Ai Weiwei, Barbara Kruger, and Banksy:
Drawing the Line Between Protest and Art
Rebecca Sheley
Candidate #1359-0013
Word Count: 3,873 words
Table of Contents
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………... p. 2
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………...p. 3
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….p. 4
Defining Art, Protest, and Protest Art…………………………………………………….p. 4
Ai Weiwei: the Protester………………………………………………………………….p. 9
Barbara Kruger: the Artist………………………………………………………………...p. 12
Bansky: the Protest Artist…………………………………………………………………p. 15
Comparing Weiwei, Banksy, and Kruger………………………………………………....p. 20
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………p. 21
Works Cited.……………………………………………………………………………….p. 22
Abstract
Art and protest often intermingle. I have a great interest in both, and often times, in my
own artwork, I find myself getting more and more controversial, hoping to make my viewers
rethink their assumptions. This tendency got me interested in artists like Ai Weiwei, who
shocked not only China, but the world with his shocking disregard for Chinese law. From here, I
began to look into protest art and shock art, doing more research about well-known artists such
as Kruger and Banksy. It became clear to me that all of these artists were at one point or another
considered “protest artists,” but I wasn’t sure exactly what the criteria for that meant. It seemed
to me that Weiwei was basically just a protester who used his art to convey his ideals, whereas
Kruger was more of a free-thinker than a protester, just wanting to shock her audience. This is
where Banksy came in: he seemed to be the balance between protest and art, making him the
“true” protest artist out of the trio. With these artists in mind, I began to formally define “art” and
“protest” and give examples of both, with another of “protest art.” With these definitions in
mind, I concluded that Ai Weiwei was more of a protestor than artist; Kruger was more of an
artist than a protestor; and Banksy lay somewhere in between the two categories.
3
“Ai Weiwei, Barbara Kruger, and Banksy: Drawing the Line Between Protest and Art”
Introduction
Art has always been a mirror for the society it originated from. Whether it is the godly
sculptures of the Greeks, or the vast landscapes of the Romantics, the visions artists recreate are
a great insight into the cultural and political circumstances of their time. Moreover, there are
those who seek not only to represent their world through their art, but also change it. Protest art
is the natural course of action for those seeking to gain a wide audience for their rebellion, as it
allows people to be captivated by the artistic elements of it, but also react to what is usually a
thought provoking, but easy to decipher message. Three prominent examples of protest art in the
past several decades are Ai Weiwei, a highly political Chinese dissenter, Barbara Kruger, whose
feminist works have spurred a myriad of look-alikes, and Banksy, the anonymous street artist
whose work litters the streets of New York, London, and Israel alike. All of these artists craft
their political ambitions into works of eye-catching, sometimes shocking art, all for the purpose
of educating the masses and inspiring them to fight for a common cause.
Defining Art, Protest, and Protest Art
The question remains, however, of where “art” becomes “protest.” Being highly involved
in art myself, I try to tread on the ground between the two, but that is a narrow line, and leaves
me questioning its boundaries. When does a graffitied wall become more protest than art? When
is documentation of a man dropping an ancient relic considered an artistic feat? When is bold
text, overlaid with shocking words regarded to be a protest against oppression? Art, defined by
the Merriam-Webster, is simply “something that is created with imagination and skill and that is
4
beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings.”1 Although this definition is relatively
complete, the art I will be discussing also must exist to be consumed. If an artist creates a work
that is meant to change the political or social environment that it depicts, it, in essence, must also
be displayed somehow to be able to incite that change. Using the Merriam-Webster dictionary
again, protest is fairly easily understood as “a solemn declaration of opinion and usually of
dissent.”2 It is important to note that I’m considering something to be protest only if it reflects a
specific event or organization. Just like animal rights activists don’t often just protest the meat
industry, choosing to focus on one specific company or law, protest artists must focus on
specific, real life situations for them to be considered protest artists. Combining the
understanding of art and protest, however, is where my criterion for “art” and “protest” and
“protest art” lies.
