ShareThis Page

Pittsburgh Art Commission recommends removing Stephen Foster statue

| Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2017, 5:12 p.m.
The statue of Stephen Foster in Pittsburgh's Oakland section. (Trib photo)
Nate Smallwood | Tribune-Review
The statue of Stephen Foster in Pittsburgh's Oakland section. (Trib photo)

Pittsburgh's Art Commission voted unanimously Wednesday to recommend removing a statue of composer Stephen Foster that depicts him standing above a black slave strumming a banjo at the entrance to Schenley Park in the city's Oakland neighborhood.

Critics have said the statue of Foster, who was born in Lawrenceville, is demeaning and should be removed. Others view it as Foster gaining inspiration from a black musician.

The commission's decision is only a recommendation.

Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto makes the final determination about what to do with the statue. He has said the statue should be displayed somewhere other than the public entrance to a major park. He has said he does not want to see the 117-year-old bronze sculpture by artist Giuseppe Moretti be destroyed.

“Mayor Peduto thanks the members of the Art Commission for all their hard work on this matter and looks forward to reviewing their findings,” mayoral spokesman Tim McNulty said in a statement.

The commission did not recommend where the statue should go or whether it should be displayed at a private venue.

Nationwide, cities have been grappling with whether to remove Confederate monuments — and other statues viewed as glorifying racial oppression — in the months since a white nationalist rally Aug. 12 around a statute of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Va., erupted into deadly violence.

The Pittsburgh Mayor's Office has said the Foster statue was being reviewed before the violence in Charlottesville.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.