Open letter to Witte de With
What does it mean for a white institution to do “critical work” under the moniker Witte de With, the name of a high-ranking colonial naval officer who worked for both the Dutch West India Company and the Dutch East India Company (VOC and WIC)? What does it mean to engage in “critical reflection on timely issues” (from Witte de With website) under that name—a name that conjures up a history of terror? What does it mean to validate, market, and circulate such a name?
We, a group of cultural professionals, artists and activists, draw attention to the disjunction between the stated criticality of Witte de With, a Center for Contemporary Art in Rotterdam, and its failure to acknowledge its entanglement with colonial violence. Witte de With has “failed” to come to terms with its own internal contradictions, and has yet to reckon with the historical figure it symbolically embodies. Even though our critique is directed at Witte de With, it extends well beyond this institution’s white walls. The issues we address are endemic within major “critical” cultural institutions in the Netherlands.
From 17 June till 20 August 2017, Witte de With will host Cinema Olanda: Platform, a project conceived by Dutch artist Wendelien van Oldenborgh with assistance of curator Lucy Cotter, director of Witte de With Defne Ayas, curator Natasha Hoare, and the Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis (ASCA). The platform is an extension of the exhibition in the Dutch pavilion at the 57th Venice Biennale. Cinema Olanda: Platform promises to engage “questions surrounding the Netherlands’ (inter)national image vis-à-vis current transformations in the Dutch cultural and political landscape.”
Although the project is avowedly committed to “shed light on underexposed aspects of the Netherlands’ recent post-colonial history,” it is striking that no one involved in its conception had considered the legacy that the name “Witte de With” bears. When questioned about its naming during a meeting convened to discuss Cinema Olanda: Platform, director of Witte de With Defne Ayas disclosed that the issue of the Centre’s name had not previously come up in its 25-plus-year existence.
The senior staff as a matter of course readily admitted that the institution’s naming is “unfortunate,” expressed their dismay, and a “willingness” to change the name. Yet, what should we make of this admission, “willingness” and outward display of dismay in the context of 25-plus-years of non-action and recent re-action? Why has not the Centre troubled its name? Let’s not be unclear about it: the fact that Witte de With has remained silent on the historical actions of its namesake has been a purposeful choice. What’s more, by brandishing the name “Witte de With” the Centre has been sanitising and tacitly promoting the violent dispossessions that marked Dutch colonialism.
When pushed to clarify why there hadn’t been a follow-up to the concerns raised in the meeting, Witte de With responded defensively and hammered on “mutual respect” and whether it was “performative” to ask these kind of questions. Rather than doing the work, Witte de With put the load on the invited Black and non-Black people of colour. It posed the question: “what would be some of your findings around this character that makes him more controversial than many of the WIC / VOC?” This question is not only irrelevant, it is deeply unethical. Whether Witte de With is a “minor character” in Dutch colonial history, or not, should not matter—and what does “more controversial” even mean in a context of enslavement, genocide, and dispossession? It is this line of questioning and the various consecutive responses of Witte de With that expose its failure to critically understand its own historicized whiteness.
We want to make clear that this is not, and should not be, only or simply about Witte de With adopting a new name. This contemporary art centre is located on Witte de With street in the Witte de With Quarter. The city of Rotterdam proudly describes the Witte de With Quarter on its website as , a “leisure cluster,” “the vibrant heart of the Rotterdam art scene” that is “known for its dynamic nightlife.” Witte de With street has been dubbed “Rotterdam’s ‘Axis of Art’.” The street houses several other esteemed art / cultural institutes such as TENT and Showroom Mama. Art, leisure, consumption, colonisation are right at the heart of the Rotterdam art scene. To trouble the name Witte de With is to trouble not only the white subject position, but the entire cultural and economic structure that supports and enables the white subject. The resolute rejection of the name should be the first of many steps toward abolishing the political and economic system that assigns value to “Witte de With.” Contemporary art institutions are no less entangled with the extractive colonial economy than any other institution built on the foundations of white supremacy.