Image 1: Miller, J. Howard. “We Can Do It!” 1942. Photolithograph on paper. National Museum of American
History, Washington.
1
"Art." In Merriam-Webster. Accessed January 7, 2015.
2
"Protest." In Merriam-Webster. Accessed January 7, 2015.
5
Something that is simply protest may have artistic traits, but was created for the sole
purpose of causing a stir and inciting a change. For example, the popularized “We Can Do It!”
posters are not simply art, despite the skill and creativity that went behind the design because the
posters were created more so to invigorate women during the depression than to be appreciated
aesthetically3.And even though there is obvious artistic merit in this piece, it is more a work of
propaganda and commercial media than even that of protest art. It is grounded in real life
circumstances, and is a reaction to the environment it was created in, meant to change some
aspect of that environment, namely, women’s roles in it. It was created not to be seen as art and
appreciated for the skill with which Miller rendered Rosie the Riveter, but to be seen as a rally
cry for women in the workplace during the Second World War.
Image 2: Gentileschi, Artemisia. Judith Slaying Holofernes. 1620. Oil on canvas. National Museum of
Capodimonte, Naples.
On the other hand, art is something that is usually intended to be looked upon and
digested, and from it protest-like ideas may be drawn, but protest is not the most obvious purpose
Miller, J. Howard. We Can Do It! 1942. National Museum of American History, Washington.
3
6
of the artwork. Judith Slaying Holofernes by the 17th century artist, Artemisia Gentileschi, is an
example of art that has protesting undertones, but was not created entirely for that purpose4.
To understand how this work can be seen as an act of protest, it must be known that Gentileschi
modeled the figure killing Judith after herself, and Judith as the man who raped her5. Even
though it can be seen that she is protesting the innocence of the man that raped her, she is more
so providing commentary on the incident, and incident which is very personal to her and
therefore would be difficult to “protest.” And even so, the aspect of the work that is “protest”
must be interpreted. The artist did not necessarily paint the piece as an act just of defiance
against her attacker. For an art piece to be protest, I believe its aims must be clearly understood,
and the incident the artist is commenting on must be something that is able to be protested. In
this sense, a personal experience of rape would not qualify as such, but well-known incidents of
violence against women would be.
To straddle the line between “art” and “protest” is difficult, but it is the troublesome
middle ground on which actual “protest art” lies. I believe the most well-established example of
protest art is Picasso’s Guernica6.
4
Gentileschi, Artemisia. Judith Slaying Holofernes.1620. National Museum of Capodimonte,
Naples.
5
RoGellery. "Barbara Kruger, American (1945 - )." RoGallery.Last modified 2014.Accessed
October 30, 2014.
6
Picasso, Pablo. Guernica. 1937. Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid.
7
Image 3: Picasso, Pablo. Guernica. 1937. Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid.
Picasso employs his distinctive cubist style to demonstrate the atrocities of the Spanish Civil
War. The art was created with intent to persuade an audience, but it also was created with artistic
integrity and purpose. To his viewers, the intent and circumstances surrounding the artwork were
obvious; there was no need for scholarly examination of this piece, which was named after the
town that was bombed during the conflict. For it to be more “art” than “protest,” he would have
had to include a more vague interpretation of the war, or a more personal, symbolic depiction of
it. For it to be more “protest” than “art,” he would have had to create a more easily understood
image, where it’s meaning was explicit for those who viewed it and knew the historical context.
Even if a piece has sociopolitical value to the views and addresses some relevant problem in their
society, it cannot be considered protest unless it is rooted in specific, material occurrences and is
created with the explicit intent of protest. Otherwise, it is simply a politically or culturally aware
piece of work, but is not protest per se. But, he did not also just state “war is evil” or “the
Spanish Civil War killed many people” in a visual format. He employed emotion and aesthetic to
fuel his protests. It is, therefore, a matter of intention, and is important to understand the
circumstances surrounding the artwork and the views of the artist.
