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.”

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

  1. Every record has been destroyed or falsified,
    every book has been rewritten, every picture
    has been repainted, every statue and street
    and building has been renamed, every date has
    been altered. And that process is continuing
    day by day and minute by minute. History has
    stopped. Nothing exists except an endless
    present in which the Party is always right.

    ~ George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

    1. My question is why does anyone go to these indoctrination sites in the first place? We will not win this battle if all we do is whine and complain. People actually have to do something.

      1. So says everyone, even you. Pray, tell us, what is it that YOU are doing? Or are you just pontificating and waiting for “someone” to do “something”? “People actually have to do something.” Why don’t you lead the way?

  2. If the University removes the painting, then it should replace it with Elina, hoisted upon the picture hanger, and facing the wall……..a fitting compromise.

  3. The Dool painting incorporates a visual reference to an important genre of paintings in the history of Western Civilization, which includes Rembrandt’s group portrait of The Drapers Guild which is sometimes nicknamed The Dutch Masters. This woman’s destructive aggression needs to be stopped or the painting should be returned to the artist.

  4. Since when is it a PC Crime to be ‘uncomfortable’ about anything? I view emotionally-fragile gals who kvetch and moan about everything that makes them nervous to be utterly ridiculous and silly. Akin to little girls who scream at a tiny spider on the wall. Nobody should be afraid to mercilessly mock them for their pathetic attempts to remake the world to align with their neurotic world-view. Grow up you easily-frightened infants! Real adults deal with the world as it is.

    1. The crime isn’t about ‘being uncomfortable’, the crime is the inactivity of the inanimate object forcibly(?) imposing onto the viewer/reader/listener an uncomfortable ‘feeling’. Just ‘being there’ IS the criminal act, don’tcha know? 🙂

  5. Let’s ask the courageous, although eminently factitious, Comradette Joanne van der Leun.

    Do you still need your artificial success and status, Comradette Mz. Joanne van der Leun[atic], or might you persist in life of your own capacity, acumen, gumption and stamina without illicitly appropriating the industries, treasure and nations built by those pesky men?

  6. Not to worry, America.

    63% of American men voted republican.

    That would have been a massive landslide if this were still America, America as intended and established by its Founders who required naturalized citizens to be “…free white person(s)…” and voters to be European, male, 21, with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.

    America is still there, if the police ever return possession to its rightful, legal owners.

    The Deep Deep State “Swamp” superRINO, Kevin “The Bumpkin From Bakersfield” McCarthy, isn’t going to get you there.

    Oh, and the first Latino Presidente, “El Jefe” Don Ronaldo DeSanctimonious, isn’t either.
    ______________________________________________________________________

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

    – Declaration of Independence, 1776

    1. FUNFACTS:

      The “leader” of “conservatives” in the U.S Senate is from Kentucky.

      The population of Kentucky is a whopping 4.5 million.

      This linchpin of corruption, deconstitutionalization and globalization in America was “elected” by 1,233,315 votes.

      You know your country is totally corrupted when one globalist liberal in conservative clothing, from a state of 4.5 million, in a nation of 332 million, purloins enough power to be commanding America.

      The Deep Deep State “Swamp” need manipulate only the key control points that are the most vulnerable, susceptible and accessible.
      __________________________________________________________________________________________________________

      Mitch McConnell

      Rank: 7th in the Senate

      with an estimated net worth of $34,137,534 in 2018.

      – Open Secrets, A 501(c)(3) tax-exempt, charitable organization, 1300 L St NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20005, (202) 857-0044 – info@crp.org
      ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

      How does one “politician” amass $34 million on $174K per year?

      Did the American Founders design government to make elected representatives filthy rich; does the Constitution mandate that?

      It is no wonder they call the Washington D.C. NFL team the “COMMANDERS!”

  7. Three guesses as to the source for the claim that Hillary Clinton is “linked” to this story—any takers? Did you click on the link? It was, of course, FOX! What else? Turley admits this via a link, instead of a direct citation. Turley is paid to come up with something, anything to criticize Democrats for, to stir the culture wars, given the drubbing that Republicans took and the red wave that didn’t happen that Turley hasn’t commented on. Of course, election-denier Kari Lake refuses to concede. Of course, Republicans are accusing the election winner of a conflict of interest in certifying her own victory, implying that there is somehow a conflict of interest. It’s becoming sad, really.

    1. In Arizona, Katie Hobbs, the Secretary of State and state official who conducts state elections, “won” the election she presided over – for seven days!

      Nope. No apparent or real conflict of interest there, right?

      Katie Hobbs must have recused herself.

