Best regards,
Andrew Stewart

Begin forwarded message:

> From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]>
> Date: November 23, 2020 at 7:55:14 PM EST
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]>
> Subject: H-Net Review [H-Pennsylvania]:  Black on Holzman, 'Contested Image: 
> Defining Philadelphia for the Twenty-First Century'
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> 
> Laura M. Holzman.  Contested Image: Defining Philadelphia for the 
> Twenty-First Century.  Philadelphia  Temple University Press, 2019.
> xi + 198 pp.  $29.95 (paper), ISBN 978-1-4399-1588-2; $99.50 (cloth), 
> ISBN 978-1-4399-1587-5.
> 
> Reviewed by Jennifer M. Black (Misericordia University)
> Published on H-Pennsylvania (November, 2020)
> Commissioned by Jeanine Mazak-Kahne
> 
> With _Contested Image,_ Laura Holzman traces how three icons--the 
> Barnes Foundation art collection, Thomas Eakins's _The Gross Clinic 
> _(1875), and the bronze sculpture of fictional boxer Rocky Balboa, 
> from the film _Rocky III _(1982)--became "pictures for the city" of 
> Philadelphia. The book builds upon her curatorial experience in 
> place-based contemporary art projects and culls together editorials, 
> letters, blog posts, correspondence, and other artifacts of public 
> discourse, as well as her own personal experience living in 
> Philadelphia during a time of intense cultural debate in the early 
> 2000s. The very public debates surrounding the relocation of these 
> objects imbued them with new meaning, Holzman argues, fusing them 
> with the identity of the city itself. The book links together 
> conversations in art history with public history, urban history, and 
> visual culture and points to the ways in which such images and 
> objects can gain new significance in the wake of contemporary 
> cultural debates. 
> 
> Holzman's story begins with a sweeping introduction to Philadelphia's 
> history over the past 250 years: from the center of political life in 
> the late colonial and early national period to its fall from 
> prominence in the nineteenth century as other East Coast cities grew 
> their populations and industry. By the twentieth century, local 
> boosters stressed the importance of Philadelphia's cultural 
> institutions, a sensibility that continued to shape the city's 
> identity and figured heavily in urban renewal efforts during the late 
> 1990s and early 2000s. 
> 
> This context of urban renewal and redevelopment frames the book's 
> middle chapters, which tackle each icon in case-study fashion. 
> Financial troubles around the year 2000 prompted the trustees of the 
> Barnes Foundation to consider relocating the prestigious art 
> collection from its 1925 Beaux-Arts mansion on a quiet, residential 
> street in Merion, PA, to downtown Philadelphia. By this time the 
> Barnes collection had gained international acclaim and, in some ways, 
> outgrown its secluded suburban location. A prolonged public and legal 
> debate ensued over the next decade as many argued for the 
> site-specificity of the collection--including the importance of 
> keeping it in the suburbs--while others pointed to issues of public 
> access and its potential to promote much-needed tourism to the city. 
> Such debates, Holzman argues, shaped the design of the new downtown 
> building: its architectural features "reflected the [now] public 
> orientation of the collection" while the landscape designs showed 
> continuity with the Merion location (p. 70). Holzman asserts that 
> these public arguments about the importance of the collection and its 
> ties to the city transformed the Barnes collection into a signifier 
> for the city itself, an icon which Philadelphians adopted to frame 
> their city's identity as a premier site for cultural engagement in 
> the twenty-first century. 
> 
> Like the relocation of the Barnes collection, a 2006 proposal to sell 
> Eakins's painting to an out-of-state buyer resulted in intense public 
> debate. But in this case, Philadelphians rallied together to keep 
> _The Gross Clinic _in the city. This chapter articulates the book's 
> argument most clearly and is the most compelling case study of the 
> three. Again, Holzman argues that public discourse transformed the 
> painting into a "city icon that played a crucial role in negotiating 
> Philadelphia's reputation" at the time (p. 77). Yet rather than 
> international acclaim, as was the case with the Barnes collection, 
> Holzman points to the private significance of _The Gross 
> Clinic_--that is, individuals' private memories of the painting on 
> display, and the intersections of those memories with visions of 
> Philadelphia--as the mitigating factor that made the painting an 
> iconic image for the city. At a time when Philadelphia was attempting 
> to rebrand its public image, saving _The Gross Clinic _enabled 
> Philadelphians to demonstrate their commitment to high culture. They 
> redefined Philadelphia as a "sophisticated metropolis" whose cultural 
> resources and institutions were highly valued by residents (p. 78). 
> Philadelphia thus pivoted from its twentieth-century image as a 
> crime-ridden, postindustrial wasteland to a world-class cultural 
> center for the twenty-first century. As Holzman notes, saving 
> Eakins's painting helped to reassert Philadelphia's "significance as 
> a place with superb medical facilities, top-notch museums with 
> world-class conservation teams, and audiences who cared deeply about 
> the art on display in their city" (p. 97).
> 
> Philadelphians may have been confident about the significance of _The 
> Gross Clinic, _but they wrestled with what to do with the Rocky 
> statute from the first moment of its arrival in the city. Sylvester 
> Stallone donated the sculpture to the city in the early 1980s after 
> filming _Rocky III_, proposing that the statue be placed at the top 
> of the east steps to the Philadelphia Museum of Art (PMA), as is 
