Art and Activism: Cultural Institutions in Turmoil
The recent escalation of conflict in the Middle East has reverberated through the arts and cultural sectors, prompting a wave of resignations, protests, and debates over free expression. Notably, the esteemed journal Artforum dismissed its top editor after the publication of an open letter advocating for “Palestinian liberation.” This decision ignited a backlash, leading to resignations and widespread boycotts from artists and writers who felt their voices were being stifled.
In Hollywood, a prominent agent at Creative Artists Agency stepped down from a leadership position after sharing social media posts that described Israel’s military actions in Gaza as “genocide.” This incident reflects a broader trend where individuals in positions of influence are facing consequences for their views on the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Additionally, the interim chief executive of a San Francisco art museum resigned amid mounting pressure from artists and staff who were calling for the museum to divest from Israel. She characterized the backlash she received as “vitriolic and antisemitic,” highlighting the deep divisions that have emerged within cultural institutions.
Last month, the chief executive of PEN America also resigned after enduring months of criticism from authors who accused the organization of failing to take a strong stance against Israel’s actions. Some authors, particularly those on the left, expressed concerns that the former executive, who is Jewish, had ties to “longstanding commitments to Zionism, Islamophobia, and imperial wars in the Middle East.”
The shockwaves from the ongoing war have infiltrated various realms of the arts, including film productions, museums, book festivals, and educational institutions. This has led to intense and often bitter disputes over what constitutes acceptable discourse regarding the conflict and its key players.
Many observers are alarmed by the apparent narrowing of dialogue in creative spaces since the violent events of October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched an attack on Israel, resulting in over 1,200 deaths and the abduction of nearly 250 individuals. This incident triggered a military response from Israel that has reportedly claimed tens of thousands of lives in Gaza, many of whom were civilians. As Jonathan Zimmerman, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania, remarked, “My hope was that October 7 would allow us to create some sort of consensus around small-L liberal pluralism, and that has not come to pass.”
At the University of Pennsylvania, tensions flared over a Palestinian literary festival held on campus just weeks prior to the attack, culminating in a donor revolt. The situation escalated further when the university’s president resigned following her perceived avoidance of a question during a congressional hearing about whether students advocating for the genocide of Jews should face repercussions.
A closer examination of cultural institutions over the past year reveals a troubling trend: it has predominantly been institutional leadership—executives and owners—who have attempted to suppress critical perspectives regarding Israel. In contrast, it is often lower-level employees and less prominent artists advocating for expressions of solidarity with Palestine who have faced backlash. This power dynamic underscores the complexities of navigating artistic expression amidst a politically charged atmosphere.
For instance, workers and supporters gathered outside the Noguchi Museum in Queens last month to protest the museum’s enforcement of a ban on the wearing of kaffiyehs, a traditional symbol of Palestinian identity, by employees. This incident further illustrates the ongoing struggle within cultural spaces to balance artistic freedom with political sensitivities.
