University of Manchester student representatives paint over mural by “racist” poet

The University of Manchester’s Students’ Union (SU) leaders painted over a mural of Rudyard Kipling’s poem, “If”, and replaced it with “Still I Rise”, a poem by Maya Angelou.

“If” was displayed on the wall of the Leaders Lounge. The design was authorised by union staff during the renovation of the SU building, which is named after South African anti-apartheid campaigner Steve Biko.

In response to Kipling’s poem, SU members which represented the student body believed Kipling was “not in line with (their) values”, due to his “imperialistic” and “colonialist” literature.

They cited “The White Man’s Burden” by Kipling, a poem written in 1899 during the Philippine-American war, which encouraged the United States to colonise the Philippines. The union’s executive committee chose to replace “If” with “Still I Rise” on 16 July.

The SU released an official statement regarding the art project on 19 July. They stated that they were “happy that (the project) has instigated an important conversation around liberation and the decolonisation of the curriculum”, and referenced the national students’ campaign, “Liberate my Degree”, which aims for more works by black and ethnic minority writers to be studied at university, for example.

They said: “The Union’s officers’ actions to replace the original poem with Maya Angelou’s poem is not vandalism, it is breathing life into a project to make it truly student led.

“Our officers stood out against the poem not in an attempt to obliterate Kipling from history but because, as an organisation, our values promote liberation first. Therefore, the first works created on the Union’s walls should be that of a liberation artist.

“Whilst Kipling’s work was a product of his time, there are lines in other works such as The White Mans’ Burden, ‘Your new-caught sullen people’s, half devil half child’, that do not celebrate the beauty of all races.”

While the University of Manchester said they had no comment and clarified that the SU was independently operated, the staff which commissioned the painting of the mural has since apologised. They told The Independent: “We understand that we made a mistake in our approach to a recent piece of artwork by failing to garner student opinion at the start of a new project. We accept that the result was inappropriate and for that we apologise.

“It highlighted the need to adjust our processes and control mechanisms to guarantee that student voices are heard and considered properly so that every outcome is representative of our membership.”

They added that they will introduce “powerful, relevant and meaningful art installations” in the near future, and that the repainted mural of “Still I Rise” was “a brilliant start”.

Our officers stood out against the poem not in an attempt to obliterate Kipling from history but because, as an organisation, our values promote liberation first

– University of Manchester SU

Individual officers of Manchester’s SU took to social media to explain their motives. Liberation and access officer Sara Khan posted a statement on Facebook, clarifying that while the SU did not disagree with the sentiment of “If”, they opposed Kipling’s other colonialist texts.

She said: “We, as an exec team, believe that Kipling stands for the opposite of liberation, empowerment, and human rights – the things that we, as an SU, stand for.

“Well-known as author of…work that sought to legitimate the British Empire’s presence in India and de-humanise people of colour, it is deeply inappropriate to promote the work of Kipling in our SU.

“As a statement on the reclamation of history by those who have been oppressed by the likes of Kipling for so many centuries, and continue to be to this day, we replaced his words with those of the legendary Maya Angelou, a black female poet and civil rights activist.”

General secretary Fatima Abid wrote on Twitter: “God knows, black and brown voices have been written out of history enough, and it’s time we try to reverse that, at the very least in our union.”

Diversity officer Riddi Viswanathan told the BBC: “It’s important for us to represent the voices of black and brown students, which is why we felt Rudyard Kipling’s poem was completely inappropriate.”

In a telephone interview with the New York Times, Deej Malik-Johnson, an elected representative for the SU, said that Kipling “had racist attitudes”.

He said that while Kipling had some enlightened views for his time, the poet’s views did not fit in with a diverse student body, since 40 per cent of Manchester’s students are from outside Britain.

Malik-Johnson clarified: “We weren’t trying to erase Kipling — we did it deliberately so you could still see his words. It was to start a conversation.”

Since the project was completed, the students have received lots of support. However, the SU stated that the project has “incited levels of racist abuse and criticism that are completely unacceptable”.

