Hey, there! Log in / Register
Roxbury artist makes front of Google today
By adamg on Mon, 01/19/2015 - 10:10am
Today's Google doodle in honor of Martin Luther King Day is by Ekua Holmes of Roxbury, who is on the board of the Boston Arts Commission.
She writes of her overall work:
During my childhood, I was nurtured by a loving and supportive community of men and women who played important roles in my life. In everything I create, I hear them saying, “Remember Me.” Through my work, I honor their legacies by bringing them forward to life with torn and cut shapes of color and texture. With these scraps and remnants, assembled like a “down-home” quilt, I rebuild my world, putting in only what speaks to my personal and cultural narrative.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Ekua Holmes of Roxbury and Google honor King today
Congratulations Ekua Holmes of Roxbury, I think it's a great image and I'm proud google chose your work to honor King today. I love the ahts.
Congratulations
Awesome honor to be chosen for this.
The MFA has a beautiful exhibit of works by Gordon Parks returning to his hometown for a Life magazine article that never ended up being published (3rd floor of the Americas wing).
I think the MFA is free to the public today? I took just a couple pics of this and a few other interesting items - I'll post them in the Uhub flicker pool for anyone that's interested.
I'd love to see someone tease that argument out
DNLee says MLK Jr., in addition to using non-violent civil disobedience, also used economic disruption as a tactic in the fight for civil rights and economic justice.
Isn't that the real objection to the I93 protest that it disrupted commerce? And as always, public safety was the red herring.
I'd love to see someone tease that argument out based on the historical record and shove it Marty Walsh's face.
Give it a rest
Your correlation is absured.
It's not a correleation
It's not a correlation, it's a hypothetical and I'm right. He would have fired MLK Jr for doing what Nelli did.
but
you're forgetting one thing.. he didn't work for the city of Boston.
You've argued back and forth about this crap.. and yes its crap. But you are forgetting one thing, its called employment at will, and Nelli falls under this. She was a contractor, not an employee. Big difference how someone can be terminated for nearly nothing. Maybe the outcome would have been far different if she was a paid city employee (and not a contractor), but since she was a contractor, you pretty much can be let go for anything, and there's little she can do about it. It's probably written into her contract with the city stating she can be fired without little or no justification. It's apart of being a contractor. And the city decided to execute that clause in her contract. The city really didn't need to explain why.
So please stop this idiotic argument, there's more to this than just "she was fired".
But
"you're forgetting one thing.. he didn't work for the city of Boston."
That's what makes it a hypothetical.
Pandora's Box
I know I will regret replying to someone who doesn't have a clue. But you missed my ENTIRE point.
THERE IS NO INJUSTICE. You violate your terms of your contact, regardless of whatever they may be, and you're gone. Its apart of being a contractor. Many people don't understand that they can be fired for any reason. I don't care what the reasoning is, its in your contact. Its your job to know what's in your contract you sign. Sounds like she didn't.
Look, I'd like to feel bad that she lost her job, but I don't. Sorry. I've been a contractor with very strict rules in my contract, and I've had to live by those rules. She should have thought about that before she decided to take matters into her own hands and decided to take part. But of course I bet she didn't care and thought she could sue her way back into her job if she lost hers. (which is unlikely). Honestly, sounds like she didn't care anyways.
Don't like it? Find a new job where you aren't bound by a contract. or don't have a job, period so you can do such things.
You know I'd love to be a recluse and do what I want. You know, like take part in every protest that I see fit, but you know. I don't. Why? because I like my job. I like getting a paycheck. And unfortunately some protest group isn't going to come to my aid or some trust fund is going to pay my way if I lose my job. They aren't. Unfortunately I have to look out for me only. You will call me self centered, but I frankly just don't give a crap, you or protests and BlackLives don't pay my salary or put food on my table. I do. I have to look out for that first.
Must be nice to put your principals before your own well being. Must be nice to have a slush fund to pay your way when things don't work out right. Must be nice. Some of us don't have that luxury.