8
Ai Weiwei: the Protester
Ai Weiwei, recently named “China’s most dangerous man” by Smithsonian, has been in
the spotlight for his activism in the People’s Republic of China for many years7. His work is
daring and controversial, enough to compel the Chinese government to spy on every aspect of his
life, from surveying his bank account to actually entering his home and assaulting him8. Many
of his works seek to push against the communist government in China, which is rife with
corruption and censorship of all sorts, but to call his work definitively “art” is difficult. I
personally have a deep admiration for Ai Weiwei and his efforts. Government censorship has
been a splinter in my mind ever since I first read Brave New World and 1984. But even I
question whether his work can truly be considered art.
It’s not because of lack or skill or finesse that causes me to question Ai Weiwei’s artistic
integrity; it’s the motivation for his work. After growing up with a former-Communist ally
father, who later turned against the government after he realized the secret corruption going on
within its workings, Ai Weiwei was bound to be emphatic about his country9. He has made his
life into an art form, a life of fist-clenching rebellion. He is a living symbol of China’s internal
struggle for democracy and free speech, and much like Che Guevara inspired a revolution with
his physical forces, Weiwei is attempting to inspire a revolution with intellectual forces 10. His
older works, consisting of highly artistic modern pieces make defining him as an artist all the
more difficult.
Stevens, Mark. "Is Ai Weiwei China’s Most Dangerous Man?" Smithsonian Magazine,
September 2012, 1-3.
7
Osnos, Evan. "It’s Not Beautiful: An Artist Takes on the System." New Yorker, May 24, 2010.
8
Ibid.
Stevens, Mark. "Is Ai Weiwei China’s Most Dangerous Man?" Smithsonian Magazine,
September 2012, 1-3.
9
10
9
To call his work daring would be an understatement. In 1995, for example, he created a
triptych of himself dropping a one million dollar Han-dynasty vase11.
Weiwei, Ai. Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn. 1995. Museum of Contemporary Craft, Portland.
Not only is this an example of his boldness, it exemplifies how his art teeters over the border
between protest and art. The Han-dynasty is often regarded as China’s “golden” age, and for Ai
Weiwei to destroy a monetarily expensive and culturally invaluable artifact speaks wonders for
his desire to demonstrate the corruption of China. He doesn't want to abandon his Chinese
heritage and life; he simply wants a better China12. This can be shown the numerous hours he has
spent in local government offices to trying to get information about recent earthquakes, and
failing, but it’s in his failures to work with the government that show how dysfunctional the
system is13. For this reason, it seems that Ai Weiwei uses his art as simply a tool for furthering
his political aims. The implications of this piece are shocking; however, in my opinion there is
not enough experimentation with perspective, lighting, or composition for this to be considered a
Weiwei, Ai. Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn. 1995. Museum of Contemporary Craft, Portland.
Stevens, Mark. "Is Ai Weiwei China’s Most Dangerous Man?" Smithsonian Magazine,
September 2012, 1-3.
11
12
Osnos, Evan. "It’s Not Beautiful: An Artist Takes on the System." New Yorker, May 24, 2010.
13
10
viable piece of art. Because of these aspects, this piece to me was a political statement, called art
mostly because no other label really fit.
This is not to say that Ai Weiwei does not have merit as an artist. He has many pieces
that are exceptional works of modern art. His piece Stool 椅子, for example, demonstrates his
ingenuity and desire to repurpose common objects and change the way his viewers see them.
This sculpture consists of two stools, joined through a common leg, with one nearly cutting
through the other and sticking out at a strange angle14.
Image 5: Weiwei, Ai. Stool. 2007. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
It seems that, even in his more pure artistic endeavors he still seeks to shock his viewers. Even
some of his more political art has great artistic quality. His series of dioramas called
S.A.C.R.E.D. depicts his stay in a Chinese prison in beautifully executed form. Fully colored
sculptures display three-dimensional snapshots of the process and rights violations of his
incarceration15.