Malik-Johnson added that some women received “death and rape threats”, which were reported by The Tab Manchester. Khan told The Tab: “This kind of abuse is something I’ve certainly received before, but the volume at which I’ve been receiving it has been overwhelming. I feel exhausted, and it’s hard not to feel trodden down.

“I keep trying to be positive but this is just standard for activists of colour, and it’s why a lot of them don’t get to reach their full potential, because people are always trying to knock us back down when we speak up.”

We understand that we made a mistake in our approach to a recent piece of artwork by failing to garner student opinion at the start of a new project. We accept that the result was inappropriate and for that we apologise

– University of Manchester

Many resorted to giving one-star reviews to the University of Manchester’s SU Facebook Page and reposting “If” entirely in the review. One reviewer said: “When will people realise that you cannot put the clock back? Winston Churchill was hailed as a great leader – no, he was a mass murderer. Let’s not mention Nelson Mandela’s dark side. He was just as bad.

“Your attitude certainly is not going to help improve our day to day life here in England where we all just want to get along with each other. A puerile and senseless act of stupidity which you clearly condone.”

Others stated their support for the SU. One person gave a three star review, and said: “Spurred on by the eradication of Kipling’s ‘If’ from your common room and the references to the poem ‘The White Man’s Burden’ as a racist call to arms for colonial powers, I went and actually read it and discovered a masterpiece of bitter irony…It has made me want to go through and reassess his poems for myself. Thank you.”

Many have also expressed their “solidarity” with the students on Twitter. The National Union of Students (NUS) UK commended the Manchester SU team in a tweet: “Our students are at the forefront of creating a more equitable world, they fight for liberation, empowerment, and human rights.”

In an official statement, the NUS said that the union’s repainting of the mural has “sparked widespread news coverage misrepresenting the actions of the student officers leading to them receiving abusive messages and death threats”.

They added: “The actions of the officers must be viewed within the wider context of students challenging the ways in which knowledge is produced and displayed at institutions in which racial disparities exist.

“In the last year, we have seen many student activists who challenge the curriculum and spaces of learning being targeted by the press, simply for making critiques of the world around them, from the content of their curriculum to the glorification of empire.

“We stand in absolute solidarity with the student officers involved and condemn the hateful abuse they have received.”

Certainly his politics were imperialist but that’s only half of the story…Of course he was an imperialist, but that’s not all he was and it seems to me a pity to say so

– Janet Montefiore

Experts in literature expressed divided opinions on the SU’s stance to remove the poem. Janet Montefiore, professor emeritus of twentieth century literature at Kent University and author of the Kipling Journal, emphasised that “If” is not a “racist” poem, but one of “good advice” which “has meant a great deal to a lot of people”.

She added that it was “terribly crude and simplistic to dismiss Kipling as a racist”. She said: “Certainly his politics were imperialist but that’s only half of the story…Of course he was an imperialist, but that’s not all he was and it seems to me a pity to say so.

“You don’t want to pretend that it all didn’t happen…Dickens said dreadful things about black people in the Jamaica rebellion. Does that mean you don’t read Dickens?”

Professor Montefiore also said that Kipling “wrote some wonderful stuff” and was “a magical storyteller”, and commented that the SU’s decision to paint over his poem “was a bit OTT”. She has since invited Khan to write a piece for the Kipling Journal.

Amit Chaudhuri, professor of contemporary literature at the University of East Anglia, said Kipling was “a compelling and very, very gifted writer” who “clearly had racist prejudices”.

Rana Mitter, a professor at the University of Oxford’s China Centre, said: “He was someone who displayed some of the worst aspects of his time, but there are many places in his writing where his racial attitudes are very different to the typical British ones of the time.”

Many UK universities have seen similar protests against slavery and colonialist attitudes over the years, including Oxford and Bristol Universities. Regarding such protests, Nick Draper, director of University College London’s Centre for the Study of the Legacies of British Slave-ownership, said: “This is all part of a wider phenomenon and we’re only at the beginning of the process.

“It’s like tectonic plates shifting, where there’s so much tension between the present and the past and how it’s memorialized. Something has to give.”