The bodies and artistic productions of Black and non-Black people of colour are de rigueur on institutional menus, the sought after flavour in these times of lip-service “intersectionality.” White art institutions, whether they carry the name of a colonizer or not, are “excited” to engage with feminist, queer, Black, intersectional and decolonial perspectives as long as these critical interventions are framed as discourses and stripped of their radical potential and praxes. What does it, then, mean when a White institution “welcomes” and assimilates people of colour into its structures?
Kyla Wazana Tompkins tells us that “in ‘eating the other,’ the white self affirms liberal interiority through the metaphor of assimilation and digestion; blackness is the precondition . . . on which whiteness is made material, both as body and as political actor.” The consumption and incorporation of Blackness, then, only serves to satiate the belly of “critical” white liberals. White institutions fortify themselves through the consumption of Blackness. Black people pass through them, seemingly without transforming them—they extract what they need from us to sustain their “criticality.” Appropriation without credit. Tokenism and visibility without agency. Instrumentalization. Critique, pedagogy, advice, and emotional labour, as a rule, without pay. We enter and end up in their databases.
White institutions simply rehearse the all too familiar consumption of the emotional or intellectual labour or presence of Black and non-Black people of colour, now in the name of “diversity.” Therefore, we will not repeat the by-now-rote exhortations to implement diversity in recruitment and hiring practices. Along the way we have been reminded and assured time and again that Witte de With is dedicated to its equal opportunities policy with regards to employment. However, do we want to be part of a supposed critical institutional framework that is from its beginning founded on the accumulation and violation of Blackness? White institutions that seek to offer an “intellectually rigorous platform for bold experimentation” (from Witte de With’s website) to Black people—without working towards dismantling the foundations of antiblackness—can only “incorporate” Black people as accumulated and fungible objects. This very inclusion through accumulation and fungibility is at the core of antiblackness.
We sincerely doubt whether White institutions in their current organizational configurations are even appropriately equipped (if not capable) to unfold the structural and systemic changes we deem fundamental. Whether they actively seek to be authorized by a Black revolutionary agenda will be the proof of their meaningfulness and relevancy to the liberation of Black and other oppressed people. It is far from enough to “welcome” institutional critique. Apologies and perfunctory commitments to “diversity” can only go so far. Both are meaningless when not backed up with decisive radical action. So, what will Witte de With do to institutionalise the process of decolonization after Cinema Olanda: Platform is over, and the bodies of colour have left the building through the proverbial revolving door? How will it take responsibility for its (non-)actions?
Witte de With should not wrestle with these questions behind closed doors. It should be transparent and accountable towards audiences and participants for how it will be working toward undoing its institutional structures. It should go without saying that this project of undoing should not be spearheaded by the same people responsible for the sanitization of colonial violence. It is not for Witte de With to establish when nor under which terms its praxis and existence are questioned.
This is not the first time an overwhelmingly White cultural institution mitigates critique by Black and non-Black people of colour while simultaneously co-opting said critique in an effort to immunize itself against it. Nor will it be the last. We therefore take this statement as the beginning of a conversation among other Black and non-Black people of
colour about how to navigate the (neo)colonial cultural landscape in a moment when cultural institutions are becoming increasingly adept at using the critical language and concepts developed by Black and non-Black people of colour to fortify and maintain their own position of power.
To Witte de With we ask: How will this institution start to undo itself?
