Academia, International, Society

Leiden University Removes Work of Famed Dutch Artist Due to the Depiction of Only White Males

A painting from the renowned contemporary Dutch painter Rein Dool has been removed from a wall at Leiden University in the Netherlands after the objection that it depicts only white men. Political Science PHD candidate Elina Zonina said that the painting of white men smoking cigars made her feel uncomfortable. According to Dutch News, Zonina insisted that the school needed to add an “ironic or critical” note with such a painting.  In the meantime, it is now turned toward the wall to avoid harming or offending anyone else at the school.

We have seen similar actions in the United States where one or a small number of objectors result in the removal of paintings, material or postings at universities. Few faculty are willing to risk the ire of protesters by opposing such actions.

Joanne van der Leun, a professor of criminology and dean of Leiden Law School, reported the action at Leiden:

According to other reports the famed 90-year-old painter Rein Dool is irate over the move, which he called “incredibly narrow-minded.”  His painting depicted the board of Leiden University in the 1970s with six serious-looking men with cigars in their mouths.

There have been similar removals of the portraits of white males from universities like Harvard and Yale and even courthouses. These are portraits and paintings that capture the history of these institutions. In this case, it is a significant piece of art that was removed.

The College Fix quotes a Jewish student who objected that one of the figures now removed is Dolf Cohen, famous historian and rector, who survived the holocaust by going into hiding. He became one of the most consequential academics in the country. One commenter is quoted as saying “he now turns his back to Leiden.”

In the meantime, the university appears in cringing obedience. It noted that this is not the first objection that the painting is offensive or causing some to feel “unrepresented.”

To object to such actions is to risk being targeted in the next campaign. Even if protected by tenure, such campaigns can leave a professor persona non grata in academic circles, denied essential speaking and publishing opportunities. With few conservatives or dissenting voices on faculties, most professors can expect little support from their colleagues when such controversies arise. The result is deafening silence.

Of course, the university could add the requested “ironic or critical” note by simply stating “This painting depicting a prior board was removed because the board was once composed of only white men. That history has not changed but we added this note.”

101 thoughts on “Leiden University Removes Work of Famed Dutch Artist Due to the Depiction of Only White Males”

  1. Per the very last paragraph of the good professor’s post, I would change it as follows (my changes in upper-case):

    “Of course, the university could add the requested “ironic or critical” note by simply stating “This HISTORICAL painting depicting a prior board WILL NOT BE removed SIMPLY because the board was once composed of only white men. That history has not changed but we added this note.”

  2. We have seen similar actions in the United States where one or a small number of objectors result in the removal of paintings, material or postings at universities. Few faculty are willing to risk the ire of protesters by opposing such actions.

    I picture a large herd being stalked by a small pack of predators. The predators identify an opportunity to attack, separate it from the herd and the herd leaves the victim behind undefended.

    It’s time for the herd to turn the tables on these predators.

  3. Joe Biden, whether he is aware of it or note, supports this sort of thing.
    Disney Corporation, whether intended or not, supports this sort of thing.
    Coca-cola corporation, ditto.
    Major League Baseball, supports this sort of thing.

    There was a wonderful movie many years back: “King of Hearts” I believe it was titled — in which in WWII, the insane asylum gates are opened, and the ‘loonies’ take over the town — fascinating.

    1. @Richard Lowe…
      There was a wonderful movie many years back: “King of Hearts” I believe it was titled — in which in WWII, the insane asylum gates are opened, and the ‘loonies’ take over the town — fascinating.
      -=-
      Sorry sir, you are wrong.
      Its a recent documentary of today’s modern Washington DC. Those loonies sit in the WH and in Congress. We affectionately call it the swamp.
      Now if we could only introduce mosquitos laden w malaria … (said in jest of course…)

      -G

  4. The same movement also censored into oblivion Uncle Ben, Aunt Jemima, and the Land o’ Lakes Indian Maiden.

    It is not about fighting racism or sexism, it is about nihilism and destruction,

  5. Womanhood isn’t real. Just put on a costume and you’re a woman. Her gripe, then, is about the costumes. Would she feel more “comfortable” if the artist modified the painting so a couple of the people are wearing wigs and dresses?

