I don't know if the library is the best place to display this. Children go there and parents aren't necessarily expecting to see this. At least at a museum you expecting it and you can decide if your children are mature enough for this material.  Also some people might not want to see anything like this because they are offended by the subject matter and they're just going to the library to check out books not look at drawings on display.

I do not think pictures of people having sex of any kind is the proper subject for a painting in an area where children frequent

“The library should be a safe harbor for controversies of all types, and those controversies can be dealt with in the context of what is known about art, about literature, democracy and freedom,” Clement A. Price, a library trustee and Rutgers history professor, told The Star-Ledger. “There’s no better venue in Newark where such a powerful and potential controversial drawing should be mounted.”

I don't know about anyone else, but I have never gone to the library for controversy.

It says its hung in a second floor reference room. Its not like its in the foyer. Its probably being handled as appropriately as that pary of our history can be handled....

Personally, I find it absolutely disgusting. Why would anyone find the need to paint a picture of a slave giving a BJ!
A library is not the place for this.

i want to see the drawing...its kinda hard to make an informed opinion without seeing the complete work. it seems inappropriate for a library setting, however 2nd floor reference section isnt really somewhere lots of kids are gonna be. it seems like a work more appropriate for a University library, not a public one. i get the point of the work, but its not really something that the public really needs to see.

if i worked there and the painting offended me i would let it be known that i would prefer not to work around it...that should be accommodatable.

found it...i can see why they left it uncovered. its not graphic, not the focal point of the piece, and shows the gritty truth of the time period. still think it should be in a University library tho.

A more accurate description would be a slave being raped by a white man, not so much having sex! Anyway, I dont really see the need for rape scenes to be hung as art in libraries, we know it happened and it's an awful part of American history, its not necessary to have it up on display, in some peoples minds its glorifying it, others even find it funny, just like slavery reenactments are not necessary when school children are taught about slavery, I for one don't want for give it any glory.

I don't think a public library is an appropriate place to display a painting with sexual content, even if it isn't graphic. Slavery was a very sad and regrettable part of American history, but I don't want to have to explain its reality to my child before she's ready, nor do I want to explain to her what a blowjob is till she's mature enough to handle the information. Slavery has been well documented in books, narratives, and other accounts, and honestly, I think seeing graphic depictions of it now only breeds anger over past wrongs that were perpetrated and suffered many generations ago and have to be put to rest at some point.

I think it would depend on where in the library and how it was done. It is a real part of our ugly history. Slaves were forced to do much, including raped. In the children's area I would have concerns. In the adult sections where it is for research I would have no issues with it. But it would depend again how it is done. Part of a display depicting that era it is certainly appropriate. In a section meant for relaxation and reading periodicals....not so much.