stanley-lai

[stanley-lai]

This article was very interesting as I generally only read about Canadian Indigenous Artists.

[stanley-lai]

[stanley-lai]

Art and Geographical Space

The issues of art and geographical space is quite interesting in light of environmentalism, colonialism, and indigenous rights. However, not all land art is produced by those who have an ancestral or indigenous claim to the land. It is easy to see how white environmentalists in America, for example, might engage in land art for environmental purposes while failing to recognize indigenous rights associated with that land. On the other hand, the intentions of land art that has an environmental consciousness purpose is certainly reflecting an indigenous understanding of harmony between people and the land. The article in the Guardian, “How Our Colonial Past ...”, illustrates the need for artists to consider human and environmental costs of civilization. At the same time, however, I wonder if artists that are part of the commodity culture themselves can make any claim of moral high ground just because they raise environmental consciousness in their art. Their ability to produce and exhibit their art is a result of the capitalist-consumerist-commodity culture itself. Can art truly be transformative when its very existence owes to that society? I think of the same issue related to indigenous rights and art. The “Postcommodity in Borderlands” works show how this collective faces numerous contradictions in its work. When I read the manifesto of the collective, it strikes me that they probably have very little contact with the residents of the borderlands, particularly undocumented immigrants coming to the United States for work. If those immigrants listened to the Postcommodity collective’s manifesto, they would be confused. What those immigrants want most of all are jobs in the commodity culture of the U.S.

[stanley-lai]

Thompson

Thompson’s account of socially engaged art might be my favorite reading from the course. The role of the collective in creating these works of art for a social purpose, and in a social method, is fascinating. What I found hopeful was much of the work documented in the book actually provided services to people in need. I found this to be quite inspiring as art could be more than just an expression of outrage, which is what so much of social justice art seems to be about. It’s more about the artist expressing themselves rather than actually getting something done toward justice. Toward that critique, the “Between the Door and the Street” performance seemed to show the entitlement of privileged women making themselves feel good about generating debates about issues. I think there was some good that was done, certainly, by encouraging women to talk about their issues. However, is this really art, and are they actually providing a service that cannot be provided in another manner? This seemed a bit smug. Anyone can have these conversations in America. There is no need for a safe space to discuss these issues, so I think the artists were motivated more about feeling good about themselves and making themselves look good to others than actually doing something of actual service to those in need. By contrast, Project Row Houses actually provides real services to people, not just talk about justice. Likewise, the Rap Research Lab delivers education and training to underprivileged youth. I think it’s important for artists interested in social justice work to actually use that work to do something, not just express themselves, particularly if they are a member of a dominant group.

[stanley-lai]

Style Wars

The underlying themes in “Style Wars” is that an underground artistic culture can actually be delegitimated to the point of illegality. I am not saying that graffiti artists should have the right to paint on any building or structure they want if owned by someone else. However, the film makes clear that many of the settings in which graffiti was placed were neglected or abandoned by the owners. Moreover, the film makes clear that those in power in New York City delegitimated all graffiti art as vandalism. This somewhat relates to Arnold and Tylor’s ideas of culture and the distinction between low art and high art, but not in the way you might interpret (or predict me to interpret). Cultural elites did not appear to be among the actors targeting graffiti in New York City in the film. Rather, I would argue that the low art sensibility was held by the police and city government. I would venture that the artistic elites in NYC, such as the curators at the MoMA, would defend graffiti as art. I have definitely seen some ideas in class echoed in current events. For example, I have heard firsthand from older adults critiques of the fashion worn by younger people today, some of which is influenced by the hip hop culture from America. I would argue that this fashion is both artistic production in its design but also in how it is displayed by the wearers. Thus, when older adults disapprove of a fashion choice by younger adults and teens, they are expressing a condemnation similar to the low art critique of cultural elitism noted in Arnold and Tylor.

