Lorna Simpson Response - PK

Lorna Simpson appears as a complicated individual and artist. As an African American she focuses on the issues of race, sex and class, but does so in a very simple, yet powerful way. She decided to create her work in a studio, instead of taking shots of real life happening. To that, she adds words; not just any words however, they’re phrases from the news sources that somehow associate with the image. The models she used were African American males and females, all with their backs to the viewer. It’s striking that she would chose to have them face away, taking away their individual identities, but strengthening the group identity in some way.

The short clip of “Easy to Remember” was tremendous. I wasn’t aware right away that it was those people humming; I thought they were just moving, but it makes sense. And again she takes away their identities, showing just a part of their face, just the lips. It’s interesting that she would do that, I’m not sure I understand it, but I find it fascinating.

I like Michelle Leigh’s comparison of New York to the Mayan ruins. New York being desolate is not something we are used to seeing, and Simpson showing that has a sort of eerie feeling to it.

I find it curious that she does not use any violence portrayal, yet you get a feeling that her work comes from a sense of violence, or leads the viewer to think of it. Her pictures and words she uses give a sense of strong emotion and an understanding of preexisting violence in the pieces without outright showing it.

The image is “Flipside” by Simpson. The image scared me when I first saw it, I didn’t know what I was looking at, and it literally made my heart pound a little faster. It is an image of a woman and an African mask, both seen from behind. The mask being there has a very powerful effect on how we portray the woman, and possibly her origins, comparing her to a member of an African tribe.

Lorna Simpson Response

To start off, I wanted to comment on her video. Right when I began watching the video, I received this sense of eeriness. Only seeing lips and listening to this chanting/humming really made that video a spooky one. I suppose the spooky aura in her video was necessary for the point she was trying to convey. The way I see it, Lorna Simpson was illustrating the oppression African Americans had to suffer. The video showed lips of various people; however, none of them were talking. It was all humming and chanting: something that requires little effort. African Americans were stripped of their rights and were treated lesser than humans. The humming and chanting in the video represents what little freedom they had. Speaking up was out of the question because they would either be ignored or penalized. Therefore, all they could really do was hum and create soft sounds. Through this video, Simpson demonstrated the times when African Americans were ridiculed and insulted.

I decided to post this picture of a mouse in a maze because I think it links with the way African Americans were treated. The mouse is set loose to go anywhere it wants within the maze. Although, that is all it can do: it cannot go anywhere else. I find this similar to the way African Americans were treated. Even though they were allowed to go about and do their own thing, there was a constant string pulling them back. African Americans were restricted in many ways compared to others. This relates the mouse in the maze because the person that let them in is in constant control of the mouse. The person would be the string pulling the rat back in this case.

The story of my walking limbs

This first one I like because of the angle, and the awkwardness of my feet, I feel, give a different meaning to the picture. I want to portray that my feet/legs aren't normal.






This second one I chose to kind of say that "hard work pays off". A lot of dancing, equals, great calf muscles.But look at the back of my feet; shows how much work I put in my feet just releve (french: to lift).





This third one I chose because it is creepy to look at. I've distorted my foot by just standing on my toes, so one could say that the result of dancing is beautiful, but no pain, no gain, right?

o0k9i

You are not alone: Shirin Neshat

The first thing I noticed about the selection of Shirin Neshat’s photographs was the beauty. Shirin Neshat, an exiled Iranian now living in New York, “show[s] and tell[s] what has been forbidden to show and tell” (http://www.iranian.com/Arts/Dec97/Neshat/index.html). She reveals the beauty and the femininity of the Iranian woman that has been hidden. What is most interesting to me is that in her photography, she never violates any of the Islamic laws concerning the coverage of women.

While she, at first, seemed to be a feminist to me, Neshat claims that she is not a feminist because she is “not generally interested in considering women’s rights in relation to equality with men, or in a competition with men, but rather within their own rights and feminine space” (http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/asked-and-answered-shirin-neshat/#more-81605).

