Beloved children’s author Dr. Seuss occasionally featured racist caricatures in his illustrations. Some of these illustrations were featured in an exhibition, which was subsequently boycotted by local authors. The exhibit was then canceled by the Seuss Museum. The mayor of Springfield, Massachusetts, reacted by blaming “political correctness at its worst,” belittling the issue altogether (“We as a city, state, nation and world have more important ‘life and death’ issues to deal with and resolve”) and asking, as has become cliché, “where do we draw the line?”
The mayor’s reaction and the museum’s cancellation of the event highlight the two typical responses to racial controversy in museums: 1) a demand to present the past exactly as it existed without comment, and 2) an evasion of divisive issues by sanitizing a conversation of controversial content.
A third response would be more useful: using the controversy as a teachable moment. As Rounds asserts, people go to museums to do “identity work,” – to figure out who they are, who they want to be, and who they shouldn’t be. We should approach controversial work by noting, in this instance, the racist nature of Seuss’ illustrations and starting conversations about how they matter and have mattered. In other words, the controversy should have been a part of the exhibition, rather than an excuse to erase it. Archibald claimed that museums should be a New Times Square, “to discuss shared burdens and challenges.” Let’s take on that role and facilitate tough discussions.