[stanley-lai]

Queer (In)Justice

The primary idea in “Queer (In)Justice” is that exclusion is the persistent theme in how institutions have considered the interests and identities of queer people. This occurs despite the claims of egalitarianism and justice that some of these institutions claim to reflect. Thus, queer activism is necessary to achieve justice. In the previous week, I discussed my critique of the “Colonizing Abstraction” article, which is that MoMA should not be criticized for ignoring indigenous abstract art in an exhibit about abstraction in 20th Century art. I wonder if MoMA had simply titled the exhibit different, avoiding the “inventing abstraction” phrase, whether the author of the article would have been less offended. While I think the critique in “Colonizing Abstraction” is misguided, I do agree with Frances Saunders that modern art can be used as a weapon in the use of that term as a propaganda tool. It’s funny to think of the split between how average Americans viewed abstract art and how the CIA might have used it to send a message of artistic freedom to those living under communism. Ultimately, I agree with Appiah’s notion of the false delineation of something called Western civilization. The ancient Romans and Greeks had substantial contact with the East. If they are the origins of Western civilization, then there really is nothing that can be said to be exclusively Western. All of this overlaps with our course theme about the social construction of culture, not just in the production of culture but also how we produce our attitudes and beliefs about that culture.

[stanley-lai]

Colonizing Abstraction

The relationship between abuse of indigenous persons under the laws and treaties of the United States and abstraction in the arts certainly captivated my attention this week. I understand the basic violation of indigenous land rights for which Cornell University is more responsible than perhaps any other institution of higher education in the United States, according to “Cornell: A Land-Grab University?” However, given that every square foot of land in the United States was the territory of an indigenous group, it is hard to see how any institution could escape this criticism. What is more interesting to me is how the artistic community can be considered an oppressor of indigenous rights. Not in a legalistic manner. Rather, in an aesthetic neglect of the contributions of indigenous art to abstract. Thus, “Colonizing Abstraction: MoMA’s Inventing Abstraction Show Denies Its Ancient Global Origins,” deserves substantial focus. I think the article does a good job of showing how indigenous cultures used abstraction in their aesthetic approach. I guess I am a little less convinced that that indigenous art was instrumental in the abstraction that evolved in Europe. Even the author of the work does not claim this influence. Rather, the point is to note that abstraction existed before the Europeans and the Americans developed Abstract Expressionism and other genres in the 20th Century. Since the MoMa show was about Western abstract artists of the 20th Century, I’m not sure that neglecting the indigenous contribution to abstraction outside of that time and place is an act of cultural imperialism.  

[stanley-lai]

Cuban American

The lives and art of Ana Mendieta and Felix Gonzalez-Torres were quite interesting because I lacked much knowledge, if any, about the Cuban immigration experience to America and Cuban American culture. I know that Miami has a large Cuban American population as a result of immigration by the anti-Communist Cubans that left because of the revolution. I was really not aware of much more about how the community has evolved away from these origins. As I looked at their work and read their biographies, I could not help but wonder how their experience as immigrants and assimilation into the culture of the host country, the United States, influenced their work. For example, Gonzalez-Torres’ work referenced natural features, such as the ocean. I was reminded of the close geographical distance between Florida and Cuba when viewing a photo of this work. The interview with Gonzalez-Torres showed him to be someone quite interested in the abstraction of human experience. He talked of philosophy, concepts, and theories. But then he also noted the specific application to everyday human experience. He identified more as a partner and as a gay artist than a Cuban immigrant. Likewise, the work of Ana Mendieta, given its focus on gender and feminism, shows how our attempts to construct identities for artists, such as Cuban Americans or Cuban immigrants, might overlook the key traits they consider of themselves. This section was important for me to consider how artistic identities can be so different from the other demographic traits to which we assign people and artists.

[stanley-lai]

Exploration

The video from John Oliver about Columbus Day is quite interesting because it shows how identities in American can evolve in strange ways. From what I could tell, Columbus Day in the United States is an almost neglected holiday except by one group: Italian Americans. For them, Columbus Day actually means something important to their culture. In my discussions with other Americans, Columbus Day means very little if anything. For them, eradicating Columbus Day would also mean nothing important. Yet, as the John Oliver show indicates, the fact that Columbus Day has become ingrained into Italian American pride means that it is the focus of controversy. Italian Americans do not consider the attack on Columbus Day to be merely an attack on the actual explorer. They consider it to be an attack on their ethnic heritage. Given that Italians were discriminated against in their history, and not even considered white by many Euro Americans when they first came to America, it is ironic that Italian Americans today are taking a position on Columbus Day that supports white supremacy over indigenous persons. The map at native-land.ca/ was quite interesting because it really shows the extraordinary number and diversity of indigenous cultures in North America. I spent substantial time exploring some of these groups. I was most struck by the incredible number of indigenous groups in California. They existed in very small populations throughout the state. They were also exterminated by the white settlers in a way that was perhaps more barbaric (and later in American history) than many might realize. I would recommend anyone interested to read David Stannard’s American Holocaust.