    It’s all so confusing.

  6. Svelaz, I actually thought there was hope for you with your earlier statement at 8.32 am but by 8:35 am you returned to type. The aforementioned painting was depicting a prior “point” in time, nothing more and nothing less. CRT is a political-social movement taught as fact in some quarters when it’s actual title is “theory”. I have no problem with teaching classes about a theory like CRT, or Marxist economics (an oxymoron at best), progressivism, or how many angels can dance on a pin but I resist totally these movements or theories being implemented in culture and daily life when many are simply “theories” and unproven. Set up an idealized test society and promote your theory and see how it turns out. Then we can talk some more.
    If we used your point of view here, then Mr. Witherspoon could simply say “I am really uncomfortable with CRT” and it would be suddenly and miraculously swept away or “figuratively” turned to face the wall in ignominy.

    1. GEB, you missed the point. The problem with those who opposed the painting was that they felt “uncomfortable” because of what it signified. It was a very stupid thing for them to claim and I do agree with sentiment that this was just a very idiotic thing to do. Being uncomfortable because of what it characterized shouldn’t be a reason to remove or turn the paining to the wall. The same reason exists with the idea of what CRT presents to some conservatives who claim it makes them feel uncomfortable about being exposed to ugly truths of our history. They often make the excuse that it makes students uncomfortable, but it’s really the parents or adults who are. Students are not the ones who are saying it makes them uncomfortable or guilty. It’s other adults who are “speaking” for them. Both issues create an “uncomfortable” feeling or an unease about what both issues depict.

  7. We live in a society strangely reminiscent of the 17th Century Salem Witch Trials. Point out the obvious, and you’re the next Witch.

  9. We are removing statues with bad historical associations from public places. Environmentalists are defacing great art. Feminists are removing art by white men from museums. Literary works by men are being subjected to feminist readings or being dropped from curricula altogether. Soon, musical works by white men will be “disappeared” from concert halls. We will soon be living in a world of vacuity where only left-wing opropanda can survive. But there is a silver lining. It is possible that the art work of that well-known genius, Hunter Biden, will be displayed, assuming he decides to identify as a some type of female.

  10. “A painting from the renowned contemporary Dutch painter Rein Dool has been removed from a wall at Leiden University . . .”

    Ever notice how totalitarians, in fact and in spirit, like to make things and people disappear from history?

    1. Like what happened with the Tulsa massacre? The fact that CRT is exactly what that shows of tyrants of our own past? Right?

  11. These people are beyond crazy. This is our future unless non woke media can eventually secure a meaningful audience.

  12. Although well-intentioned, it’s likely that today’s censors (government and private censors) couldn’t produce a television series like “All in the Family” or “The Jefferson’s” by Norman Lear and Rob Reiner.

    These shows actually showed how ridiculous and backwards bigots were. These shows actually helped defeat bigotry but wouldn’t be allowed on television network today. Although censors are well-intentioned, sometimes censorship can have the opposite effect.

    Censorship also doesn’t work. Listen to the popular music of the 1970’s and 1980’s. Artists and writers simply use code words that can’t legally be censored, but everyone understands exactly what is being said.

    1. Ashcroft’s Zersetzung: Actually, what those shows did was to stereotype and stigmatize the working class as racists. Kind of like what the liberals think of workers today. And Reiner is the biggest woke arsehole on the planet.

    2. AZ,
      I watched the Jeffersons.
      It was so funny on multiple levels, made fun of everyone.
      They could never make a show like that today. The woke leftist mob would not stand for it.

  13. Even I think that is just silly. There are extremes and this is one of them. It’s one of those moments that really deserves a good ol’ fashioned hard face palm.

      1. Everyone has a line. Even liberals. Conservatives have their own extremes and crazies too. The distinction is that most of the time conservatives spend more time defending them than condemning them.

  14. rather than reporting on the endless flow of progressive stupidity, you could report on something less predictable, like the sun rose this morning.

  15. Wokeism is becoming the largest US cultural export article to the detriment of the world.
    As a consequence, we should also protest against the exhibition of art by Lynette Yiadom-Boakye, Amy Sherald, or Jacob Lawrence who exclusively portray African people for lack of diversity.