      State law must have precluded the obvious conflict of the presiding election official participating in the very election she is presiding over, indeed, the appearance of such conflict.

      Arizona has codified corruption – the person running the election presides over her own victory, elections are not conducted by law: On the legal day of elections, in legal polling places, and by legal means (i.e. paper ballots).
      _______________________________

      “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      – Declaration of Independence, 1776
      _____________________________

      Enough antithetical, anti-Constitution, anti-American nonsense.

      The American Founders and “Crazy Abe” Lincoln fully grasped the importance of “grabbing the bull by the horns” and “hands on” governance, with a vengeance; why is it that so-called republicans can’t understand that “…sometimes you gotta say, “What the —-, make your move.”

    2. NUTCHACHACHA,

      Can America get rid of unconstitutional affirmative action, quotas, welfare, public housing, etc., now…

      or do you still need it?

      1. Let’s ask the courageous, although eminently factitious, Comradette Joanne van der Leun.

        Do you still need your artificial success and status Comradette Mz. Joanne van der Leun[atic] or might you persist in life of your own capacity, acumen, gumption and stamina without illicitly appropriating the industries, treasure and nations built by those pesky men?

  8. That these people think that banishing images that upset should tell you all you need to know. We are no longer dealing with well-adjusted people, and that does indeed have serious ramifications for our future. A lot of us are cynical about it, or make jokes – but really: this is the future. it really is. Dem politicians and their arms bend over backward to placate this constituency. Decide how you would like to proceed, because if you insist that someday snowflakes will hit the wall and grow up – you are really, really mistaken. We can take the power back now or suffer the consequences later. Our elections were a chance to prove that, but too many of us are too petty or self-involved to see the bigger picture. The time for being upset with your party and being bitter and not taking action has passed. You raised your kids to be weak cowards, hopefully those apples didn’t fall from a tree.

  9. Wow,
    I wonder if she would be offended by a Maplethorp exhibit of only nude males.
    I also wonder if she ever read ‘Portrait of an Artist’ or ‘My name is Asher Lev’? (Both good stories BTW)

    I seriously doubt it because the protagonist is a male adolescent coming of age.

    The point is that the actions of the University are laughable if not for the fact that they represent an extreme reaction to one person taking offense. Which begs the question… what’s the purpose of art?
    Would they then also take down any art that has a Christian theme because an atheist may find it offensive?

    -G

    1. @ian

      I actually remember the Mapelthorp controversy, and if you are using that as an example, you have not seen the internet for a thrice of decades. Frankly, you haven’t seen the art world either, as it has only gotten ridiculous to the point as to make that Mapelthorp exhibit look tame. Focus on your kids using Tik Tok or OnlyFans 24/7 if you’d like to actually intervene. Kids do not need phones before the age of 13. Pretentious art snobs with too much money and time on their hands are not the issue at this point. Wake up to the 21st century. Start paying attention *now*. Those days are long, long over.

      1. @James,

        I used the Maplethorp exhibit because its all men… at least the one in Cincy that caused an uproar many moons ago.
        It was the first thing that came to mind where you had an art exhibit of all men which she may find offensive too.

        Are there other examples? Sure.

        The other issue is one has to question what is art?

        The other thing is that she said she was offended/triggered by the art.
        Is that a reason for censorship?

        -G

  10. Looks like the mental disease afflicting so much of our country has made its way to Europe. Then again, that is the home of the environmental crazies trying to ruin works of art.

  11. Do you think they will remove all access to donations an endowment money since virtually ALL of it came from White people ??

    1. Good point Solvermn. You can bet that they take the big money checks from cigar smoking white men with a big thank you Mr. Whiteman. They say, I see that your cigar has gone out. Let me light that for you Mr. (Clinton) Whiteman. Speaking of cigars.

  12. RE:” Leiden University” Woeful lacking of individuals with cojones to tell these wackjobs..’If you don’t like it……shove it!!” The counter-culture has found the leak in the dike and there’s no one with courage enough to plug it.

  13. Diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment, class-based bigotry)… one step forward, two steps backward. #HateLovesAbortion

  14. I guess there really is such a thing as “white fragility,” and we’re seeing it in action every time a university caves into pressure from know-nothings who feel “uncomfortable.” Can’t wait until the tables turn again — and they will. What goes around, comes around.

    1. @GioCon,

      Was her objection due to the fact that they were all white? all male?
      And the attitude … to steal a joke from Tim Allen… “too bad they owned everything and were somehow mocking her?”

      Or was it the fact that she was frustrated that she couldn’t go back in time to confront them, only to be mocked and burned as a witch because they would have viewed time travel as sorcery/witchcraft.

      -G

Leave a Reply