Egbert Alejandro Martina, Ramona Sno, Hodan Warsame, Patricia Schor, Amal Alhaag, Maria Guggenbichler
Co-signing in solidarity:
Gloria Wekker, Alok Vaid-Menon, Flavia Dzodan, Barby Asante, Pascale Obolo, Bibi Fadlalla, Fannie Sosa, Raju Rage, SORRYYOUFEELUNCOMFORTABLE collective (Imani Robinson, Jacob Vincent Joyce, Ewuraba Hama-Lansquiot, Ciaran Finlayson), Gia Abrassart, Jermain Ostiana, Pêdra Costa, Dr Ayesha Ghanchi-Goemans, Simone Zeefuik, Mezhgan Saleh, Jovita Dos Santos Pinto, Nadia Bekkers, Joy Mariama Smith, Rudy Loewe, Tracian Meikle, Sands Murray-Wassink, Ingrid Lee, Onyeka Igwe, Teresa Cisneros, Cecilia Lisa Eliceche, Mikki Stelder, Rae Parnell, Teresa Maria Díaz Nerio, Margaret Tali, Suza Husse, Wilfred Vlad Tomescu, Céline Barry, Imara Limon, Romy Rüegger, Marina Vishmidt, Anna Frei, Emma van Meyeren, Franziska Koch, Mirjam Linschooten, Emma Haugh, Karisa Senavitis, Kevin O'Neill, Tirsa With, Savannah Theis, Dr. Noa Ha, Sinthujan Varatharajah, Guinevere Ras, Sara Mattens, Toon Fibbe, Sander Philipse, Katherine McBride, Naomi Pieter, Alaa Abu Asad, Setareh Fatehi, Zineb Seghrouchni, René Boer, Alfie Martis, Nina Bower Crooke, Délice Mugabo, Jenny Wills, Robin McGinty, Zaira Simone, Jennifer Tosch, Miguel Peres dos Santos, Sara Pape, Patricia Kaersenhout, Sruti Bala, Tirza Balk, Noémi Vanessa Michel, Negarra A. Kudumu, Phil Tortoli, kym ward, Bruno Cornellier, Wigbertson Julian Isenia, Malique Mohamud, Isabelle Sully, Inge Visscher, Inez van der Scheer, Jens Appelo, Marjan Boelsma, Hans Schraven, Joni Fieggen, Marie-Anne van Reijen, Corna Dirks, Irene de Gelded, E. C. Feiss, André Kaïjim, Jaki Seroke, Brittanie Shey, Jo-Ann With, Tessa Kersten, Evelina Rajca, Manu Rijmer, Fallon Does, Anne de Hooge, David Bennewith, Folco de Jong, Bauk Arisse, Brendan Thesign, Rebecca Carlisle-Haely, Olave Basabose, Jaap Stronks, Gustav Heinsen, Thijs Witty, Pietre van Diepen, Fazle Shairamahomed, Arnold Lubbers, Falke Pisano, Leandro Nerefuh, Libidiunga Cardoso, Ribidjunga, Dina Winkel, Christian Schmith, Jaye Brunsveld, Xandra Nibbeling, Mike van Niehoff, Lizette Krist, Caetano Carvalho, Rishi Badal, Joey van der Put, Sarah Züst, Prof. Dr. Sabine Broeck, Leana Boven, Ylva Habel, Staffan Carlsson, Piet Molendijk, Becket Mingwen, Navin 'NaferLovesYou' Thakoer, Roland Snoeren, Lucia Raymond, Albert Arendsen, Anna Okello, Michael Blok, Josefine Adolfsson, Anna Laine, Nina Vigon Manso, Nathan Van der Auwera, Jan Teurlings, Jimini Hignett, j vrer verkerde, Tina Bastajian, Jennifer van Leijen, Katayoun Arian, Jo Kali, Annet Dekker, Judith de Haas, Sandra Salome, Bart Mijland, Marie Civikov, Eva Sancho Rodriguez, Radna Rumping, Carolina Frossard, Yoeri Guépin, Dean Bowen, Sylvana Simons, Ibrahim Alaoui, Sander de Vries, Susanne Eskens, Gabriel A. Maher, Johanna Couvée, Gyonne Goedhoop, Carlota Jerez, Samuel Girma, Olle Lundin, Eric Krebbers, Isabel Mager, Mikko Lipiäinen, Mare Groen, Eduard Mangal, Ben van der Ploeg, Luc Opdebeeck, Roshini Kempadoo, Emma Ng, Bojana Mladenovic, Sayonara Stutgard, Ying Que, Nicole