Hey this is going back to our "identity" week - but I thought it was really interesting - partly because I read Richard Scarry books when I was a kid too...
1963 vs. 1991 Corrections
Things like the ribbon addition to correct gender stereotypes are pretty funny, they're just trading one sign for another (driving a steamroller vs. wearing a ribbon).
Thursday, October 4, 2007
examples
While reading these articles, a few experiences immediately came to mind. When in Mexico I always wondered why the culture continues to be so Catholic. This question could probably only come from an atheist like myself - but I can't help seeing in the context of the Spanish conquest of Mexico - which was so brutal. And echos of it persist in the sense that Mexico is still colonized by Coca Cola, NAFTA, etc. Things that don't contribute to the independence and prosperity of Mexicans, just keep them in perpetual dependence. So in that context, I always think: I would reject Catholicism, and Coca Cola and the rest.
Mosqueras article was great in the sense that he clearly makes the case that it's silly to think you can cleanly separate what came from the outside, from what is original. I'm sure that within minutes of expose to the foreign, a mixture occurs, and there's no going back. We become hybrids.
Mosqueras article was great in the sense that he clearly makes the case that it's silly to think you can cleanly separate what came from the outside, from what is original. I'm sure that within minutes of expose to the foreign, a mixture occurs, and there's no going back. We become hybrids.
The statement from the Mosquera’s essay “to look like no one else or to look like Frida” really made me laugh and say “thank God I do graffiti.” I think statements like those are said when money is trying to be made. If one takes the money factor out, things are looked at a lot differently. I’m not trying to say that Identity needs to be excluded from work,or that cultural identity validates the work, but if the artist feels that it needs to be, then it should and vice versa. If Third World country artist, or any artist, feels some type of pressure from the Western Culture to be a certain way they should give up being an artist.
East meets West, North meets South
Oguibe kind of hit the nail on the head with this bit:
"We see double standards. But that is hardly the most important point. We also find that essential tendency to ignore indigenous historical perceptions and constructs."
The theme as old as time is the one where more "advanced" societies try to save or elevate the "primitive" societies they've "discovered" in "unclaimed" land. Many examples come to mind, most of which we've all read in one history book or another. Problem is, history is often written by the victors according to their specific perceptions accurate or not. Most recently, it's been Europeans running around "discovering" places, claiming them as their own and bestowing their clearly superior culture on the indigenous populations. This colonization has yielded some quite tasty cuisine, inexpensive diamonds, pilfered national treasures and some new takes on art.
Mosquera wrote: "The de-Eurocentralisation in art is not about returning to purity, but about adopting postcolonial "impurity" through which we might free ourselves and express our own thought." Taking this comment and the one that Margo made about capitalist colonization we see a whole new take on the art produced in those areas.
Take for instance the sub-Saharan part of Africa. Colonized, de-colonized and then left with partial infrastructure and poverty. The locals have taken the left0ver telephone wire that would have been considered waste in, say, France and have created a mini-industry by applying their local craft and custom to a new material by weaving traditional Zulu baskets with it. The best part? They're using the Internet (capitalist colonization) to sell these things back to the colonists!
In the modern world, East or West, North or South seems like it lacks definition other than a direction. If you travel eastward long enough, you'll hit the west. If you travel northward far enough, you'll end up going south.
"We see double standards. But that is hardly the most important point. We also find that essential tendency to ignore indigenous historical perceptions and constructs."
The theme as old as time is the one where more "advanced" societies try to save or elevate the "primitive" societies they've "discovered" in "unclaimed" land. Many examples come to mind, most of which we've all read in one history book or another. Problem is, history is often written by the victors according to their specific perceptions accurate or not. Most recently, it's been Europeans running around "discovering" places, claiming them as their own and bestowing their clearly superior culture on the indigenous populations. This colonization has yielded some quite tasty cuisine, inexpensive diamonds, pilfered national treasures and some new takes on art.
Mosquera wrote: "The de-Eurocentralisation in art is not about returning to purity, but about adopting postcolonial "impurity" through which we might free ourselves and express our own thought." Taking this comment and the one that Margo made about capitalist colonization we see a whole new take on the art produced in those areas.
