|
SAM DURANT
-
John LeKay. Can you please tell me how you became interested in the
native Indian culture, history, etc and what inspired the making of
your latest exhibition, "Proposal for White and Indian Dead Monument
Transpositions, Washington D.C"?
Sam Durant: I grew up in Massachusetts not far from the Plymouth
rock. I must have visited the rock and the Plymouth Plantation
dozens of times on school trips. These sites showed the
relationships between colonists and Indians from the perspective and
for the benefit of the colonists, the whites. It seemed that their
primary purpose was to justify the conquest of the Indigenous
people. In the seventies a group of Indians, I think mostly
local Wampanoag’s, began organizing the National Day of Mourning
that would take place every Thanksgiving Day at the Plymouth Rock.
I can’t remember if AIM was involved in this, but in any case, as a
teenager I became aware that our celebration of survival was for
Indians a reminder of the theft of their land and the destruction of
their people and culture. So I was introduced to white/Indian
political relationships from an early age.
The "Proposal for White and Indian Dead Monument Transpositions"
derived out of a residency I was doing at the Walker Art Center in
2002. I was working with a couple of Native American schools in
Minneapolis (Heart of the Earth, an original AIM charter school
and Four Directions) on a sound piece and doing research on Native
American history in Minnesota. There are quite a few monuments
stemming from the "Dakota War" in 1862 in the state. That really
started me thinking about the whole idea of monuments, particularly
the ones related to the formation of the country.
JL: I was reading about the monument in
Minnesota marking where the 38 Dakota Sioux were hanged, erected in
1912, and how this monument - inscribed "Here
Were Hanged Thirty-Eight Sioux Indians, Dec. 26, 1862." - caused
much controversy and bitterness from the white settlers and the
natives. One White settler was quoted as saying, "Why perpetuate
the memory of such a hideous execution?" and the Dakota, who were
also offended by the blunt, harsh message on the stone didn't
consider it a monument. Are most of the Dakota war monuments in
Minnesota built for the white settlers? When you say the monuments
"relating to the formation of this country" - Is there any one of
these in particular that you are referring to?
SD: I would say that all of the Dakota War monuments were built for
the white settlers. There are a couple dedicated to "friendly
Indians" ,these were the Indians who served the settlers, not
the ones who were defending themselves. Edgar Heap of Birds did a
remarkable work about the thirty - eight hanged Dakotas
called "Building Minnesota". It was done through the Walker Art
Center in 1990
The monuments that relate to the formation of the country are the
ones used in my proposal, the massacre monuments that commemorate deaths in the conflicts between the Indigenous people and
settlers, from their arrival on the continent to the beginning of
the 20th century.
JL: You state in your proposal essay that your specific criteria for
selecting the 30 monuments that you reproduced are based on
similarities to the massive obelisk Washington monument. How did
you find the exact locations of these 30 monuments which are
scattered across the US and can you please tell me about your
process of reproducing them.
SD: I found the monuments through two years of intensive research.
I can’t claim that it is inclusive of every monument in existence
but I'm confident that it is pretty close and is certainly a
representative selection. The sculptural representations of the
monuments that make up the installation are scaled from photographs
of the originals to about one third of their actual size. They were
fabricated in my studio by two very talented young artists, Aaron
Sandness and James Melinat (along with a variety of part-time
helpers). It took a year to complete the fabrication.
JL: What I also find interesting of what you have brought to light is the perception that these various original monuments create on
several levels. How size and height (in terms of commemorating
someone in our society) connotes value. For example the diminutive
3ft Sand Creek monument in which 600 Indian natives were massacred
in comparison to the 52 ft Fort Ridgley monument in which 3 white
soldiers were commemorated.
SD: Yes, that's an interesting observation- most of the Indian
memorials are smaller. The key scale relationship for me is
revealed in the architectural model of the proposal where you see
all of the monuments in relationship to the Washington Monument.
The overwhelming height of the 550 foot obelisk is really
underscored when you put a group of relatively tiny monuments in
proximity to it.