When I looked at the photographs again, I realized that this statement makes sense. Neshat photographs beautiful women, abiding to Islamic dress code laws, owning their femininity despite their denied rights. They own themselves within the rights they currently have in their own “feminine space”. Her artwork does not have feminist themes. If it did, perhaps the women photographed would be breaking Islamic laws. However, in all of her work, they are complying gracefully, without opposition. One of the photos that really stuck out to me is the one where the Iranian woman is covered from head to toe in black, while the young boy beside her is naked.

While this image draws attention to what might be considered inequality here, in the United States, to those who do not understand Muslim culture. However, the concealed woman is not fighting it. She is holding her son’s hand like she would normally. This, the fact that women are concealed when men are not, is just how it is.

The women photographed by Neshat do not seem upset or restless with Islamic law, rather they are comfortable with it and believe that it is right. They are concealed, hidden, and perhaps oppressed, but they are beautiful and true to their Islamic beliefs and doctrine.

The image I have attached is a photograph by Mina Momeni, entitled You Are Not Alone from http://caledoniyya.com/2008/07/21/mina-momeni/. While Moneni’s photographs do not appear as “raw” as Neshat’s. They have the same concept. The women photographed are following Islamic law, but are still beautiful. The photo and the title are making a statement that the women may be oppressed but are still not alone. While Neshat’s women seem to be settled and all right with the laws they must follow, these women do look more affected by the laws. Which do you like more?

Shirin Neshat response

Shirin Neshat’s work to me is rather powerful, her photographs of Islamic women in particular. By covering these women with Arabic text she shows how these women are not only a significant part of that culture, but how that culture is also a significant part of them. Islamic cultures have been male-dominated for many years and the women have often taken a back seat. The Arabic text that covers or sometimes blankets the skin and bodies of these women is a very stark image. For me it symbolizes how restrictive Islamic cultures, especially that of her native Iran, have been for women because the writing in many of the pictures conceals or obscures the identities of the women behind it. I think she is also trying to say with the Arabic text that this culture is a large part of who these women are because the writing is part of their bodies.

Perhaps she is also saying that, since most of these women’s bodies are covered by clothing, and the part that isn’t is covered by Arabic writing, that when we look at Islamic women we tend to see the religion first and foremost instead of seeing the people behind it. We just see the restrictions; we don’t really see the people being restricted. Although the article from The Iranian was posted in December 1997, I think it is really interesting to consider her work and its renewed relevancy in a post-9/11 world. After the attacks on that day, the amount of prejudice against Arabs and Muslims skyrocketed. For many people the burka became a symbol of Islamic restrictions on women, and the focus shifted to what was perceived as the problems of Islam instead of the Islamic people themselves. Especially in the United States, many of the women wearing the burkas choose to do so, but that this is a choice is ignored simply because of anti-Islamic sentiment. So while I understand that the images also must have been powerful when originally published and should be considered as such, to me they have taken on a strong second meaning in our post-9/11 society.

I chose that picture because to me it signifies how women have been typically silenced in their culture, but her slightly open mouth seems to portray that she is ready to speak out.

Giving a Voice to the Controlled

While looking through Shirin Neshat’s work, I noticed that the subjects in her photos look like they have a story to tell. I really appreciated that Neshat’s subject seem to tell a story not only through their eyes but also some of them have text somewhere on their body. The people in Neshat’s photos appear to be mostly women and children – the part of Islamic society who seems to be kept under control the most by men. Neshat is basically letting the voices of the “controlled” part of society be heard by the world, when they otherwise would not be heard.

I was most drawn to the little boy with the different symbols drawn all over him and holding bullets to a gun that is seemingly off camera. I think this photo is supposed to be shocking and attention grabbing to make the audience aware that children, I am assuming mostly little boys, are manipulated and dragged into “military” service at a young age. This photo is quite shocking because the little boy is sitting, staring up at the camera with big, innocent eyes, yet some day, he might grow up to be a man who suppresses the voices of women and children. It seems like an endless cycle of repression.