So please, stop this non sense about injustice. There is no injustice if she fully well knew what she was getting at (and I think she's not dumb enough not to realize that). Her loss. She should have thought about that before she went and protested.
What?
That's a silly argument.
if you don't
if you don't.. you never will.
I was just thinking the same thing.
.
why?
Because I'm requiring her to take responsibility for her actions? Like acting like an adult and thinking before acting? She did an action and lost her job in the process. Cry me a fuckin river. Take responsibility for your actions and accept your outcome whether you like it or not.
This can be applied ANYWHERE. You are aware even more so that many companies PROHIBIT these types of actions (like taking part in protests). You can him and haw all you want how much of an 'injustice' it is, but no one is forcing you to work for a company with said rules. You are free to leave. This has been tried over and over again in the SJC and companies have won. Again, don't like it. Leave. You have the freedom to leave.
PS - Nice try in changing all your comments... how about YOU think some before you reply also. You're very quickly losing credibility.
Nice chatting with you.
.
oh
so you're going to drop me like a bad habit because you know I'm 100% in the right and have totally poked a hole in your argument
Thanks for playing. You've just proven to me that you don't have any other points to make except "injustice", and I've poked several holes thru your theory. Means it has as much weight as a hill of beans, and is pretty invalid argument.
Come back when you have more to say than "injustice".
Not at all.
Not at all. Let me know when you have the numbers.
and
what does that have to do with my post(s)? None... I never talked about IQ or people or anything. I'm not dvdoff. And actually if you READ my posts, you'd see I gave her credit for not being stupid and very well knew what she was getting into.
You're slowly stepping away because you know in about three seconds you wont have a leg to stand on. You know we're all right, you just keep driving home this silly reasoning.
And now you want "numbers" because that's your cop out... you're copping out because you don't have any rebuttal at all.
You're right.
That was my mistake.
What about the hypocrisy?
I'm completely OK with that argument. I would have absolutely no problem with the Mayor having immediately and publicly fired her for participating in an illegal action that arguably threatens public safety, except that when Local 718 did *EXACTLY THE SAME THING* nobody was arrested or subjected to discipline, and when a City of Boston Police officer was arrested and charged with attacking a driver and stealing his car, our "I'm committed to public safety" Mayor seems to be completely silent on the topic.
I'm thinking Marty Walsh would have fired MLK too.
If MLK Jr. worked for the City of Boston and protested on his day off in a way that Walsh characterized as causing a public safety crisis.
And now back to the artwork
This post is about the artwork, not your views about Marty Walsh or the protest.
You've already expounded previously at great length. Start a different post if you
want to continue that topic and leave this one alone.
Thanks.
Still waiting for you
Still waiting for you to get back to the artwork.
I have to note, you didn't. I'll surmise that you don't find it interesting, instead you want to tell me how you think I should comment. Uh, I'm not interested in your ideas about how I should comment but thanks for the chat.
He probably would have
and MLK would have accepted that outcome, just as he accepted jail time as part of the cost of fighting for his cause.
I agree, and good people
I agree, and good people would have spoken up about the injustice of it.
Define the "it". There's no
Define the "it". There's no injustice of taking punishment for blocking a highway with all the disruption and everything. If you meant the other it - I'll just link to adamg's comment from that post. I would just be repeating what he said.
Your logic fails in the
Your logic fails in the larger case. There IS injustice in being forced to comply with an unjust law. So, maybe your argument should rest on whether or not this law is just. ,
Also, I'm sure you agree that an apparently just and unbiased law can be applied in an unjust and biased way. Much of the civil rights movement was focused on exactly that -- for example, voting qualification requirements that were never applied to white people, only to black people. You can have laws against blocking streets, sidewalks, highways, etc. that make no reference to race, religion, politics, or what have you -- but if you find that (just for example) Patriots fans are allowed to block a street and cause disruption and are not in any way punished for it, but people advocating an unpopular political position are arrested when they do the exact same thing, then I'd say there's cause for complaint. What do you think?