Take for instance the sub-Saharan part of Africa. Colonized, de-colonized and then left with partial infrastructure and poverty. The locals have taken the left0ver telephone wire that would have been considered waste in, say, France and have created a mini-industry by applying their local craft and custom to a new material by weaving traditional Zulu baskets with it. The best part? They're using the Internet (capitalist colonization) to sell these things back to the colonists!
In the modern world, East or West, North or South seems like it lacks definition other than a direction. If you travel eastward long enough, you'll hit the west. If you travel northward far enough, you'll end up going south.
Mosquera calls for a "construction of a contemporary culture- one capable of acting in today's reality- from a plurality of perspectives." For a long time, Western domination in the countries it colonized suppressed the existing culture and tried to conform it to the standards they believed in. (It still happens in a capitalist colonization of culture by the way new McDonalds, Starbucks are popping up all over the world) This domination has set the structures for how non-Western art is viewed within the Western perspective only.
"Third World artists are constantly asked to display their identity, to be fantastic, to look like no one else or look like Frida..."
I found it interesting the way Mosquera points out that art that satisfies the stereotype of exotic is somehow more accepted at the center. He talks about the notion of the "other" as being a threat, rather than embracing it for what elements it might bring.
He also talks about the problems of intercultural communication, and the solution being not only accepatnce of other cultures but an understanding of them in order to "enrich [oneself] with his or her diversity." This is what Oguibe refers to as the Heart of Darkness, the unknown. There is a need to understand the Other, but to also understand where one exists in relationship to that term.
"Third World artists are constantly asked to display their identity, to be fantastic, to look like no one else or look like Frida..."
I found it interesting the way Mosquera points out that art that satisfies the stereotype of exotic is somehow more accepted at the center. He talks about the notion of the "other" as being a threat, rather than embracing it for what elements it might bring.
He also talks about the problems of intercultural communication, and the solution being not only accepatnce of other cultures but an understanding of them in order to "enrich [oneself] with his or her diversity." This is what Oguibe refers to as the Heart of Darkness, the unknown. There is a need to understand the Other, but to also understand where one exists in relationship to that term.
Give me a mutt
Mosquera made such sense of things for me. The Marco Polo Syndrome – where those of us in the egocentric, privileged West view difference as life-threatening rather than nutritional. Growing up in middle class US, and then having a good job and an affluent lifestyle as an adult – it took me some conscious paying attention and traveling to other areas of the world (which most Americans don’t do – only around 20% of Americans even have passports) to realize the value of diversity. My awareness increased when I learned of the richness of art from cultures that were composed of diversity and very tolerant, such as the Tang Dynasty on the Silk Road, and Al Andalus. There is a corollary in nature. The pedigreed dog is much less hardy than the mixed mutt. I no longer would choose to live in an area of the US that wasn’t highly diverse, and I really hope in my lifetime to have the opportunity to live outside the US and learn another language.
While I am very interested in the Eurocentric identification in the art world, I am concerned that the authors didn't clearly acknowledge the inability for international artists to separate themselves from the Eurocentric influence. I was reminded of a short story called Unaccompanied Sonata. In it, when the "artist" was introduced to other works, in an attempt to retain "identity," he unconsciously removed the similarities/crossovers between his work and others. Likewise, are transnational artists able to distinguish themselves apart from their Eurocentric roots without continuing to acknowledge the Eurocentric presence?
“Postmodern interest in the Other has opened some space in the “high art” circuits for vernacular and non western cultures. But it has introduced a new thirst for exoticism, the carrier of either a passive or a second- class Eurocentrism which, instead of universalizing its paradigms, conditions certain cultural productions from the periphery according to paradigms that are expected of it for consumption by the centeres. Many artists, critics and Latin American curators seem to be quite willing to become “othered” for the West.” Mosquera 220.
In a field where “the new”, “the different”, “the avant garde” is supposedly cutting edge that exotic look or feel is something that is so often sought after. The “Eurocentric” reality is this “gotta own”, “gotta have it” mindset that is at the center of killing cultures. To think of objects from another culture as being something that is collectable or even marketable is just a modern notion of European colonization now apparent in “THE ART WORLD”.
In a field where “the new”, “the different”, “the avant garde” is supposedly cutting edge that exotic look or feel is something that is so often sought after. The “Eurocentric” reality is this “gotta own”, “gotta have it” mindset that is at the center of killing cultures. To think of objects from another culture as being something that is collectable or even marketable is just a modern notion of European colonization now apparent in “THE ART WORLD”.
I think it is a misconception of historical and contemporary ideas of exotism and the notion of sub-saharan within the African cultures. Rarely do we see the functioning cities, the scholarly societies, contemporary art, that exist within these "primitive" cultures. National Geographics and publications of the sort paint an image of a Third World country so exotic to our own.
"This way history is constructed as a validating privilege that is the West's to grant, like United Nations recognition, to sections, nations, moments, discourses, cultures, phenomena, realities, and peoples". -Oguibe
It is though the Western eyes of the curators, gallery owners, art market, art publications, etc. that creates the discourse of art in our culture. If interested in the exotic, then they will display their ideas of what is exotic, typically this is foreign type, or primitve looking art works. Art work that reflects their notions of modern African Art, etc.
"This way history is constructed as a validating privilege that is the West's to grant, like United Nations recognition, to sections, nations, moments, discourses, cultures, phenomena, realities, and peoples". -Oguibe
It is though the Western eyes of the curators, gallery owners, art market, art publications, etc. that creates the discourse of art in our culture. If interested in the exotic, then they will display their ideas of what is exotic, typically this is foreign type, or primitve looking art works. Art work that reflects their notions of modern African Art, etc.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
The one statement that really stands out to me in these readings is Mosquera's comment "The contemporary artistic scene is avery centralised system of aparthied". Is it me, or do we re-discover every week how the artworld represents everything evil in our society? It is funny how something so pure as creating, is surrounded by so much impurity. I guess it is money that makes the artworld so judgmental. This post-colonial attitude and approach to art is based on class structures created by wealth. The demands placed on third world art described by Mosquera (originality based on tradition=primative) is based on the worth ascribed by the west, which is a direct efffect of the market that deals with primative or primative based artwork. A pure and true understanding of the "Other" (as described by Oguibe) will only happen when there is a market for that kind of work. It is all good and fine for us to understand this issue as artists but a major shift in opinion about the Third World from the entire West must happen before people will spend money on social-driven contemporary art from places like South Africa.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
"the truth of history is that wherever there is a tradition of artistic practice, and that means every society and every culture, there is always a system of appreciation, assessment, definition of values and taste." (Olu Oguibe)
Olu Oguibe talks in his essay about the problematic question, what is modernity, when did it start and where does it belong to and if there is such a thing how did Africa respond to it?
I am asking myself, how do we judge a piece of art to be modern?
To me modernity has to do with funcion and taste in a certain moment- Oguibe mentions " popular art". I think art is linked very closely to a society and often represents its life and values. For example, "township" art reminds me of the very typical paintings and colorful works we find throughout Africa, which are made of local materials and represent the feel, look and funcion as a representation. This is modern to me- it presents the moment and it raises questions for now and future affairs. The art world in Africa is immense.
I believe the West makes a mistake in trying to search for modernity- however the west defines what's modern- in Africa. And why is it so important? Why does the West want to modernize african art?
I found this strong article of Olu Oguibe quite fitting:
"To all intents and purposes, we live in a segregated world where, for instance, the rest may know the West but the West seldom knows the rest, and within the rest only a few know enough beyond their own little home territories. The novelist Chinua Achebe noted long ago that this is indeed the state at which the West has arrived, at that juncture where it no longer has to erase or ignore others consciously, but as a matter of fact. It is a terrible world where this is the case. That it is the nature of our shared condition as cultures struggling to acknowledge one another, even to co-exist, is a tragedy indeed."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)