Taking these representations of the Virgin inscribed in the patriarchal imaginary as a point of departure, it is possible to trace visualities in modern Latin American art that confront the myth of this voiceless, bodiless, holy woman. Among these, the works of artists Norah Borges (Argentine, 1901–1998), María Izquierdo (Mexican, 1902–1955), and Miriam Inez da Silva (Brazilian, 1939–1996) stand out for their construction of alternative visual narratives that not only act as provocations to the canonical imperatives of Marian representation, but also propose a fundamentally different, female approach to the divine. Depending on the image, their approaches vary from personal, affectionate, and sensitive to lively and popularly oriented to corporeal, tactile, and even sexual. By means of what Giorgio Agamben has called “profanation,” all three artists aimed to return the sacred to common and communal use in a way that is neither ironic nor blasphemous—to express religious belief and its creative potential by delineating another form of understanding of religion in modernity. At the same time, they opened a space for aesthetic and ethical experimentation that follows the modernist canon and yet offers original perspectives on the connections between art, politics, and gender.⁴ As the following comparative analysis will show, religious language—against all odds—enabled innovative affective, popular, and corporeal configurations that challenged the ruling sexist and patriarchal order in Latin American social and religious realms as well as in Latin American artistic realms.

Norah Borges’s Quotidian Mysticism

Though she began as a poet, Norah Borges studied wood engraving in 1914 in Europe, where along with her brother, the writer Jorge Luis Borges, she was active in the Spanish Ultraist avant-garde. When she returned to Buenos Aires in the mid-1920s, she brought this experience with her, becoming an active participant in the group of young innovators who came together in the pages of the avant-garde journals Prisma, Proa, and Martín Fierro.⁵ By the end of the 1920s, however, she was married to the Spanish critic Guillermo de Torre, and her interest had shifted away from radical expressionism to the tranquility of more ordered form—to an art aligned with the post–World War I conservative cultural French movement known as the “return to order,” or rappel à l’ordre, which overlapped with her connections to the emerging Catholic intelligentsia attempting to forge ties with modern artists and writers.⁶ Thus, her name appears among those exhibiting in the gallery of the Buenos Aires Courses in Catholic Culture at the same time as she was contributing drawings and woodcuts to contemporary journals of cultural Catholicism such as Criterio and Número.⁷ The drawings Niña vestida de primera comunión [Girl Dressed for Her First Communion] (fig. 1) and Aviñon, both published in Número, when taken together, show that Borges’s religious interest cannot be thought of as outside the classical aesthetic of the return to order and its classical emphasis on balance, harmony, and precision.⁸

If, within the history of art, the return to order marked a shift among artists and writers to classicism in a European sense, Borges brought her own uniqueness to this affiliation. To be sure, as Patricia Artundo has suggested, she enjoyed the freedom that came with not fully belonging to postwar European culture.⁹ This is clear in “Un cuadro sinóptico de la pintura” (A synoptic chart of painting), an unsigned text credited to Borges and published in Martín Fierro in March 1927. In this writing, the watchwords “order,” “proportion,” “sharply defined contours,” and “definite forms” coexist with an expressed need for colors that “give joy to the eyes,” such as pink and lemon, pink and Veronese green, and salmon-pink, together with the “mystic color” equivalent to the “color that things will also have in heaven.”¹⁰ Borges’s choice of a pastel palette that avoids strong chromatic contrast, along with her interest in circuses, toys, children, and cart decoration, led male critics of the time to condescendingly and paternalistically emphasize its spontaneous, childlike, and hence feminine aspect, while ignoring the formal aspects of her work and its expression of harmony and proportionality.¹¹

As Griselda Pollock explains, although femininity is “an oppressive condition” for female cultural producers, analyses of their output should explore both its limitations and the ways in which women have negotiated and transformed them.¹² In Borges’s case, her exploration of affect was as much a consequence of the “good” feminine attributes that a woman of her social class was expected to cultivate as it was the possibility inherent in nonvisual, more haptic forms of perception. A wager, therefore, on the expression of a sensorial experience of the world as a form of resistance that, when distributed in oppressive pictorial spaces, encourages community among some bodies (women, young people, and children, in particular). In this way, while her formal compositional style deviated from the aesthetic of order by combining geometry with feeling, her religious-themed works, by recurrently investigating the daily, affective aspect of faith, deviated from the virile, aggressive primacy of Catholic discourse in those years. Borges innovatively put forward a pastel-colored, joyful, and amicable spirituality that brought the religious figures she represented closer to those viewing them.¹³ In turn, she granted materiality to the representation of the sacred, making the body itself and the contact between bodies recurrent themes.