JL: I do see many similarities and a distinctive difference between
the Vietnam war memorial, the Korean war memorial and the World War
2 memorial etc. In these cases, the war memorials serve to honor
the soldiers and justify these wars and how you state in your
essay, the monuments serve to provide a historical narrative that
validates and justifies violence and loss of life through the
commemoration of the victorious. How challenging do you think
your war memorial proposition will be in today's political climate?
SD: I think there’s probably two answers, first, in the case of the
exhibition of the proposal I think it has served to make the point
that America is based on violence and conquest- not on democracy as
we are taught to believe (and is repeated every minute of the day
in the corporate media). So it makes a certain historical point
which could be used to understand current situations. For instance
one might view the war in Iraq as a continuation of the historical
pattern of colonial war and aggression, rather than swallowing the
Administration’s now obviously bogus justifications. I’ve found
that the more I know about history the less I believe what the
government says. This of course would be the opposite of what a
“conventional” monument is supposed to do. So in this sense I hope
that my Monument Proposal would be understood as an anti-monument.
The second answer would be found if the project could actually be
realized on the National Mall, in which case I think it would have
a much stronger and wider impact in this regard.
JL: In Ward Churchill's essay for your book. He quotes Roxanne
Dunba Ortiz. "The growth of ethnic consciousness and the consequent
mobilization of Indian communities in the western hemisphere since
the early 1960s have been welcomed neither by government forces nor
by opposition parties and revolutionary movements. The Indian
question has been almost forbidden subject of debate through out
the entire political spectrum, although racism, discrimination,
exploitation are roundly denounced on all sides". What are your
thoughts on this?
SD: I agree with Dunbar Ortiz, the “Indian question” is so
threatening that it really can’t be posed, if you do, the very
foundation of the republic, its very justification for existence
comes immediately into question. This is far too dangerous because
actually there is no legal justification for the country’s
existence, its just conquest by force, as Churchill, Vine Deloria
and others have long argued. A great example of this situation you
refer to is how white liberals react when the subject of
reparations is broached, it seems there’s almost nothing more
horrifying. Denouncing racism is one thing but talking seriously
about reparations for Indians and slavery is quite another. As
de-colonized African countries begin implementing truth and
reconciliation processes, Australia and New Zealand engage in long
term reparation programs with their Indigenous populations
Americans stick their heads further into the sand (in the Middle
East mainly) on the issue. That’s why I was so happy to be able
to include the Churchill essay in my book. He makes such a
thorough and well-reasoned proposal for how reparations could work
and of how they would serve the greater good of all Americans, not
just those they would ostensibly benefit.
-
JL: This is the kind of work that transcends the art world and sets
in deeply emotionally and cerebrally once you leave the gallery. Not
something easily forgotten. From my perspective, I do not see this as having anything to do
with "art about art or any of those cliché conceptual chess moves
like displacement, scale etc.
Like your answer in two parts. Especially the second part about
Iraq. There is another and much deeper historical and a very present
and relevant time dimension to this etc. What do you think the
perception of this work will be with Native American Indians,
politicians, regular Americans, and the rest of the planet who will
experience this, if and when your proposal goes through.
SD: Well thank you, it’s very nice to
hear that the project has such resonance. In terms of the audience,
I would say that the work is primarily for white Americans. It is
specifically addressed to the version of American history produced
by and for that population. I did show it to Paul Chaat Smith and
Truman Lowe at the NMAI in Washington DC. They really got a laugh
out of it, which was a big relief because I was nervous about their
response. Lenny Bruce said pain plus time equals humor. This is
something I think humor shares with art- the ability to deal with
traumatic and difficult issues. Representations can provide a
distancing effect better enabling a viewer to engage with subjects
they might not ordinarily be able to. So in this way I hope that
anyone could connect with the Proposal, though for many it might be
a threatening idea and for others a painful one.
JL: Are you working on other pieces related to this Indian
question and subject matter?
Actually, I am working on a new project dealing with white/Indian relations. I was invited by my alma mater, Massachusetts College
of Art to do a show in Boston next year. Right now I’m imagining
it will take up the subject of the Plymouth Colony, the Plymouth
Rock and the morass of the attending mythology surrounding that
history.
Photos.© Sam Durant.
Courtesy Paula
Cooper Gallery New York. |