The photo I chose to put up on the blog is a picture that is similar to the little boy holding the bullets. I chose to put up a photo of a child’s pair of feet with a gun in between the feet. I think this photo portrays the same kind of message that the photo of the little boy does, that an innocent little child could grow up and be a monster. I don’t think that this fear is one that is unique to Iranian culture; I think it’s also a fear that is felt in other places, including the United States. I appreciate that Neshat’s message can be universal but also specific to Iranian culture.

Response to Shirin Neshat

Shirin Neshat's artwork caught me off guard. Very rarely do I see work that depicts Muslim subjects, especially works that challenge and explore the meaning behind Islam. What I love about her work is that it takes the ideals of self-doubt and self-criticism and turns them into striking images that evoke so much emotion and complexity. She reminds me a lot of Barbara Kruger. They both challenge their cultures, sometimes being very critical, and always looking out for women. There appears to be a delicate balance between the beauty of the Islamic culture, and the violence that ensues in her homeland.

I chose the picture above because it was the one that spoke to me the most. I've always questioned and thought about the effects of wearing a headdress every day. Some of the women I have met and seen go as far as to cover their entire face from the outside world. In an American culture, your face plays one of the largest roles in defining who you are, where you came from. For someone who has to cover their face, what defines them? Who are they beneath the mask? I've never been especially critical of this cultural norm, but I've always pondered its psychological effects on the women involved.

This women looks particularly unhappy, which makes you wonder...what's wrong? How did she get here? On the other hand, she's adorned with intricate and beautiful designs. This is the tension that draws viewers in. There is an acknowledgement of the culture's beauty here, but alongside it is a sadness and disappointment.

I find Neshat's work especially relevant because of the latest news surrounding war ships from Iran. The ships are nearing U.S. Atlantic borders and causing a huge stir in the government right now. The violence and destruction that parallels with war is seen many times in a country like Iran. But within the women there, Neshat shines light on a complex battle about what is right. She examines what it means to be Iranian, especially to be Muslim, and she dares to ask the questions in a very bare and brave way.

Neshat

Shirin Neshat’s artwork is a genre I personally have never seen before and I feel that it presents thought-provoking ideas in a somewhat paradoxical form in that she is criticizing and deeply evaluating her own religion. While she signifies herself as a Muslim woman, she ironically challenges the religion and culture’s ideals and depiction of women or perhaps even the stereotypes of Muslims through her unique artwork. I believe that the stark visual constrict (black and white) in her work exemplifies the world’s black and white or cut and dry illustration of the Middle East and the Muslim community. While she says that she does not provoke the Muslim community, I fell that she does provoke people to think about who they really are and what they stand for. I really liked her ideal in that she does not intend to widen the divide between the western world and Islam (women specifically), but build a dialogue to encourage tolerance and respect through her controversial work. I liked the picture that presented a Muslim woman wearing a headdress with, what it appears to be, a target on her face. This illustrates the Western view on Islam and that they are all extremeist religious figures and that they need to be “taken care of.” While I personally don’t possess that false representation, many Americans do, which is very disturbing. She is trying to disintegrate the false violent stereotypes and assumptions the world has on Islamic women and promote that while these woman may look different and bow to a different god or government, they are not that starkly different.

The picture I chose is one by Neshat that depicts a mother’s hands around her child’s hands. I see this as the Islamic stereotype that from birth, the culture is brainwashing all people to become horrible people, when the mother is simply nurturing the child. You may ask where I came up with that idea, but just look around at the people who do think this way and have to sense that Muslims are not even people. This is precisely what Neshat is trying to evoke in the Western thought and ideals.