In The Annunciation (1945; fig. 2), a traditional subject in the history of Western art, Borges presents the encounter between the archangel Gabriel and the Virgin Mary within a modern, formal configuration simultaneously framed within a familial, affective space.¹⁴ Brought together in an intimate setting but in golden tones denoting the sacred, the scene presumes a certain hierarchy between the characters, since Mary is seated and looking upward at the archangel hovering just above her, thereby granting greater importance to the spiritual being and his tidings. However, unlike other artists before her, Borges depicted this meeting without resorting to symbols or other elements usually associated with it. In fact, Gabriel is wingless and dressed no differently than a mortal. His clothes share a certain contemporaneity and style with those worn by the Virgin Mary, who is dressed in green (as opposed to the traditional blue and red), sports a modern hairstyle, and lacks a veil—just like countless modern young women in the first half of the 20th century. In this way, Borges returned a founding myth in the history of Western civilization to daily life, bringing it closer to her audience, who must pay attention to the title to understand that what is happening is not a simple chat between friends—and perhaps and perhaps not even between women friends at that. In fact, gender ambiguity is a characteristic of this work and others by the artist. The scholar Roberta Ann Quance has highlighted the presence of a “female androgyny” in Borges’s paintings through the artist’s depiction of slightly effeminate beings set in pink worlds, as in her images of lovers, newlyweds, and angels.¹⁵ Without calling herself a feminist or pretending to reflect on gender, Borges destabilized sex/gender limits and granted a leading role to affectivity, a quality marginalized by the sexist structure of modern society and that would acquire political relevance decades later.¹⁶

In many of Borges’s images, through a language of love devoid of romantic cliché, the bodies of her subjects touch or caress each other—including in The Annunciation, where the position of the arms could be understood as a precursor to an embrace. Confronting the relationship between emotionalism, weakness, and female inferiority, Borges reaffirmed the female, in contrast to other women of the avant-garde (like Maruja Mallo or Frida Kahlo) who, as Quance suggests, assimilated male styles and activities in order to “pal around” with male artists.¹⁷ For example, in Borges’s painting Holy Week (fig. 3), the Biblical characters are identifiable by the symbols they carry rather than by their features, which do not differ greatly from one another. Veronica, Joseph of Arimathea, and Nicodemus all have oval faces, gentle demeanors, big black eyes, and pastel-colored cassocks, and they are composed in an iconic arrangement. However, the staging of the scene and characters is closer to that of modern daily life than to a historicization and sacralization of Catholicism.

In Norah Borges’s pastel-colored universe, the private, mystic, intimate, and affective coexist with a rational harmony guided by a spiritual imprint. In this sense, religiosity is an aesthetic form and motif that brings the supernatural closer to the everyday, contributing strikingly to undo hierarchical binarisms (sacred/profane, reason/heart, modern/primitive, and feminine/masculine, among others), pillars of a modern Western narrative from which women (artists) found themselves excluded.

Divine Mestizaje: María Izquierdo’s Altars

María Cenobia Izquierdo was born in San Juan de los Lagos, Jalisco, a pilgrimage site thronged by the miracle-seeking faithful. She moved to Mexico City with her husband and children in the 1920s. In 1928, she entered the Escuela Nacional de Bellas Artes, where, in 1929, Diego Rivera was appointed director. Art historian Nancy Deffebach recounts that Rivera praised Izquierdo’s paintings in a student exhibition without knowing who had painted them and was surprised to find out that they had been done by a woman. As a result of this recognition, Izquierdo was invited to show her work in November 1929 in La nueva Galería del Arte Moderno, her first solo exhibition, but then had to abandon her studies when she fell victim to the jealousy and aggression of her classmates.¹⁸ By then separated from her husband, she was sharing a studio and had become romantically linked with the painter Rufino Tamayo; both were connected to the Contemporáneos, a group of young avant-gardists who opposed nationalist discourse and defended the internationalization of Mexican art and literature.¹⁹ Not coincidentally, in the 1930s, Octavio Paz, among other writers, reproduced some of Izquierdo’s paintings in the journal Taller in homage to this “heterodox” whose art, he recalled fifty years later, “was far removed from the muralists’ ideological painting.”²⁰

