“Young Artists After Siamesa 1960” (2015) was removed from the US Embassy in the Dominican Republic and could be sold.
The Department of State removed Kehinde Wiley's 2015 commissioned painting from the United States embassy in the Dominican Republic this month, claiming that the artist's “violent and racist words and depictions” have no place in the foreign relations agency.
In a statement shared with Hyperallergic, a spokesperson said that the department has consulted legal representatives to “ascertain whether the art can be sold.”
Leah Campos, the Trump-appointed US Ambassador to the Dominican Republic as of 2025, posted a video of the painting's removal on Instagram on August 11. The post's caption read: “In the Trump Administration and under my leadership we are turning away from globalist and woke ideologies and instead embracing American patriotism and the beauty of our great country! 🇺🇸”
Wiley, known for painting Barack Obama's presidential portrait in 2018, was commissioned in 2013 by the State Department to create “Young Artists After Siamesas 1960” for its Santo Domingo embassy. The painting depicts four individuals — two standing together as if they're about to dance, and two seated on the floor at their feet — against a floral-patterned backdrop. Wiley studied the work of Dominican artists Celeste Woss y Gil and Gilberto Hernández Ortega in preparation for the work, which he completed with the help of local art students.
Facts Only
* The Department of State removed Kehinde Wiley's 2015 commissioned painting from the U.S. embassy in the Dominican Republic.
* The removal was based on claims that the artwork contained "violent and racist words and depictions."
* Legal representatives were consulted regarding the possibility of selling the art.
* Leah Campos, the U.S. Ambassador to the Dominican Republic as of 2025, posted a video about the removal on Instagram on August 11.
* The Ambassador's post expressed support for American patriotism over "globalist and woke ideologies."
* Wiley was commissioned by the State Department in 2013 to create the painting for the Santo Domingo embassy.
* The painting depicts four individuals against a floral-patterned backdrop.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The event highlights a friction between cultural expression, government policy, and evolving ideological frameworks regarding what constitutes acceptable discourse in diplomatic settings. The removal of art based on content—specifically charged language or imagery—raises complex questions about the role of state agencies as arbiters of artistic value versus an individual artist's creative autonomy. When a government claims specific art is unfit for diplomatic use due to perceived offense, it establishes a precedent where aesthetic and political judgment intersect within official channels. The subsequent reaction from the Ambassador frames this action not as a policy disagreement over cultural sensitivity, but as a defense of nationalistic values against perceived ideological encroachment. This interaction suggests a tension between centralized institutional control and individual artistic freedom, particularly when that freedom is situated in a space tied to international relations. The process forces an examination of who defines "violence" or "racism" within state apparatuses, and whether the removal serves a protective function or functions as a form of ideological gatekeeping.
What criteria should govern the curation or removal of culturally significant art from diplomatic spaces? Does the institutional classification of art reflect genuine harm or subjective political positioning? How does framing an artistic removal as a matter of patriotism shift the focus away from the content and toward the political stance taken by the governing body?