    This nonsense has to stop. Obviously, academic institutions are no longer led by leaders but by unprincipled weaklings (with some exceptions)

  16. Racist artists…painting their contemporary world. I guess the Mona Lisa has to go to landfill. Racist crap, by a racist painter (cant use the word artist)

  17. Maybe they should add an “ironic or critical” comment to her PHD dissertation. This should follow this little fool for her entire professional life.

  18. Just WOW. And that they actually do it to stop the crying little progressive RACIST??

  19. People who have wisdom and knowledge enough to recognize this nonsense as adolescent whining need to grow a backbone and say, “No. The painting stays. Deal with it.” Maybe it would help the adolescents doing the whining grow a backbone of their own.

    1. Witherspoon, I wouldn’t go THAT far. Remember, conservatives felt uncomfortable and outraged when they couldn’t handle the idea of CRT and turned into full blown snowflakes and went as far as banning the discussion in class or it’s books because it made some people uncomfortable.

      1. Svelaz- are you comparing this situation to the willful political indoctrination of impressionable children?

        1. All teaching IS indoctrination. Little children are not being told that they are supposed to feel guilty or are naturally White supremacists as those who want to demagogue CRT want to claim.

          All it is is a different point of view that shouldn’t be censored or avoided because it makes some uncomfortable with the difficult truths about our own history and it’s ugly realities. Children these days are a lot smarter and many can recognize these kinds distinctions. CRT is not and has never been taught in elementary school, But I do think they should have it discussed in high school. With all the labels being hurled around these days, Marxism, socialism, communism, CRTl, even the great replacement theory should be discussed in high school. But too many conservatives are freaking out because someone is deliberately lying to parents and the public about what CRT and the other ism’s are “really” about.

          1. Svelaz wrote“All teaching IS indoctrination.”

            Wait just a damn minute, you think that teaching facts like 2+2=4 and 2×2=4, so on and so forth, is indoctrination?

            You’re dumber than I thought you were.

              1. Oh, and this “teacher” (groomer) is the reason why parents need to be involved in their children’s education and the public education system needs full transparency.

            2. Witherspoon, using your own form of reasoning,

              INDOCTRINATION: the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.

              Teaching math is indoctrination. Teaching history is indoctrination, especially when you focus on one aspect of it and ignore another. Teaching English is indoctrination too.

              Education is the indoctrination children to a society’s needs, beliefs, and culture.

              You didn’t know that? Apparently you were not indoctrinated properly or were poorly indoctrinated.

            3. Witherspoon, teaching CRT in high school wouldn’t be considered true indoctrination because students would be asking a LOT of questions. True indoctrination is teaching and not allowing students to question the subject matter. Even elementary students would end up asking a ton of questions. That would be a good opportunity to explain why the issue is so controversial or at least give them a basic idea of what it’s about, That’s it. Kids will always be asking questions on what adults are arguing so loudly about. It’s a good opportunity to give them a simple explanation to learn about things they see or hear outside of school. It’s always been that way.

          2. “All teaching IS indoctrination.”

            Again I am telling you that you need to buy that dictionary and learn why there are many words to describe different things. I am not uncomfortable with my history, but you certainly should be. You don’t know what racism is and you promote it on a daily basis. You seem not to understand the word pervert either. Look that up so when you use children in a sentence people won’t think you are one.

            1. S. Meyer, did you look at the dictionary definition of ‘indoctrination’?

              Indoctrination: the process of TEACHING a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.

              “ You don’t know what racism is and you promote it on a daily basis. You seem not to understand the word pervert either. Look that up so when you use children in a sentence people won’t think you are one.”

              LOL!! S. Meyer, I swear you are the best example of what a serious case of the Dunning-Kruger effect looks like.

