The Artist Upending Photography’s Brutal Racial Legacy

We have walls covered by all kind of wooden masks. For us it is African origin art.
To me jazz is Lois Armstrong. I have his pre and post WWII records.
The only female voice I like is Ella Fitzgerald. I have her records. The only female voice records I have. Plus, Nat King Cole and many others. ​
Best kitchen I ever eat was in Uzbekistan.
I'm fascinated by Japanese b/w photography.


You don't have to be multicultural by been white or black only.
 
Jawarden, I'll insist on "always". The politics of the image are sometimes overt, but more often not, as is the nature of ideology. The very act of representation of a scene in conventional perspective on a two-dimensional surface is a function of some fundamental ideologies of the Western intellectual tradition. I don't use the word "ideology" in the sense of false, propagandistic ideas. I use it in the sense of a system of pervasive beliefs within a culture, beliefs so fundamental as to be invisible without conscious dissection.
It was once accepted without question that the Earth is flat. As science began to question that fundamental "fact", it was attacked as heresy because it made visible an ideology that supported a religious/political hierarchy that depended on that ideology for unquestioned obedience. That hierarchy also produced some of the greatest art in the Western tradition, but we see and experience that art differently from someone who lived 600 years ago. We see some of the ideological and political content that may not have been immediately visible then.
 
Retro-Grouch said:
Jawarden, I'll insist on "always". The politics of the image are sometimes overt, but more often not, as is the nature of ideology. The very act of representation of a scene in conventional perspective on a two-dimensional surface is a function of some fundamental ideologies of the Western intellectual tradition. I don't use the word "ideology" in the sense of false, propagandistic ideas. I use it in the sense of a system of pervasive beliefs within a culture, beliefs so fundamental as to be invisible without conscious dissection.
It was once accepted without question that the Earth is flat. As science began to question that fundamental "fact", it was attacked as heresy because it made visible an ideology that supported a religious/political hierarchy that depended on that ideology for unquestioned obedience. That hierarchy also produced some of the greatest art in the Western tradition, but we see and experience that art differently from someone who lived 600 years ago. We see some of the ideological and political content that may not have been immediately visible then.
Click to expand...

Oh you can insist, I’m just not agreeing with you. 😉 some art is political, others are poetic, some abstract, some lyrical, others just pictures of nature or a beautiful smile. Assigning a label of politics to every artful image is an unnecessary stretch. In my humble opinion of course.
 
I will be the first to agree that the Sulzberger dynasty is immensely powerful and suspect in its machinations with the American power elites. But an article about a Black artist celebrating her culture and people is not necessarily trolling. Although the title is admittedly click-bait, I find her work generous and humane in spirit. My notion of a troll is that of someone who doesn't particularly care about the value and worth of ideas, but rather presents material the sole purpose of which is to antagonize and anger. The NYT has an obvious liberal bias, as do I (surprise!), but I don't think the purpose of this particular article is to antagonize those who may take exception to a confrontational style of expression on the part of Black people. I think that its intent is to foster understanding and to help us grasp the very legitimate grounds for Black anger. This is what I'm arguing for in this thread, empathy, respect, openness to the experience of others. Even when that makes us uncomfortable. Perhaps, particularly when that makes us uncomfortable!
 
Ko-Fe, I admire your cosmopolitan spirit. I think that as an immigrant, you are more apt to "get it". Fortunately for you, Canada doesn't have quite the festering sore of Black/White animosity that the U.S. does, with it's history of slavery. Sadly, it is THE issue in our country now, and for a long time to come. We need to look it at without flinching, and articles like the one in the NYT can help. Still, it's up to each of us as individuals to open our hearts.
 
I believe all art is political. It's simply a matter of perception and willingness to find its political side. Artists do not create art in a vacuum or just because; they want to express themselves to society, and that's a political stand, even if it's an abstract painting (negation of established canons of form) or a beautiful smile (following, acceptance and support of established values).
 
The way I see it, if all art is political, then all expression is political, and at that point "political" becomes so vague and amorphous that it loses all definition. It no longer has any boundaries.

So, no, I don't think all art is political. :D

(Of course, some of it is.)

- Murray
 
Retro-Grouch said:
...Ansel Adams, for example, is not generally considered a "political" artist, but his embrace of the idea of "unspoiled nature" is an expression of American expansionist ideology. ...
Click to expand...

Calling his photos an “expression of American expansionist ideology” is putting a political spin on something which is inherently apolitical. It could better be argued his photos are simply a celebration of nature and nothing more - just as with photographers in other parts of the world. Had he lived in Europe, or Vietnam, etc., he would’ve made equally beautiful photos of that area. As for “expansionist” - every country of some power does it. That’s why most of Central and South America speaks Spanish (and Portuguese in Brazil), or why Canada speaks English and French, etc. It’s also why the Chinese have a significant influence in northern Italy, Africa, and the Middle East.


