177
edits
Onward We March: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
The painting was vandalised on March 11th, during a Library Board of Trustees meeting. The owner of the painting, Richard Resnick, decided not to press charges for the damage; "I am sorry for the person who felt so compelled and will not press charges for property destruction. I believe that those who object have misunderstood the important message that the painting represents." Resnick stated in Trumbull Times. | The painting was vandalised on March 11th, during a Library Board of Trustees meeting. The owner of the painting, Richard Resnick, decided not to press charges for the damage; "I am sorry for the person who felt so compelled and will not press charges for property destruction. I believe that those who object have misunderstood the important message that the painting represents." Resnick stated in Trumbull Times. | ||
As a comment, Herbst stated that the vandalism | As a comment, Herbst stated that the vandalism was what he had been afraid would happen to the controversial piece and explained that it was the reason why he wanted an indemnity agreement in place and insurance on the collection. | ||
|description_of_result=The painting was removed and reexhibited. But it’s not clear that the controversy is over. Town lawyer Robert Nicola is apparently advising the town to take down all of the paintings in the collection, pending some kind of arrangement between the town and Richard Resnick, the owner of the paintings. | |description_of_result=The painting was removed and reexhibited. But it’s not clear that the controversy is over. Town lawyer Robert Nicola is apparently advising the town to take down all of the paintings in the collection, pending some kind of arrangement between the town and Richard Resnick, the owner of the paintings. | ||
|image=Trumbull-mother-teresa-wide-720-530x331.png | |image=Trumbull-mother-teresa-wide-720-530x331.png | ||