mexico border and the Israeli-Palestinian security barrier,” said Nancy Hernandez, youth program coordinator at HOMEY. “We consider this section … to be a statement of solidarity between the residents of the San Francisco Mission district and global movements for oppressed peoples to gain self-determination.”
Some, however, remain enraged that the panel is not being removed.
“This does not show why the barrier was brought on — to stop the suicide bombings,” said Gina Bublil Waldman, co-founder of Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa, a San Francisco-based educational and advocacy organization. “To show only one side is biased, unfair and unjust.”
Comments from Examiner Readers
2:04 AM MST on Sat., Sep. 22, 2007 re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
1:38 AM MST on Sat., Sep. 22, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
9:48 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
9:26 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
3:25 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
3:20 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
3:10 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
2:46 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 21, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
10:37 PM MST on Thu., Sep. 20, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
6:07 PM MST on Thu., Sep. 20, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
10:28 AM MST on Thu., Sep. 20, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
9:53 AM MST on Thu., Sep. 20, 2007
re: "Controversial mural to be altered in S.F."
Report as inappropriate
Right-wing Jew said:
To compare the illegal alien issue with Palestinian terrorists and equating them as "oppressed peoples" is one of the most profound demonstrations of ignorance yet to come out of San Fran-SICKO Nancy Hernandez. Israel's wall will stay up and prevent terrorists killing innocent Jews, the US border fence will go up and prevent the invasion of the hordes of illegal leeches on American society, so there is your parallel: the SANE shall prevail in both cases and your mural will change nothing. So glad you or your ilk don't run this country, and never will-Nancy Hernandez/Pelosi, you socialists.
103 agree | 99 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Those who feel this is a matter of freedom of expression, what would you say if the "artists" had depicted a Christian with a Bible telling the homosexual community that they are living in sin? No condemnation or people, just their lifestyle choice... somehow I have a feeling that would be less acceptable that the glorification of a regime of people whose sole goal is global domination through violent force/murder... ironic how backwards things are-the self professed murderers are paid homage to while Christians, who care about a person's eternal state/destiny are "hate mongers"...
174 agree | 99 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Choribol said:
The israelis built that wall to make it more difficult for enemy combatants and terrorists to cross over, so I could see how it may offend certain people but atleast its nice work, personally I could care less what it's suppose to mean.
169 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
i hope these artists paint this exact mural somewhere else in the city, exactly as they have it already. if you're offended by art then YOU have the problem. where does censorship of artistic or political thought cease..?! while it's true that i don't want to see 'hate' speech, etc scrawled on walls.. i fail to see what is so offensive about this mural. i agree with another poster.. people will see whatever they want to see in this mural. altering it only creates an opening for censorship. even after it's altered, some people will still find reason to dislike it and want it removed. the cycle is never-ending.
152 agree | 127 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Wouldn't it be nice if we could all have the world be as we each see it? Or history written as we each perceive it? My guess is viewers of this mural will likely see whatever they want/need to see in lieu of their own personal views on this clearly longstanding and very deadly struggle.
180 agree | 125 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Am I the only one who sees through this? This is exactly what they want. This mural has nothing to do with Palestine or Palestinians. This mural is a set up by "reconquistas". Mexicans who consider themselves "Amerca's Palestinians". I bet you a dollar that they replace the crack shaped like Isreal to one shaped like Mexico and the scarfed woman will become a female illegal alien. Possibly Elvira Arellano herself.
179 agree | 128 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This is the most stupid thing that i have read in a long time. Imagine that instead of giving grant money to paint radical racist mural's, they could possibly give the grant money helping people in need within the community or better yet, give it to child protection projects, that seems to be the major problem in our country, not that the foreigners in another country are trying to kill each other on a daily basis.
110 agree | 111 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Bottom line is this, the mural takes a side and that is incorrect if one is to present a balanced piece of "art", for as it stands it is merely radical propoganda. The fact that the Israelites were historically in Judea & Samarra at the same time if not prior to any record of Philistines occupying the same area is fact. The modern day view that the Israelis only set foot on this disputed soil after 1948, that THEY are the invaders & occupiers is simply incorrect.
186 agree | 125 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
AWK said:
It's sad that the SF Arts Commission in effect gave veto power over public art to the JCRC, ADL and other right wing groups who falsely claim to represent the Jewish community. And to the journalist, the conflict is not "centuries-old", why not note the "security barrier" aka apartheid wall has been ruled in violation of international law, and why of the three quotes in the article are two from right-wing organizations?
154 agree | 122 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This attempted sabotage by the right wing is absolutely despicable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this outstanding mural. Moreover, the critic below can't spell "waist" of money? Geez.... People really need to study current events! Listen to Flashpoints on KPFA! Or contact MECA!
177 agree | 136 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
HOMEY is smart to remove the divisive elements. The group should be promoting peace not inciting more hatred.
177 agree | 127 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Why does the Arts Commission find the women's headscarf offensive as depicted in the mural? Removing the headscarf is outrageous and offensive. It is very disappointing that the Commission feels this is appropriate, because clearly it is not.
178 agree | 150 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree