the federalist

Left erects anti-monuments, not just toppling

This coming week, get ready to witness ⁤the awe-inspiring sculpture ⁤”Witness”⁣ at ‍the University of Houston. Standing at a massive 18 feet by 13 feet by 13 feet, this sculpture portrays a nude woman with braids resembling rams’ horns, tentacles for‍ arms, and a ⁤stunning hoop skirt adorned with Arabic writing in stained glass.

While the university describes‍ “Witness” as a grand ​allegorical figure with ⁣multiple meanings‌ and possibilities, the group Texas Right ⁢to Life has‌ a different interpretation. They believe it ⁣to be satanic imagery honoring abortion and the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth ​Bader Ginsburg. ​In fact, the artist Shahzia Sikander herself confirmed this interpretation, expressing‌ her intention ‍to advocate for justice ‌for nonwhite women, protest the reversal of Roe v. Wade,​ and celebrate pro-abortion⁣ views.

But “Witness” is ‍not‌ just any monument; it is an anti-monument. It challenges the traditional⁤ notion of ​a monument by dividing ⁢the community with its grotesque and⁤ offensive appearance.‍ Instead of bringing people together ​through beauty, goodness, and truth, ⁢it aims to⁤ provoke anger and discomfort.

Without knowing the artist’s inspiration, one can observe that “Witness” is‌ a ⁤bizarre and unsettling sculpture. It‌ distorts the‌ female form with beastly elements, satanic hairstyles, and a peculiar metallic bubble inscribed with the word “Havah,” ⁢a combination of “air”‍ and “Eve” in ⁣Urdu. Its target audience is not the public‌ or women, but rather angry feminists who reject Western culture and⁢ Christian values.

This is not the first ⁢time‌ Sikander has created ​such controversial artwork. She previously ‌displayed​ a​ similar⁢ sculpture alongside Moses and Zoroaster on a ​New York courthouse.

The Goal Is to Mock Christianity

Like all‍ satanic imagery ​and⁣ ideology, “Witness” serves as a tool for mockery⁣ and spite. While‍ the artist and her supporters may claim it represents empowerment or justice for nonwhite women, it is clear that this statue will not achieve those goals. Its ⁣purpose is to provoke white Christians ‍and then⁢ label⁤ them as hypocrites⁢ when​ they ⁣voice their objections.

This situation is ​reminiscent of Satanist groups ​promoting ⁢the After-School Satan Club. Despite their claims ‌of promoting self-confidence ​and ‍rationality, everyone understands⁣ that their true intention is to mock Christians. Why ‌else would they name themselves after Satan, the adversary of God?

The same question⁣ can be asked about⁣ UH’s ⁤new statue. If the goal is to celebrate reproductive rights, ⁤marginalized women, or RBG, why choose​ a‌ visually unappealing and sci-fi horror-like‍ sculpture instead of‍ something that‍ truly symbolizes those progressive ideas? The answer is simple: to⁢ provoke discomfort ⁢and⁣ anger.

A Sign of⁢ the Times

Erecting an anti-monument may have a more demoralizing impact ⁢than simply toppling existing monuments. By displaying ​”Witness,” innocent bystanders‌ are reminded that their culture, legacy, ⁢and access ‍to beauty have​ vanished. They now live in a world that lacks the‍ spiritual and moral ‍capacity‌ to create true monuments. Instead, ‌all they can produce are abominations that destroy their surroundings, surpassing even the worst graffiti.

However, ⁢there is hope for a different ⁣approach. The⁣ Texas Right to⁤ Life organization is justified in calling for the removal of the‌ statue, and their formal process demonstrates a commitment to building and creating rather ⁣than destroying. ⁢It is essential to act responsibly ‍and ⁣with love ⁢when it ⁣comes to‍ public art, as it is not a trivial matter. “Witness” may be an‍ exquisite piece of ⁤anti-culture, but it belongs in private enjoyment or the landfill,‍ not as a representation of⁤ shared values.


What are​ the ethical considerations surrounding the display of satanic symbols in public spaces, especially‍ when the intention is to provoke and offend Christian believers?

The display of satanic symbols in public spaces. These groups argue that it is a matter‌ of free expression and⁢ religious freedom, but in⁤ reality, their intention is to provoke and offend Christian believers. In​ the case of “Witness,” the goal ‌is to ‍mock ​Christianity and challenge its values and beliefs.

By using religious‌ symbols and imagery, the artist seeks to create controversy​ and generate attention. This tactic ⁢is not new ​and has been used by artists throughout history. However,‌ it is ​important to recognize that freedom of⁢ expression should not be used as an⁤ excuse ⁣to offend or ‌insult ‍others’ beliefs.

Furthermore, the ‌University ⁤of Houston’s‌ decision to display “Witness” raises concerns⁣ about the ⁢institution’s responsibility towards its students ​and the community. ⁢While universities should⁤ promote artistic ‍freedom and diversity, they ​also have a duty to create a safe and inclusive⁢ environment for all⁤ individuals, regardless of⁢ their religious or cultural backgrounds.

It ​is crucial to have a dialogue about the boundaries of artistic expression​ and ⁤the potential impact on different communities.‍ This conversation should involve⁤ not only artists and curators but also the public and religious leaders. By engaging in open and respectful discussions,⁤ it is⁣ possible to find a balance between⁤ artistic freedom and the need to ⁣respect diverse perspectives.

In conclusion, the ⁤sculpture “Witness”⁢ at the University of Houston raises important⁢ questions about the role‍ of art in society and the limits of artistic expression. While artists have the right to create thought-provoking and controversial works, it is ⁢essential to consider the potential impact ‌on individuals and communities. As viewers, ‌we ⁣should approach these ⁤artworks with an open mind but also a critical‍ eye, questioning their intentions and the ⁤messages they convey. Ultimately, it is through thoughtful and respectful dialogue that we can navigate the complexities of art and its relationship to ​society.

" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
News Journalist
Hello, I am Adam, how can I help you?

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker