The Palais de Tokyo in Paris has taken down a new work by American artist Cameron Rowland, just days after it went on view. The museum replaced the piece with wall text stating that the removed work “may have been considered illegal.”

Rowland’s artwork, titled Replacement (2025), was commissioned for “ECHO DELAY REVERB,” an exhibition highlighting American artists shaped by French theory. The show was curated by Naomi Beckwith, deputy director and chief curator at the Guggenheim Museum in New York, who also serves as the artistic director of Documenta 16.

A Flag as Political Statement

For Replacement, Rowland substituted the French flag that typically flies above the museum with the flag of Martinique—a French overseas department in the Caribbean. The work’s accompanying caption provided historical and political context for the gesture, exploring Martinique’s colonial legacy and ongoing ties to France.

“Since it was colonized by the French in 1635, Martinique has been a part of France,” the caption read. “Martinique remains part of the French nation-state as an overseas department. France remains reliant on Martinique. Black Martinicans have pursued the end of French rule for 390 years.”

The text also quoted the Mouvement Indépendantiste Martiniquais, a political party advocating for Martinican independence:

“Martinique remains a politically dominated territory, economically exploited, militarily occupied, culturally alienated and fettered by the European free-trade agenda, which prohibits any idea of lasting protection for our island economy.”

Symbolism and Censorship

Rowland’s work used the official Martinican flag adopted in 2023, featuring black and green bands with a red triangle—rather than the older version with a white cross and four snakes once associated with colonial rule.

Replacement debuted alongside other works in “ECHO DELAY REVERB” on Wednesday. By Thursday, however, Rowland’s New York gallery, Maxwell Graham, revealed on Instagram that the piece had been removed from the exhibition.

The museum’s decision quickly sparked debate online, with many interpreting the act as a form of political censorship and a reflection of France’s unresolved colonial tensions.