The cause for complaint
The cause for complaint remains around the advocated cause. Regardless of the biased enforcement (though I should also mention if Patriots fans attempt to block a highway, they would get arrested too - I mean look at historical celebrations, people have been arrested for less), the complaints remains around the reaction to what is advocated and not the law nor its enforcement. So I think my logic still stand just fine. Adamg and the subsequent link to MLK's essay both argue better than I can on this matter.
"The cause for complaint remains around the advocated cause."
"The cause for complaint remains around the advocated cause." - exactly what does this mean?
There have been plenty of "historical celebrations" after sports team victories. I'm pretty sure that they all involved blocking roads, yet I've never heard of anyone being arrested for just that. The arrests happen, if they do, when cars are overturned and set on fire, typically not before. I hope you don't consider this "less" than blocking a street. But perhaps I'm wrong and you've got a reference to when sports fans were actually arrested for blocking a road.
I would bet if Patriots fans
I would bet if Patriots fans tried to block a highway then they would get arrested. The case we have here is a highway, not a road (and a Patriot fan celebrating on a road would get arrested if they refused to move - I say that to point that would be a more aptly parallel case against protesters blocking a road). Anyways, that a side note.
The main point is the around the "advocated cause" that you are confused about. I pointed to the argument of Adamg and MLK's essay and I tried to give the best summary possible within my abilities and time. You responded that selective enforcement is something to complete (I believe), my response is still that the main focus remains what they are advocating (in this case, their advocacy to #blacklivesmatter). Because blocking a highway is still blocking a highway, that is still an arrestable offense - no cause negates that. It's not selective when you're strapped to a barrel of sand on highway and intentionally made oneself unable to move.
We get it
you think those morons were right. Now, do you think Bob Kraft would have fired Brady if he was on 93 that day? How about John Henry? Would he have fired David Ortiz? And more importantly, where was Doug Bennett that day?
I don't think those guys are morons.
So no, you don't get it.
Well, sorry
They are. Attempting to force people to adopt your point of view is not only counter-productive, it turns people against your cause. Try and see through your self righteousness for two seconds.
Show the scores
Show me the IQ scores of the 28 people who participated were between 51 and 70 and I'll concede your point. Get back to me when you have the data.
I don't have to
You see, before statistical analysis and the internet became the hallmark for settling arguments, we used to have a little thing called common sense.
Common sense dictates that if you drag a barrel into the middle of a busy high speed highway in order to force people to adopt your point of view, you're a fucking moron.
And believe me, if one of those morons had been splattered by a semi right away, how long would it have taken the rest of these so called social warriors to scatter like cockroaches when you turn a light on?
Common sense isn't on the IQ scale but MORON is.
So show me the IQ scores that prove your assertion or admit you can't substantiate the argument.
You're the most incredibly
You're the most incredibly pedantic weirdo I've seen here in quite some time and I'm sorry that Adam decided to front page an article you wrote. Seriously, take a look at what you're doing here.
absolutely
Words have meaning. If he wants to retract 'moron' I'm fine with that.
You do know words are defined
You do know words are defined by both colloquial usage and formal.
Edit: Nevermind on second half.
You
You make an excellent point. What's the colloquial meaning of moron?
Unlike the former medical
Unlike the former medical definition that requires a certain IQ range that you have bee arguing. The colloquial meaning is taking an action (and this even the highest IQ can still make such action) is that arguably dangerous, reckless, and/or against general well-being.
Putting oneself in front of a highway since it is with a giant barrel is generally viewed as moronic. As have arguments that fits with each criteria. You could argue they are being brave, but well... there's the old saying there's a fine line between bravery and stupidity (also colloquially treated as a synonym to moronic since I feel I have to overtly explain they are viewed as synonyms). Are they brave or moronic? They seems more based on results than any universal criteria (for example, if a man ran into a flaming house fire to save a kitten survive, he will be likely called a hero - but if he died, likely will be called an moron (eventually, obviously it would be extremely mean-spirted at the funeral)).