              1. You finally learned what the Dunning-Kruger effect is. Unfortunately you are dumb and I am not.

      2. Svelaz, the objection to the teaching in elementary and middle school of ideas derived from CRT and intersectionality theory is not that students are offended but that they include unproven, contentious concepts presented as truth. These ideas include:

        1. US institutions today are systematically racist;

        2. The systemic racism is designed to preserve power and wealth for white, Christian, able-bodied, cisgender, heterosexual males and to oppress those elsewhere in the so/called intersectional matrix;

        3. Accordingly, how you fare in US society today depends on the extent to which you are an oppressor or oppressed in the intersectional hierarchy;

        4. Teachers should ask students to identify those parts of themselves that are oppressive and those that are oppressed, to determine their place in the hierarchy; and

        5. Students should learn that the way forward is to dismantle the institutions that perpetuate this oppressive structure, with the role for those at the top of the hierarchy being to ally with those at the bottom to smash their source of unwarranted power and wealth in the name of social justice.

        This is precisely what teachers are now trained to do, as set out in the teacher training materials I have reviewed. It is political and ideological indoctrination.

        1. Daniel,
          Well said.

          As I have stated on this blog more than a few times, I am not white.
          My very brown grandparents had a strong work ethic, saved their money, paid cash for everything, and eventually owned their home.
          Had they been white, some people would call them racist.

          1. Glad you pointed that out, but the sad fact is that your skin tone should be totally irrelevant.

            1. I agree.
              The woke leftist mob has to put everyone in a box. If you are this then you fit in this box. If you are that then you fit in that box. Everyone except cis white males are victims of something.
              Dare to get out of your box, your words are violence and you must be canceled, silenced, and destroyed.

        2. Daniel,

          The problem is the claims that these concepts are being taught in elementary and middle school. They are not. These concept SHOULD be taught or discussed in Hight school and above. Parent’s are being lied to that these concepts are being forced or taught to elementary or middle school kids. It’s simply true. The only reason why these claims are being made is to stoke outrage on parents and scare them into thinking that their kids are being taught that they are “if you are white you are naturally racist” or “that they should feel guilty about being white” because their ancestors were cruel slave owners”. It’s all BS and that is the problem.

          Elite conservatives and those with a political agenda ARE deliberately making those claims to spread fear and outrage among parents who are either too busy to really understand what the theory really is or are too ignorant and gullible to understand what it is that they are outraged about.

          The theory was never taught in elementary or middle school and anything close to it or involving race was conveniently labeled CRT to scare parents into demanding school boards stop teaching something they have never been teaching in the first place. CRT is being used to label anything that is considered racist or has an appearance of being racist against white kids because it’s easy to demagogue the theory for political gain. That’s all it is.

          1. ” Parent’s are being lied to that these concepts are being forced or taught to elementary or middle school kids.”

            It is parents who are complaining based on what they see and hear so stop sounding so ignorant.

            I posted a syllabus from one school district. You didn’t comment on it or read it. One doesn’t have to be very smart to recognize that indoctrination of the young with critical race ideas that placed color over character were in the school system.

            1. “ It is parents who are complaining based on what they see and hear so stop sounding so ignorant.”

              Parents are being TOLD and SHOWN by those who are deliberately mischaracterizing what CRT is and THAT is the problem.

              The syllabus you posed a long time ago had nothing to do with CRT. Equity and diversity training is NOT CRT. You’re not very smart it’s obvious that you don’t have the ability to recognize the distinction. You then project that inability onto others to compensate for it.

              1. CRT taught in law schools is not what the parents are talking about but CRT is the name used. You are wrong. I posted a syllabus from school. In fact I posted multiple items so you don’t know what you are talking about.

                I listen to the parents, teachers caught and the literature. It demonstrates you to be a stupid leftist sycophant. No use to waste time on your sorts.

        3. Daniel says, “ This is precisely what teachers are now trained to do, as set out in the teacher training materials I have reviewed. It is political and ideological indoctrination.”

          False. That is NOT what they are doing at all. The “training materials” many are using as “proof” are diversity and equality training, That is NOT CRT. That training has nothing to do with CRT at all, but those who are making those claims are conflating two very different things and using the “CRT” label to anything that is used to demagogue it

        1. Upstatefarmer, they are NOT doing that. The only people claiming that are those that are deliberately peddling the notion for political gain and to sow distrust and division.

Comments are closed.