... If one is a member of a minority, particularly a person of color, one is continuously, daily, bashed over the head at every turn by a dominant culture that demands your silence and invisibility. ...
Click to expand...

It seems exactly the opposite is true. Ironically, it has been politically Left Blacks who have tried to silence and discredit honorable and successful Black people like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, the highly respected brain surgeon Ben Carson, and other prominent Blacks such as Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell, and Candace Owens, to name just a few at the highest levels. It’s pure politics.

In the United States, in politics, television, various fields of entertainment, social media, literature, sports, in so many areas people of different races and ethnicities definitely do have a loud voice that is heard and respected. This is demonstrated daily in so many venues. Just consider how many Senators, Representatives, Governors, Mayors, teachers, doctors, lawyers, businessmen, business owners, managers, and successful people in good companies are non-white. This is why so many people want to come here and those that do are often successful and better off than where they came from. That is why I am here.

For over 40 years I have observed people come here from “3rd World” countries, very poor countries - from a culture totally different than the West and who don’t speak English. But they see the opportunities here. Within a decade they have their own business, a house, and their children are at the top of the class in science and engineering. I have seen this time after time over 40 years. They are successful. They don’t feel entitled - they see the opportunities wide open for them, are grateful for it and love this country. Yet I see those born here, with all the advantages that entails, who squander those opportunities.

There are plenty of other countries, glorified by know-nothing people who never lived there, where if you are a minority you will be told to STFU in no uncertain terms and you truly have no voice or opportunities. That is absolutely not the case here.
 
I can assure you that not all art is political. How do I know with such certainty? I’ve been living as a working artist for 20 years and have supported myself, 4 children (3 of which were not mine, nor were they the same race as me). I have never once been influenced by politics when making my work. Not a single time. If anything I make personal artwork to escape politics and other distractions in order to enter my own headspace. It’s a therapy that I won’t taint with something so venomous as politics. . I do work for myself and for clients who pay me to do it. It gets annoying when viewers assign their own meaning or try to tell ME what I intended when making a piece. Enjoy viewing someone’s work, but unless they TELL you their intention, I wouldn’t assign your own views to it. It’s not fair to do that to the creator. It’s "appropriating" their work so to speak. I will go out on a limb and say that many artists BS a story about the meaning and "intention" of their work well after it is complete. The drama sells.
 
I think others above are saying a similar thing, but surely ALL art is apolitical. It is us who are "political" to varying degrees depending on our backgrounds, experience etc. Indeed how is that we can look at a Holbein or a Vermeer and see very different interpretations? Is it possible that we are confusing the "emotional" impact of art with the "political" impact of art?

And if we do believe that art does have a political resonance, I would love to know what the politics are behind the cave paintings in the South of France!
 
I suppose the fact that Adams was born in California makes him guilty of “American expansionist ideology” as are the current 30 million residents of the state. Am I guilty of this as well? The Munsee tribe that lived in my area of NY would certainly think so. But how much guilt should I bear for events that happened 400 years ago, considering that my grandparents all arrived in the US 120 years ago? Adams was an officer of the Sierra Club, worked on behalf of Native Americans and the interned Japanese during WWII. Surely some of us can be redeemed by our lives and our works for our forebears “evil” activities.
 
Interesting thread and linked article. I agree with Retro-Grouch's summary. Don't agree all art is political. Pushing through the shallowness of most debates nowadays is refreshing.
 
I second OtL comment; Can only visit site if cookies accepted, need to go to Web browser etc to delete bla bla bla. Makes it easy for me to access the article website with having pigging cookies loaded on to my device. Sorry for rant but more Web pages are getting like this.
 
One's work can be an expression of ideology without one being aware of doing so, and if one accepts the definition of ideology I submitted earlier, it is inevitable. Adams did overtly political documentation of the Japanese internment, and overtly political activism to preserve the environment, all admirable. My intent is not to bash Adams. But I see his work as one of the last gasps of the late Romantic Hudson River School, which depicted the American frontier as "pristine" "uninhabited" wilderness, ours to take and civilize.
Do I think that Adams literally, consciously believed this? No. But his work is informed throughout by the cultural currents, the ideology, of the art of the late 19th century, which did very consciously subscribe to the doctrine of Manifest Destiny and expansionism.
History, and Art History, remind us that ideas don't disappear. They mutate, swirl beneath the surface, bubble up and find expression in unexpected contexts. Art is like the great unconscious of the culture, and like the unconscious of the individual, home to both demons and angels. It's our responsibility to acknowledge both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom