Commission hearing consensus is to remove Stephen Foster statue
Among the more than two dozen people who spoke Wednesday evening before the city’s Art Commission, most wanted the Stephen Foster statue along the Oakland stretch of Forbes Avenue to be taken down or moved somewhere less visible. But few speakers were ashostile as Billy Hileman.
“You should melt the metal part down and recoup a little bit of [money],” said the educator and veteran activist during the hourlong hearing. “And then maybe make gravel out of the pedestal.”
That drew laughter from a crowd of more than 60, but Mr. Hilemanchoked up moments later.
“Obviously, I can’t speak for people of color,” said Mr. Hileman, who is white, “but I can speak for me.I’m tired of being a part of this.”
Sculpted in 1900 by Giuseppe Moretti, the 10-foot-tall statue has long been controversial for its depiction of an African-American banjo player at the feet of the Pittsburgh-born composer. Critics say the statue glorifies white appropriation of black culture, and depicts the vacantly smiling musician in a way that is at best condescending and at worst racist.
Those concerns attracted new scrutiny this summer, after Charlottesville, Va., was rocked by a violent rally of white supremacists in which Confederate statuary was a flash point. Pittsburgh
Mayor Bill Peduto called upon the commission to undertake a public dialogue about the Foster statue’s fate.
At the hearing Wednesday night, black speakers were outnumbered by at least 3 to 1 by white ones. But only a handful of speakers, all white men, urged that the statue remain.
Arthur Denberg of Squirrel Hill argued that Mr. Foster’s music often “was really quite sympathetic” to African-Americans.
And although some found the statue “demeaning,” he said, “You are seeing a situation where somebody is drawing inspiration.”
“I see history, true to its form,” said Bartley Bailey of Observatory Hill. Although the statue “should be moved to a better place,” he said, it was “part of history. … I think weall ought to settle down.”
“I think a lot of the comments illustrate the need to have this conversation,” countered an AfricanAmerican man, Sean Champagne of Oakland. “I feel like a lot of the residents of the city don’t understand the impact of depictions of white supremacy.”
That also was the more popular view in written testimony.
Yesica Guerra, the city’s public art and civic design manager, said that nearly half of 126 written comments sent to the commission favored either relocating or removing thestatue.
Only a quarter favored leavingit where it is. Other options include providing signageto contextualize the work.
“Itwas surprising so many people were in favor of removing the statue,” said Brittany Felder, an AfricanAmerican woman. She and other law students at the University of Pittsburgh had talked among themselves about their concerns, she said, but “I don’t think we had a chance to gauge [public sentiment]before.”
“Public sentiment that has spoken the loudest and the most has been on the removal of the statue from a public location,” Mr. Peduto saidearlier in the day.
Although the statue’s fate “will end up with me,” he said, “I don’t think a politician should be in the position of saying certain sculpture shouldbe up.”
He said his decision would be based on the commission’s findings and “upon history, culture, and the art itself.”
The commission will hear more testimony and begin deliberations at its next scheduledmeeting, at 2 p.m. Oct. 25.