Over the weekend, there was a small uproar in Arizona. As if things could get any worse.

Apparently, a mural was the site of intense “scrutiny” on the part of various far right protestors, including a city official. The problem? The mural depicted children who had dark skin. The depiction was deemed racist or “too politically correct.” And after the intense scrutiny mounted, the principal of the school that authorized the mural caved to pressure and asked the artist to whiten lighten the dark skinned children.

via Huffington Post

Mirroring patterns seen statewide, one can sense the backlash from people attempting to maintain the “old guard” status quo of well-defined power and race relations in the face of rapid change, as reflected in this comment from Prescott City Councilman and local radio host Steve Blair about the disputed mural:

“I’m not a racist by any stretch of the imagination, but whenever people start talking about diversity, it’s a word I can’t stand…. The focus doesn’t need to be on what’s different; the focus doesn’t need to be on the minority all the time…. Art is in the eye of the beholder, but I say (the Miller Valley mural) looks like graffiti in L.A….. I don’t see anything that ties the community into that mural.”

Before we rightly condemn such notions, it should be noted that Blair was giving voice to a point of view that has dominated the political discourse here for generations. Indeed, R.E. Wall, director of the Prescott Downtown Mural Project, reported that he and the other artists experienced weeks of “tense working conditions” at the site, including regular racial slurs shouted from vehicles and passersby such as: “You’re desecrating our school,” “Get the ni–ers off the wall,” and “Get the sp-c off the wall.” The original article detailing the mural’s completion drew a spate of vitriolic and racially-charged online comments that mirrored these verbal assaults. In an interview with the local newspaper, Wall observed that “the pressure stayed up consistently. We had two months of cars shouting at us.” Eventually, he said, the demands reached such a level that his group was asked by school officials to lighten the faces of the mural’s main subject, as well as the other children in the mural.

What message does this send to the school children (one of whom, in fact, was the model for the primary image that sparked the mural controversy) and others in the area with darker skin pigmentation?

Because of pressure (i.e. outrage) from various groups and media outlets over the weekend, it was announced that the mural would not be lightened after all.

Did you get that? The picture actually reflected a real child. A living and breathing child. A child whose image has been called sp*c and n*gger for the past two months. What does that child do now? Now that he knows what his fellow community members and neighbors think about him?

Thank heavens the picture wasn’t lightened. But–what does a child who can never lighten himself enough to not “look ghetto” do?

What other violence will this child face because he is recognized as the N*ggerSp*c on the wall? Is being called a N*ggerSp*c the only form of violence there is? Is being intimidated by school official and community members a type of violence?