More on the murals
Re: “Centro Hispano murals destroyed” (10/26/2017): The local outcry and response to the destruction of murals is not about right or wrong or even about who speaks for the majority of our Latino community. This thought process only serves in dividing us. We can choose to go against the modern tide of divisiveness and stand together as a community who makes mistakes and works together to improve on those mistakes to reach our goals. The angry, disappointed, betrayed feelings driving our response is about our collective voices being silenced. Murals and artwork are not disposable commodities. Artwork is not only about a picture but also about the voices, stories and symbolism. The Centro mural situation can be summed up in a manner that I have not seen discussed anywhere as of yet. The issue is not solely about the destruction of artwork as much as it is about silencing our voices and stories by the very institution set up to protect and lift our voices. As a Latino in Madison I encourage, appreciate and welcome everyone who wants to help the community. Every bit of talent, energy, passion, funding and good will is needed for the benefit of the entire Madison community. Is there no place for me or Sharon and the other many artists who contributed to the beautiful unique Madisonian jewel that was the Centro Hispano building in Madison?
— William del Moral (via email)
Free-er speech?
Re: “‘UW Regents did right with free speech rule” (11/2/2017): Many who know me would say I’m a far-left leaning progressive. Practically a socialist. On paper, I am in favor of this policy that has recently been passed by the regents. The cynic in me, however, fears that it may be used to shut down any amount of protesting or demonstrating on campus, and that this is its eventual purpose.
—Sally Hoien (via web)
Missed opportunity
Re: “‘Swamped’ with special needs kids?” (11/2/2017)
Badger Rock charter school has snatched shame from the jaws of success. They could have touted the fact that families are beating down their doors to enroll their kids who otherwise find school to be a challenge. They could have offered the district their expertise on what makes their school so attractive. They could have pointed out that their success at inclusion has had the unintended consequence of over-clustering kids with behavioral challenges, and asked to collaborate with the district on solving the concern by replicating the success. They did none of those things. Instead, they attempted to illegally shut their doors to additional students with disabilities, and in so doing, sent a stark “we don’t want students like yours” message to the families who have so eagerly sought them out. For shame.
— Joanne Juhnke (via email)
