Was Vail justified to cancel SeeWalker’s residency?
Re: “Vail cancels a Lakota artist for her Palestinian sympathies, chilling her speech,” May 15 editorial
The Post got it wrong when it claimed in its May 15 editorial Lakota artist Danielle SeeWalker’s speech was chilled when the Town of Vail canceled her participation in an arts program because of Palestinian sympathies. Vail apparently made the decision it was not in the town’s best interest to support a controversial artist after learning of SeeWalker’s work, “G is for Genocide.”
Contrary to the Post’s assertion, Vail has not “silenced” SeeWalker. She is free to display her art. The First Amendment prohibits the government from infringing on free speech. It doesn’t require the government to use taxpayer dollars to provide a platform to artists.
The Post cavalierly sees a parallel between Palestinian refugee camps and American reservations. It omits the over three millennia relationship Jews have to Israel and that when the UN voted for partition in 1947, it divided the land into both a Jewish and Arab state. The Jews accepted; the Arabs did not.
The editorial normalizes the aspersion Israel is committing a “genocide,” a legal term that includes the intent to destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Israel has displayed no such intent. It is at war with a terror group whose founding charter states its intent to destroy Israel. It’s callous to assert Palestinians “are being indiscriminately killed.” This war has a relatively low civilian-to-combatant ratio, Hamas embeds its terrorists and weapons beneath homes, hospitals, schools, and mosques, and Israel goes to great lengths to warn civilians, something Hamas does not do.
Scott Levin, Denver
Editor’s note: Levin is the mountain states regional director of the Anti-Defamation League.
I grew up skiing at Vail, Winter Park, and numerous other areas in Colorado. After the Town of Vail rejected a Native American artist’s work, I have decided never to ski there again nor put a cent in the town’s coffers. Narrow-minded conservative actions like this have no place in our democracy … unless you lean toward fascism.
Wallace White, Durango
The Post’s Editorial Board claims that “the Town of Vail attempted to cancel Danielle SeeWalker” after the artist displayed an anti-Israel painting entitled “G is for Genocide.” You add that the decision was based on the town’s “disagreement with her message.”
Your claims are baseless. The objection is not to which side of the Israel/Gaza debate SeeWalker is on but rather that she’s involving herself in that debate just before taking a taxpayer-funded artist-in-residency position in Vail.
There is zero evidence that Vail “attempted to cancel” the artist (in the common meaning of that term) nor that their problem was her particular viewpoint. A more reasonable assumption is that the town did not want to be thrust into one of the most divisive debates in the world at this time, to be accused (as you’re already doing) of taking a side, and to do so with taxpayer money.
To the extent that SeeWalker’s prominence was raised by the town’s decision not to proceed with the residency, good for her. But the idea that Vail should have taken the significant risk to reputation and tourism by spending the city’s money on an artist who was intentionally taking a position on an exceedingly geopolitical issue is nonsense. The artist did what she felt she needed to and the city responded as they rightly should have. Nobody was wrong … except for The Denver Post.
Ross Kaminsky, Denver
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