14
Weiwei, Ai. Stool. 2007. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
15
Weiwei, Ai. Ritual. 2013. Brooklyn Musuem, Brooklyn.
11
Image 6: Weiwei, Ai. Ritual. 2013. Brooklyn Musuem, Brooklyn.
But despite the skill and craftsmanship displayed in his art, the most prolific of his pieces are far
more protest than they are art. Even with S.A.C.R.E.D., it is based on the injustice of his
incarceration in a format that is specifically designed to defy the government. But, the intention
behind this piece was more political than artistic. Art, to Weiwei, is the best form of protest to
him, so using art as a means of communicating his political aims, so even though S.A.C.R.E.D.
has artistic qualities, the intention and Ai Weiwei’s lifestyle in general lead me to believe that
this is a piece of protest, not of art.
Barbara Kruger: the Artist
While Ai Weiwei acts as an artistic protester, Barbara Kruger acts as a protesting artist.
Her style is easily recognizable: monochrome photographs overlaid with white daring text. Born
in 1945, she grew up in New Jersey with a Syracuse University background in design, eventually
12
became the head designer at Mademoiselle Magazine after only a year of employment there16.
Besides her design, however, her earliest artwork dates to 1969 when she began to delve into
photography. It was ten years after her first dips into the world of fine arts that she began to
cultivate her easily recognizable style17. This is also where her passion for challenging
convention began to show. And although her work does show politicized themes, she lies on the
opposite side of the protest-art spectrum than does Ai Weiwei: her work contains underlying
themes of protest and dissent, especially from cultural expectations, but she herself does not
create specifically to incite a revolution as Ai Weiwei does. She creates instead to recontextualize or “re-materialze,” as she puts it, the consumer-driven culture that exists today, and
is more interested in “provocation for provocation’s sake” than inspiring her viewers to act
specifically against an idea18.
One of the signs that she is more “art” than “protest” is simply the large array of issues
and relatively vague concepts she covers. The most protest-like form of art she has achieved is
arguably her 1997 Justice exhibition. In it, she features two famous right-wing politicians who
came out as homosexual posing provocatively19. The specificity of the work, and the fact that it
was a reaction to a real life event makes this piece a work of social activism that borders on
protest. The vast majority of her works, however, do not have this same real world substance as
this recent piece did. Instead, her collages focus on abstract ideas, such as consumerism, gender
16
ART21. "Barbara Kruger." ART21. Accessed October 13, 2014.
17
RoGellery. "Barbara Kruger, American (1945 - )." RoGallery.Last modified 2014.Accessed
October 30, 2014.
18
Rosenbaum, Ron. "Barbara Kruger's Artwork Speaks Truth to Power." Smithsonian, July 2012.
Accessed October 14, 2014.
19
RoGellery. "Barbara Kruger, American (1945 - )." RoGallery.Last modified 2014.Accessed
October 30, 2014.
13
roles, and free will. While these are surely ideas that have potential to be protest art, her work
does not have enough real-life grounding to be considered protest art.
She is merely trying to make people think twice about their culturally expected actions.
For example, her piece Untitled (You invest in the divinity of a masterpiece) does have very
astute and profound themes. It calls into question the relationship between consumers and the
objects they purchase, and the irony of mass produced religious paraphernalia20.
Image 7: Kruger, Barbara. Untitled (You Invest in the Divinity of the Masterpiece). 1982. MoMA, New
York.
The work has obvious artistic merit: the reference to Michelangelo's fresco on the Sistine Chapel,
one of the most religiously and artistically significant works of art from that era, and the
juxtaposition of that piece to text that forces the viewer to question her beliefs21. The ideas that
she designs her pieces around and her use of juxtaposition have even been inspirations for my
20
Kruger, Barbara. Untitled (You Invest in the Divinity of the Masterpiece). 1982. MoMA, New
York.