San, Lucie Draai, Maureen Schipper, Shamira Raphaëla, Milo van der Maaden, Cheryce Clayton, Brigitte O'Regan, max de ploeg, Marina Otero, Diego Diez, Dr Eliza Steinbock, Risk Hazekamp, Monika Dahlberg, Robin van der Haak, Angelica Falkeling, David Borgonjo, Hana Miletić, Staci Bu Shea, Ebissé Wakjira, Inneke Van Waeyenberghe, Khairani Barokka, sophie bates, Rosa Doornenbal, Tommy Naby, Sem Moema, Amandla Awethu!, Dries Douibi, D. S. Red Haircrow, Ibrahim Khayar, Michiel Vandevelde, Mia Melvær, Just for the Record Collective, Alma Söderberg, Ricardo De Lima, Paul Kempe, Gabriele Netzer, Florian Cramer, Susanne Ferwerda, Sophie Berrebi, Ieke Trinks, Alex can Stipriaan, Mat Do, Anni Puolakka, Nick Thomas, Timothy Yaczo, Praveen Sewgobind, Elif Özbay, Pieter Paul Pothoven, Jaki Seroke, Arzu Aslan, Kar Man Pang, Olga Panteleeva, Kirli Beyaz Aslan, Alexandre May, Eimear Walshe, Carla Tjon, Evan Ifekoya, belit sağ, Rana Hamadeh, Erik Stronks, Natalia Sorzano, angela jerardi, Rosie Eveleigh, Jasper Sparnaay, Nina Köll, Lisette Smits, Nikhil Vettukattil, Lianne Leonora-Curaçao, Rachida Aziz, Madison Bycroft, Eothen Stearn, Juliacks, Louise Coysh, Elaine Reynolds, Mijke van der Drift, Kate Farquhar, Sylbee Kim, Helena Sanders, Josephine Baan, Suzanne Alleyne, Renée Mboya, Frances Ellen, Milone Reigman, Lynnee Denise, Justine Waerts, Juhee Hahm, Janine Francois, Mitchell Esajas, Anni Movsisyan, Lauren Brand, Rehana Zaman, Alberta Whittle, Karoline Swiezynski, Mariët van Bommel, Harry Westerink, Gloria Holwerda-Williams, Maureen Healy, Annette Krauss, Sunil Shah, Zandi Sherman, Clementine Edwards, Ilse Valkering, Nelly Bassily, Pablo Rouwet, Pablo Calderón Salazar, Simone Lagrand, Sume Ndumb-Eyoh, Nydia Dauphin, Doorbraak, Rukariza Ali, Alma Faith Crawford, Suzanne Alleyne, Beylula Yosef, Dr. Mamoudou Sy, Ngouffo Serge, Majesty Sabro, hallie ableman, Edmung Cook, Linda Persson, elisabeth raymond, Sabine Bastiaans, Rachel Somers Miles, Heike Tjepkema, vincent van dijck, Cédric Narbonnais, philippine hoegen, Esther Baar, Petra Kramer, Ellen Schot, Jack Clarke, András Simongáti-Farquhar, Heleen Schols, Maneva Tafanalo Salaam, Tiffany Florvil, Brandy Butler, Yael Harlap, Nadine Botha, Tarek Naguib, Darunee Terdtoontaveedej, Inge de Wit, Marit van Splunter, Betty Wegen, Sophie Rentien Lando, Judith Karg, Jon Sandell, Lih-Lan Wong, Richard Kofi, Hanan de Sain, Youngjae Lih, Alex Charry, Margarita Osipian, Mirjam Westen, Tarim Flach, Rafi Wazir, Alanna Lockward, All the Cunning Stunts, Dineo, Nathalie Hartjes, Rahul Gudipudi, Jonmar van Vlijmen, Alex Sassmannshausen, Minh Tran, Cat Lachowskyj, Sinethemba Twalo, Eleonora Johanna Remmen
Sign in to Google
to save your progress.
To co-sign the open letter, please state your name below and click "submit.”
(If you want to be kept updated about events that we host in the framework of this open letter, you are welcome to add your email address next to your name)
(Names will be added to the list manually)
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.
Terms of Service