Hey dvdoff,
Hey dvdoff,
One post from you and I got three squares already!
???
Am I missing a joke here?
A link. http://mlkshk.com/p
A link. http://mlkshk.com/p/9FOI
You can keep trying to push
You can keep trying to push for a national holiday for these brave selfless noble advocates of civil rights that fight injustice on their twitters from their parents' homes and on the highways, but 4/20 is already it's own thing.
How much have you donated to their paypal for their "bail fund" that was conveniently set up within hours of the manifesto?
Why does the media matter?
Given uprisings globally, from Hong Kong to the Middle East to Fergusson, you don't think that MLK and civil rights groups would have used Twitter? That they wouldn't use social media and crowdfunding? That they wouldn't have allies working these channels in the background? Seriously?
That's as daft as the claim that the Civil Rights movement didn't disrupt anything, or that it didn't make careful use of white allies in their actions (many of whom did live with their parents).
Twitter would have been a very effective way to relay information ahead of marchers, or report to the Freedom Riders what shit hole towns to avoid due to angry mobs, etc.
144 letter sentence
144 letter sentence statements don't make you an activist or even a retweet, and soliciting for funds specifically for the purpose of bail money for a group that almost certainly knew they would be arrested and can afford legal council is just more egotistical shilling. Nowhere does it say it's towards a greater fund.
And your absurd projections
And your absurd projections about rich white kids grasping for attention don't form the basis of fact. They merely illustrate your own neuroses.
What are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
Retweeting messages for "awareness" does nothing for the greater good, it just shows you saw something and agreed with it in your own bubble of internet followers, writing to your elective officials does, or at least you'd hope it'd do something.
The paypal for the "bail fund" as it is called, was set up and promoted right after the kids got arrested, it's on their tumblr blog, it's a donation solicitation directly for them.
You keep calling them "kids".
You keep calling them "kids". Why is that, exactly?
Because
Because all except one are younger than I, and I call everyone kid. Man we sure love arguing about word usage today.
I think we're
I think we're miscommunicating here. Every protester on 93 except one was younger than you? Seriously?
If you're going to start your engagement by telling stories about other people, rather than listening as they tell their own, you'll get it wrong pretty much every time. But you'll probably feel pretty good about it.
Well, the reason is obvious.
The protestors who insisted on chaining themselves to each other in cement barrels and blocking I-93 acted like kids, plain and simple.
Okay, I'll bite
King would have done a better job organizing this. Evans would have worked with King. The press would have been able to discuss the demands of King. No one would have been fired.
King marched in Boston in the 1960s. No one was arrested. In the 1960s.
Also, if King were some DYFC employee, he'd be wasting his doctorate and probably doing a poor job on civil rights.
I bet my friend
I bet my friend I could get 13 comments posted on this arts thread.
You've
Already ruined this thread by injecting you personal views on a completely different topic.Views which seem to not be held by the majority of people.
I think what you're objecting to is a hallmark of Universal Hub
I think what you're objecting to is a hallmark of Universal Hub
So basically, you are
So basically, you are trolling. The actual definition of trolling - Making comments to incite arguments than wanting to discuss in good faith.
the above
No. the above-- how many comments I could get-- was a joke.
I'm sincere about my hypothetical that if MLK did what Nelli did, Mayor Walsh would have fired him.
Congratulations Ekua Holmes
I thought the work on her website was very interesting--lots of tropical colors, yet with an urban feel. I'm glad she's on the Boston Arts Commission. Nice job.
Tropical colors
Just the kind of colors I like to see on a January day in New England.
I love the picture of the man reading the newspaper -
with the newspaper created from cutouts of a newspaper.
A quilt!!!
So happy Ms. Holmes' work is highlighted on Google today - especially since I am working on my own quilt right now!!!!
Telling a story
A story could be told from any one of her pictures.
I like the patterns of the clothes that the people are wearing.
Republican MLK would never have been hired by Marty Walsh
Congratulations to Ms. Holmes for having her artwork selected by Google. As for the debate on whether Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. would have been fired by Marty Walsh, it's ludicrous because as a Republican, Dr. King never would have been hired.
honestly
Marty Walsh didn't hire her. Someone below his level hired her. Is it even legal to screen employees at her level by party registration? Do theey screen police candidates by party registration? I don't think so. But Marty Walsh certainly endorsed the decision to fire her. He said he didn't give it a second thought. I'm inclined to think he'd do the same to MLK in the same conditions.
It's doubly ludicrous because
It's doubly ludicrous because as a progressive person with a conscience, if he were alive today, Dr. King would not be a Republican (if not by his choice, then because he'd have been drummed out by the very same people spit-spraying about dangerous agitators rawr on these threads).
Because
You were personal friends with MLK? MLK fought for individuals rights, any individual regardless of the color of ones skin. Not cradle to grave welfare. He wanted people to be able to accomplish their own personal goal regardless of their believes, not a hand out or preferential treatment like affirmative action. If you read a history book or anything Dr. king wrote you would rapidly change your stance.
MLK was a republican and the KKK were democrats. History is history, and facts are facts. Don't try and distort the truth to prove a point.
Please don't act like you know what you're talking about
"Republican" in 1964 meant something quite different than it does today. Republicans long ago lost the right to claim Lincoln as one of theirs, except by some historical quirk that was buried way under the ground by the works of Nixon and Lee Atwater. Yes, Democrats back in the day have much to answer for but a) They're all dead now and b) You might want to read up on Byrd's last years.
Were King to be alive today, the odds of him being a Republican would approximate those of you making any sense.
As for King being some sort of Randian right-winger, please. Go read the Letter from Birmingham Jail. After you've read it - all the way through - you go ahead and tell me King's sole purpose was to promote the sort of stuff Paul Ryan spouts. Just warn me first - I want to make sure I'm not drinking anything when I begin laughing.
Was it Nixon or the brothers Kennedy who bugged MLK Jr's phone?
Was it Nixon and Atwater who bugged MLK Jr's phone or the Democrat brothers Kennedy?
You're right though, had MLK Jr. witnessed the hate spewed at Justice Thomas, Dr. Rice, U.S. Reps Watts, West, Love etc. he may have opted out. Perhaps he'd feel more comfortable as a Democrat with fellow-minority Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
As for Democrat leader Byrd's transformation in later years, by age 84, he had evolved, no longer focusing his concern on blacks but on what he called "white niggers" in 2001. Progressive!
I find it hard to believe
... that so much hateful stupidity can be packed into a single real-life human being.
No, MLK Jr. was not a Republican
No, MLK Jr. was not a Republican — but here’s what he had to say about them
You're not going to win this game
Who said the Kennedys were perfect? Also, who knows what Hoover had on them?
Plus: Nixon, Nixon, Nixon.
What beautiful work,
I was really touched by this, and was quite pleased to find out the artist is local. What a gorgeous tribute to Dr. King. Thank you kindly, Ms. Holmes, thank you.
Her work is gorgeous! I'd
Her work is gorgeous! I'd love to see the city commission her to do some public art/murals. It would add so much life!
Google-fu failing me
Is anyone aware of where prints of Ekua Holmes' work might be purchasable online?
Fill out her contact form and ask her?
The form is here.
Yeah, found that
Her site was struggling a bit today a few times. So I wasn't sure how easy/quickly I'd get a response. I was hoping someone would know more and be able to chime in.
Ekua's Evening Art Walks
During the summer months, Ekua Holmes leads art tours of her neighborhood on behalf of Discover Roxbury. Watch the organization's website this spring or early summer for more details.
I love this! Her work is
I love this! Her work is gorgeous. I'm so happy to see a talented local artist get featured.