> pictured in the films. While many fans agreed, others objected to the 
> inclusion of an object from commercial pop culture on such sacred 
> high-brow ground. Holzman argues that the ongoing arguments over the 
> proper placement of the statue--from the city's sports complex to the 
> PMA steps to the Eakins Oval just adjacent to the PMA (its current 
> home)--revolved around changing notions of _which_ cultural 
> achievements were acceptable to serve as representations for the 
> city. In other words, the Rocky statue facilitated a broader debate 
> about the relative value of high culture versus popular culture to 
> the city's public image. Tracing these discussions, Holzman points to 
> the interconnected nature of the film's popularity, public 
> appropriations of Rocky's iconic climb to the top of the steps, and 
> the changing views of city leaders and cultural institutions. By the 
> early 2000s, Philadelphians had grown accustomed to the underdog 
> spirit embodied by the Rocky character, causing the film's tale of 
> perseverance-despite-adversity to resonate with the city's rebranding 
> efforts and shifting identity. 
> 
> Throughout the text, Holzman provides convincing evidence that by 
> 2010 these three objects gained iconic status and were intrinsically 
> linked to Philadelphia's public image. An art historian by training, 
> Holzman skillfully incorporates compelling visual analyses into her 
> text, particularly of _The Gross Clinic _and the Rocky statue. Her 
> rendering defines visual culture very broadly--and, I think, 
> successfully--by invoking the site-specificity of visual meaning. She 
> thus provides important new directions for historians studying visual 
> culture. Yet there were moments when additional attention to context, 
> especially the culture wars of the 1990s and Philadelphia's history 
> of racial tensions, would have strengthened her argument. Matthew 
> Frye Jacobson, in _Roots Too _(2006), has given a superb reading of 
> the _Rocky _series as a call to working-class whites who, in the wake 
> of deindustrialization and civil rights agitation, felt disempowered 
> and left out of the national conversation. In Jacobson's view, 
> Rocky's story gave working-class whites a new hero, who redeemed 
> white masculinity for the post-civil rights era. While Holzman 
> carefully notes the city's efforts at urban renewal and 
> revitalization early in the book, she does not reconnect this context 
> to the icons she digests in later chapters, nor does she fully 
> explain _why_ the city needed to rebrand itself. Implicit here is the 
> postindustrial reality of dilapidated buildings, crime, and poverty 
> that riddled many American cities in the 1970s and 1980s, and, of 
> course, the connection in popular consciousness between these 
> unsavory aspects of the city and the people of color who lived there. 
> Rereading Holzman's subjects through this lens, one might argue that 
> they become not just icons for the city of Philadelphia, but 
> implicitly icons for white culture. The Barnes collection points to 
> the city's storied high-brow past, when white elites became the 
> custodians of high culture and education. _The Gross Clinic _evokes 
> the city's historically prominent (and white) medical colleges while 
> the Rocky statue gestures to the white working-class "underdogs" of 
> the postindustrial era. Repositioning these three objects as icons 
> for the city might have allowed whites to symbolically _reclaim _the 
> city. Was this reinvention of the city's image really just a 
> whitewashing, and perhaps an effort to detour the city's identity 
> away from its historical connections to African American culture? In 
> particular, I wondered how the successes of 1990s hip-hop artists 
> such as DJ Jazzy Jeff, the Fresh Prince, and Boyz II Men might have 
> figured into the desire to rebrand the city a decade later. Finally, 
> the public's embrace of the Rocky statue, often in direct defiance of 
> high-brow tastemakers, seems to parallel the broader threads of 
> anti-elitism and anti-intellectualism percolating in national culture 
> at the time. Situating the Rocky statue within these two 
> contexts--race relations and the culture wars--could provide a rich 
> opportunity to understand how race and class may have intertwined in 
> this moment, structuring the conversations about which culture (and 
> whose culture) was and is most worthy of the city's celebration and 
> adoption for its rebranded public image.
> 
> Holzman has written a provocative text that raises important 
> questions and thus provides ample new avenues for research. As a 
> meditation on the place of visual culture in the contemporary urban 
> environment, it is, despite these criticisms, widely successful. Most 
> importantly, Holzman reminds us of the impermanence and contingency 
> surrounding urban icons and identities. She smartly navigates between 
> public discourse and academic discussions, providing a well-evidenced 
> and accessible narrative that is sure to promote further inquiry on 
> these fascinating intersections between visual culture, urban 
> studies, and Pennsylvania history. 
> 
> Citation: Jennifer M. Black. Review of Holzman, Laura M., _Contested 
> Image: Defining Philadelphia for the Twenty-First Century_. 
> H-Pennsylvania, H-Net Reviews. November, 2020.
> URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55205
> 
> This work is licensed under a Creative Commons 
> Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States 
> License.
> 
> 


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#3838): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/3838
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/78470439/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES &amp; NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly &amp; permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to