Statement on the cancellation of the Broad Museum opening event and the censorship of the “Diasporic Collage: Puerto Rico and the Survival of a People” exhibition

By Dr. Yomaira C. Figueroa-Vásquez

As co-PI of the Diaspora Solidarities Lab (and former faculty at Michigan State University), I am incredibly disappointed to hear about the lack of welcome and issues of academic freedom emerging at MSU. Please read the statement below from Dr. Yomaira C. Figueroa-Vásquez, Director of Centro/the Center for Puerto Rican Studies and full professor at CUNY, as well as PI of the Diaspora Solidarities Lab.

If what you read concerns you as well, please do write to president@msu.edu and ask the administration respond to the requests outlined below.

Gratitude to all of our comrades who organized the gorgeous exhibit and who created a space for healing, solidarity, and decolonial/anti-imperial repair in the midst of being asked to use the SERVICE entrance at a public university. ¡Pa’lante!

~ Jessica Marie Johnson, Dir. LifexCode: Digital Humanities Against Enclosure

Statement on the cancellation of the Broad Museum opening event and the censorship of the “Diasporic Collage: Puerto Rico and the Survival of a People” exhibition

by Dr. Yomaira C. Figueroa-Vásquez

This morning my co-curator and I were informed of a decision that came down from MSU upper administration and university leadership regarding the “Diasporic Collage” exhibition. The mandate made was that “Disaporic Collage” would have to be “adapted” or censored. Specifically targeted here is the piece by Alia Farid “Piquete en el capitolio” based on a 1973 archival photograph from a Puerto Rican newspaper (acquired by MSU Broad in Oct 2023). This piece was moved to a less visible wall where it would not be seen from the entrance (even though it already was not directly visible from the entrance). In addition to this, it was required that additional text be added at the entrance of the gallery which would serve as a trigger warning and to denote that this is a faculty/research/multi-institutional exhibit. This would have the effect of denoting that this exhibit is IN the Broad but not necessarily OF the Broad. This would serve to distance the museum from the work of their own curator, Dalina Perdomo Alvarez and to frame the piece by Farid as inherently problematic.   

To be clear, we object to this mandate and the fact that the exhibit was changed without our consent within 30-minutes of us being informed. Furthermore, the sign placed at the entrance of the gallery is irresponsible and reductive in its framing of the exhibit and the piece based on a 51-year old image. We did not create or approve of this text and we reject this overreach.  Curatorial work is part and parcel of the protected speech and the design of this exhibit is an expression of academic freedom. Forcing the rearrangement of the exhibit is an act of censorship of the professional work of the curator. What precedent does this set for future exhibitions at MSU Broad?  Can university leadership modify the intellectual productions and curatorial works of its faculty and staff without curatorial discussion and approval? This exhibition was deeply researched and meticulously prepared over the course of 1.5 years (to say nothing of the history of the Broad museum as a place that was dismissive of the work of artists and curators of color which is also reflected in the fact that this exhibit was scheduled and rescheduled since 2018). The piece by Farid was presented to several univesity and museum committees, stakeholders, student groups, and faculty and has had perhaps the most scrutiny of any piece in the history of the Broad. All of this work has been dismissed in a one-sided debate. 

Since we have no direct communication with those making decisions (due to their lack of transparency) and there is no accountability for the series of damaging acts by MSU and the Broad, we must resign to writing this statement and outlining our disgust with this treatment of our exhibit, the artists, our intellectual labor, and our community. If we cannot counter the demands being made by the university leadership, we are demanding that additional wall text and signage be added to reflect the censorship of the curator, the nonconsensual changes made to the exhibit, and how this infringes on academic freedom and artistic expression. We want this text and signage to be added before the gallery is opened to the public. 

We also demand that the MSU administration publicly apologize for the blatantly racist and unwelcoming atmosphere that our artists, community, curators, and contributors endured on Friday 9/13/24 at the Broad Museum. We were lied to when we were told that the cancellation of the event was not about the content of any of the exhibitions but rather about staffing and capacity. We demand accountability for the cancellation of the event and the lack of transparency around the decision to do so as well as for how our group (comprised of primarily people of color) were forced to use the service entrance of the museum (and many were turned away outright) while the primarily white visitors, donors, board members, and other patrons were allowed to use the front entrance of the museum. 

As the co-curator of “Diasporic Collage”, the Director of the Center for Puerto Rican Studies, and the PI of the Mellon Diaspora Solidarities Lab I demand accountability and a full reimbursement of all costs associated with travel, lodging, honoraria, and fees for all the stakeholders as well as other associated costs with the exhibition. Furthermore, I demand transparency: we should know where these concerns came from and who brought them to the administration so that we can have the necessary open dialogue that this situation requires. If one person (or persons) can appeal to university leadership in secret and trigger this level of censorship and we are in turn put in the position of being censored, dismissed, diminished, publicly shamed, and embarrassed then there can be none of the open dialogue and communication that the MSU administration says that they so deeply desire. Why has our community of scholars not been invited to a conversation in the wake of these irresponsible decisions?

The culture of the university is set by its administrators. The administration says they are intent on creating space for conversation and communication but this is does not happen through these forms of censorship, labeling, and dismissive treatment. I am unconvinced that productive conversations can be had when the researchers, curators, faculty, funders, and graduate students who helped to produce this show were not consulted at any time during the making of these decisions. This is a disrespectful and cowardly university culture that hides its hand as it throws a stone.

The original post is here.