Shirin Neshat

In referring to the Iranian government's vast oppression, Neshat explains why she uses her specific artistic style, as "artists have consistently relied on the power of allegory and poetic language to express everything that is not possible to express directly. Magical realism allows an artist like myself to inject layers of meaning without being obvious. In American culture, where there is freedom of expression, this approach may seem forced, unnecessary and misunderstood. But this system of communication has become very Iranian." I love that she acknowledged how Iranian culture, its art and "system of communication" itself is being transformed by this oppressive government into something that quietly resists its power.

In the photo gallery on the next website, I found this quote to apply directly to all of the pictures- especially the ones where women were hiding their faces or mouths. At first sight, the viewer sees that they are concealing themselves in some form or fashion. But seeing the Arabic cursive or ornate designs inked onto their hands or faces, it reminds the viewer that these women still have so much to say and express, opposing the often-used but ill-judged stereotype that women in the Islamic culture allow themselves to be silenced and repressed with wearing their hijab and simply going along with their religion/countries' social norms. Nashat may not be a feminist, but she is certainly asserting Iranian women and the power they hold, and how surprising it may be to Western audiences to have this visually realized.

The piece of work I chose is by Anita Kunz, and it was a part of the "Green Movement" following the elections in Iran in 2009, advocating for the candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi who was in favor of reform. I think it directly relates to Neshat's work, as it again implies (in a louder, less ambiguous fashion) that people may have to deal with their surroundings, political deficiencies, and culture, but that doesn't mean they will let themselves be silenced or rendered helpless because of it.

Sharin Neshat

Sharin Neshat is an artist whose work can be seen by some as too controversial to accept. In her own home country of Iran, her work, including her movie, have been banned. Iran went so far as to ban her, herself, from the country. I found it fascinating in the interview when she was talking about being banned from her own country. She talked about how it took her a while to adjust to life here in the States. What I found incredibly interesting through all of this is that it almost strengthened her drive to create work about the violence in her home country. Even though she no longer lives there, or can live there, her sense of duty to tell her people’s story is still fighting within her.

The other part of her story that I found interesting was when she was talking about how her movie will never be allowed to be legally viewed within Iran. When asked if she thought that the movie would be smuggled in, she answered that she hoped for that. This is so different from most artists. Most artists want their art to be viewed in a gallery for the world to admire. They want everyone to appreciate their work for the beauty that it is. However, she does not seem to care about the glory or the praise. She is more concerned with making sure her story and the story of those she left behind is told. I think that this is the major thing that sets her apart from so many other artists.

The image I chose is of a woman holding the hands of what appears to be a child. What I find interesting about her work is that, in the same way as the other artists we have studied, her work involves both photo and text. However, the text in her work is not able to be read by many here because of the language barrier. However, even with a language difference, her work is still as moving and inspirational as all the other artists.

Shirin Neshat - Sep. 29

I will begin with my discussion of Neshat with her pictures and then discuss the Q&A. Her pictures were really interesting, as I have never viewed art from a Muslim woman before. The picture with the woman’s hand to her lips with the tattoo is simultaneously peaceful and provocative. I found her Q&A in the New York Times to be fascinating also. It was really interesting to hear her talk about her movie, art, and life. By the end of it I was extremely curious about what her movie was like. Luckily there’s a clip at the bottom that I watched. I’m not sure if you need to be more familiar with Muslim or Iranian culture to understand the clip or entire movie, but I was very confused. I didn’t really understand what she was doing or what happened when all the praying men looked up to see her standing there. Nonetheless I would be curious to see the entire movie because there was something intriguing about it.

In terms of the picture I posted, I posted this because it seems relevant to Neshat’s struggles as well as contemporary debates. Some people feel that hijabs are oppressive since they require women to cover themselves. Meanwhile, others feel that they are liberating because they wear them by choice and the idea is you are refusing to let yourself be objectified (as I understand it from conversations I’ve had with Muslims – I’m no expert).