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.