Ibid.
21
14
artwork. But this piece is not a reaction to any specific instance of religious corruption or a
problem created by consumerism. It is not a protest of papal corruption, the consumer driven
production of religion in the modern age, or even of her home country’s submission to the media.
It is simply a comment on a cultural condition that Kruger wants to challenge. Similarly, her
famed piece Your Comfort Is My Silence allows the viewer to experience the perspective of a
victim: a man is shown shushing the viewers with lighting that creates a sense of anonymity, and
the text daringly reads “your comfort is my silence.”22
Image 8: Kruger, Barbara. Your Comfort Is My Silence. 1981.
Just like her other works, it is profoundly meaningful art, but it cannot be considered protest art
because it fails to be a “reaction” to any event or organization, and is a commentary meant to
evoke a change in thought.
22
Kruger, Barbara. Your Comfort Is My Silence. 1981.
15
Bansky: the Protest Artist
In the space between artistic protest and protesting art lies the difficult to achieve realm
of true protest art. It is in this space that the anonymous street artist referred to as “Banksy” lives.
It is known that he is from somewhere in England, most likely Bristol where his stenciled graffiti
began to gain notoriety in 1993. By 2001 he had fully captivated an audience of both British and
foreigners alike23. Reacting to any and every political uprising he could, he has both covered the
streets of England with spray paint, but has also travelled as far as Israel to protest against the
violence there24. But despite his extremely driven political nature, the aspect that keeps his art
truly art is the interpretability of it. Banksy is both a representative for the impoverished, and a
rebellion in and of himself. Creating artwork that is both attractive to his viewers and meant to be
easily understood by all that see it, Banksy employs the artistic elements that Ai Weiwei’s works
lack, while still managing to have the specificity that Weiwei excels in. His refusals to identify
himself make him all the more of a powerful figure; namelessness allows him to say what he
believes needs to be said without associating himself with it, making incrimination and judgment
of him harder to manage.
And, despite his reluctance to credit fine art with making meaningful change, he is truly
part of that culture. He once said that the art world is a “rest home for the over privileged, the
pretentious, and the weak,” however, his art continues to intrigue and inspire many within that
“rest home” to create change with their own artwork25. He frequently disparages fine artists, and
23
Collins, Lauren. "Banksy Was Here." The New Yorker, May 14, 2007. Accessed October 13,
2014.
24
Ellsworth-Jones, Will. "The Story Behind Banksy."Smithsonian, February 2013. Accessed
October 13, 2014.
25
Collins, Lauren. "Banksy Was Here." The New Yorker, May 14, 2007. Accessed October 13,
2014.
16
once stenciled a scene of an auction with the words “I can’t believe you morons actually buy this
s***” after hearing about his art selling at an auction26. It is this distaste for personal publicity
and the selling of his art that separates him from Kruger. Kruger’s art is meant to be
bought, sold, and contemplated over, but in the end it is simply entertainment with a profound
message. Banksy, on the other hand, does not want his work sold. He wants it publicized, viewed
by the people, and not only the art-critics, but the urban street walkers as well.
Image 9: Banksy. Barely Legal. 2006. Los Angeles.
One of his most controversial pieces featured an installation in which a live elephant was
painted over with red patterns. The elephant, literally the “elephant in the room,” meant to
symbolize poverty, can be interpreted as how society tries to cover up the suffering of others, but
the fact that this elephant was actually alive demonstrates the fact that poverty still does exist,
and is thriving27. Many prominent figures attended the event, including Brad Pitt, and to
Ibid.
Banksy.Barely Legal. 2006. Los Angeles.
26
27
17
Banksy’s dismay, PETA supporters, who called him out for animal abuse28. Despite these
accusations, Banksy’s artwork served its purpose, and remained both a powerful piece of art and
an audacious political statement. The art Banksy creates does not specifically call out the
government, nor is it intended to reach the high officials of the government like Ai Weiwei’s
statement pieces are. His pieces are his demonstration to the common people of the changeable
nuisances that burden people in their everyday lives, whether it is censorship or poverty.
Another of his pieces became extremely relevant in the London riots in 2011. Created in
2003 during his stay in Palestine, his Flower Thrower became a political statement for the
rioters, and those trying to create peace2930.
Image 10: Bansky. Flower Thrower. 2003. Stencil. Jerusalem.
During the riots, he actually did create a piece of art regarding the situation in London, however,
demonstrating his name as a protest artist. During the chaos, some of which occurred in Bristol,
28
Collins, Lauren. "Banksy Was Here." The New Yorker, May 14, 2007. Accessed October 13,
2014.
29
Joyce, Julian, and Holly Wallis."England Riots: Days of Looting, Arson and Violence." BBC
News. Last modified March 27, 2012.Accessed October 30, 2014.
30
Bansky.Flower Thrower. 2003. Jerusalem.
18
where Banksy is rumored to live, rioters broke into and looted into a grocery-chain called Tesco .
Rioters stole bottles of petrol and created makeshift bombs to destroy the store: a bold anticapitalist made by statement using the stores own goods to destroy its function31. Banksy, known
for his anarchist tendencies, created a “fine commemorative souvenir poster” depicting a bottle
of petrol with a burning roll of paper stuck in the neck of the bottle, and daringly labeled “petrol
bomb” with the name of the superstore32. And unlike his other works, this piece almost teeters
over the edge into protest, just as Weiwei’s does.
Image 11: Ut, Nick. The Terror of War. 1973. Associated Press.
Image 12: Banksy. Napalm. 2004
The most unsettling pieces of Banksy’s I have seen makes a disturbing statement about
the American media’s relation to struggling countries. The piece, titled Napalm, was created on
canvas, not an urban building, and shows the haunting image of McDonald and Mickey Mouse
cheerfully holding the wrists of Kim Phuc, the girl from the notorious "The Terror of War"
photograph by NickUt33. I believe that this piece is the definitive “protest art” piece in Banksy’s
large collection. The juxtaposition between Kim’s screaming, naked figure and the delighted
faces of the boldly drawn pop culture figures is shocking, and provides an incisive criticism of
31
Joyce, Julian, and Holly Wallis."England Riots: Days of Looting, Arson and Violence." BBC
News. Last modified March 27, 2012.Accessed October 30, 2014.
Ibid.
Ut, Nick. The Terror of War. 1973. Associated Press.
32
33
19
the United States’ superficial aid of these countries34. The work is obviously political, but is
readily decipherable, and Banksy utilizes his artistic prowess to create a surreal, and jarring
image that declares and unspoken truth about America’s true intention for third world countries.
And, importantly, his use of a real Vietnamese girl, from a well-known photograph taken during
the United States’ war with Vietnam, grants this piece the specificity that Kruger’s style lacks,
while still demonstrating his artistic style.
Comparing Weiwei, Banksy, and Kruger
To examine whether a piece of art falls under the classification of “protest art,” however,
it is also important to look at the circumstances and intentions behind the work. The reason that I
believe Ai Weiwei to be in the realm of “protest,” not just art, is that he lives his protest. Not
only does he create culturally significant works of art to communicate his message, but he is an
active member of the non-artistic realm of protest in China, too. He is still under police
surveillance because of his activism, which involves a lot more than simply just creating art to
inform and kindle a spark in his viewers35. His art is just a tool in his wide array of techniques he
uses to counter the government’s censorship. On the other hand, Barbara Kruger seems to live
counter to her work’s claims. She adores reality television and submerges herself in pop
culture36. Although this may simply be to inform her of the things she seeks to challenge, it
seems to me more like Kruger really creates her art to make people question their beliefs, but not
specifically for any cause. This doesn’t make her less of an artist or a person, but it removes her
from the category of protest artist, who is create specifically to make viewers take action.
Banksy.Napalm. 2004
Osnos, Evan. "It’s Not Beautiful: An Artist Takes on the System." New Yorker, May 24, 2010
36
Rosenbaum, Ron. "Barbara Kruger's Artwork Speaks Truth to Power." Smithsonian, July 2012.
Accessed October 14, 2014.
34
35
20
Banksy epitomizes what I consider to be a protest artist. He creates works of art that are
clever, skillful, and fairly easy to understand. Unlike Kruger, who makes bold statements by
using rather vague statements juxtaposed over photographs, Banksy displays his work in an easy
to interpret way, depending more on the placement and relevance of his work to make an impact
than it’s metaphorical value. The fact that many of his pieces are displayed illegally in populous
urban areas adds to his level of activism. His choice of timing and placement for these pieces,
many of which get covered up by the government, a fact that speaks volumes about the very
ideas he’s trying to convey, alongside his skill as an artist, make him a true protest artist in my
eyes.
Conclusion
The skill required to make true protest art is difficult to acquire, and even if one does so,
the lines are still never clear as to what is or isn’t art or protest. Ai Weiwei, Barbara Kruger, and
Banksy all make are meant to make their audiences rethink their positions, but to what extent
their work is considered art or protest is difficult to categorize absolutely. It can be seen,
however, that if placed on a scale from protest to art, the order would follow Weiwei, Bansky,
and Kruger, simply based on their pieces and the intention behind them, along with the lifestyles
of the artists involved. These classifications are not hugely important, though. And as long as
these artists can transform their viewer's perspectives they will have achieved success.
21
Works Cited
Periodicals
Collins, Lauren. "Banksy Was Here." The New Yorker, May 14, 2007. Accessed October 13,
2014.
Ellsworth-Jones, Will. "The Story Behind Banksy."Smithsonian, February 2013. Accessed
October 13, 2014.
Osnos, Evan. "It’s Not Beautiful: An Artist Takes on the System." New Yorker, May 24, 2010.
Rosenbaum, Ron. "Barbara Kruger's Artwork Speaks Truth to Power." Smithsonian, July 2012.
Accessed October 14, 2014.
Stevens, Mark. "Is Ai Weiwei China’s Most Dangerous Man?" Smithsonian Magazine,
September 2012, 1-3.
Nonperiodicals
"Art." In Merriam-Webster. Accessed January 7, 2015.
"Protest." In Merriam-Webster. Accessed January 7, 2015.
Audiovisual
Banksy.Barely Legal. 2006. Los Angeles.
———. Napalm. 2004.
Bansky.Flower Thrower. 2003. Jerusalem.
Gentileschi, Artemisia. Judith Slaying Holofernes. 1620. National Museum of Capodimonte,
Naples.
Kruger, Barbara. Untitled (You Invest in the Divinity of the Masterpiece). 1982. MoMA, New
York.
———. Your Comfort Is My Silence. 1981.
Miller, J. Howard. We Can Do It! 1942. National Museum of American History, Washington.
Picasso, Pablo. Guernica. 1937. Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid.
Ut, Nick. The Terror of War. 1973. Associated Press.
22
Weiwei, Ai. Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn. 1995. Museum of Contemporary Craft, Portland.
———. Ritual. 2013. Brooklyn Musuem, Brooklyn.
———. Stool. 2007. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Web sites, e-sources
ART21. "Barbara Kruger." ART21. Accessed October 13, 2014.
Joyce, Julian, and Holly Wallis."England Riots: Days of Looting, Arson and Violence." BBC
News. Last modified March 27, 2012.Accessed October 30, 2014.
Larry Brash. "Judith Slaying Holofernes (Naples Version)."The Life and Art of Artemisia
Gentileschi.Accessed October 30, 2014.
RoGallery. "Barbara Kruger, American (1945 - )." RoGallery.Last modified 2014.Accessed
October 30, 2014.
23