Along the same lines, the Mexican writer Elena Poniatowska has suggested that Izquierdo was more Mexican than Frida Kahlo because she was not “folkloric but essential.”²¹ Depicting soup tureens, mermaids, peasants, dollhouses, self-portraits, and tablecloths, in her words, she painted “a still life with huachinango [red snapper].”²² Along these elements, the women in Izquierdo’s paintings (for example, the nudes or ballerinas, tightrope walkers, trapeze artists, and trainers of the circus universe) have active roles. Notably, as Jean Franco suggests, they stand in contrast to the representations of women by the famed Mexican muralists, who usually relegated their female subjects to a passive, secondary role.²³

Izquierdo’s series of altars to the Virgen de Dolores (Virgin of Sorrows), which she worked on at the end of her life, from 1943 to 1948, channeled her interest in 19th-century popular and religious art by means of female representations that have physical characteristics like her own. As Poniatowska notes, these Virgins have Izquierdo’s face as well as the curve of her lips, which evokes harshness and controlled internal rage—perhaps the result of having to create within an artistic field dominated by male muralists.²⁴ Izquierdo’s self-representation may also be connected to her own childhood memories, to the religious universe of Jalisco, to popular beliefs, and to mestizaje as a representation of Mexican national identity.

The Altar of Sorrows emerged as a tradition among Franciscan friars in Mexico in the 16th century, when it was installed only in temples; but upon growing in popularity, it was set up in squares, gardens, and within homes on the Friday of the sixth week of Lent, known as “Viernes de Dolores” (Friday of Sorrows). Although its purpose was to recall the Virgin Mary’s suffering over the Passion and Crucifixion of Christ, over time, it assumed festival characteristics, including an association with music and dance, that gave it a popular appeal. Among the objects common to traditional celebrations were paper tablecloths, white-and-purple curtains and garlands conveying purity and mourning; shiny ornaments and jars and glasses of flavored water representing the tears of the Virgin; fruits, such as oranges, symbolizing grief and bitterness; flags as symbols of hope and triumph through the Resurrection; and sprouted seeds as a metaphor for the life cycle but also associated with agriculture, flowers, and candles. For her part, the Virgin was dressed in mourning, sometimes with a heart pierced by daggers, and she had tears in her eyes and on her cheeks.²⁵

Izquierdo respected the traditional altar elements, which she incorporated in her paintings, and yet she included more personal, popular objects, such as decorated ceramic incense burners, among them. But perhaps the most distinctive characteristic is that, in contrast to the sorrowful Virgins of New Spain, Izquierdo’s Virgins are neither white nor alone. Moreover, they are not depicted in a sacred, timeless setting, but rather in a modern space that seems local, secular, and quotidian by comparison.²⁶ By painting an altar installation in a more contemporary way, Izquierdo evoked the domestic intimacy of a religious practice. In her Altar de Dolores (fig. 4), the transparency of the curtains indicates a religiosity that continues into daily life, suggesting a connection with the “beyond” that may be found in the “nearby” of Mexican popular culture. These transparent fabrics do not separate the two realms—rather, they integrate the sacred into everyday life in an intimate way, making clear that it belongs to a reality socially inscribed in the working class, as suggested by the austere frame of the painting and the image itself. According to some scholars, this painting is based on a series of inexpensive reproductions of an Italian Baroque painting that circulated widely in Mexico at the time.²⁷

Unlike Norah Borges, Izquierdo did not present herself as a believer—or even as someone interested in Catholic thought. Her altars instead responded to a popular religiosity practiced outside of the Church, one that, as anthropologist Renée de la Torre has indicated, was neither institutional nor individual, but rather social-communal. Moreover, as de la Torre points out, this popular religiosity unfolded between colonial syncretism and postcolonial hybridism. Within this context, it is not strange that Izquierdo’s Virgin has moved away from colonial, white-centered representation and is, instead, a sacred mestiza with Indigenous characteristics. This shift can be seen in Altar de Dolores and in Ofrenda del Viernes de Dolores (1943), in the Virgin’s dark skin, black eyes, and heavy features.²⁸In turn, the political gesture is explicit: As Deffebach has indicated, the images of the altar are an affirmation of popular customs that emphasizes gender, since in a time when a large part of the Mexican school, associated with the government, affirmed the nation’s virility, Izquierdo insisted that the national patrimony was also profoundly connected to Mexican women.²⁹ Izquierdo never tired of depicting Mexican women—whether sacred or profane—in her paintings and, at the same time, asserted in her own life the daring of a woman artist who transgressed the feminine codes of her age.

Miriam Inez da Silva’s Pop Sacrality

In line with conventional readings of the work of women artists, Miriam Inez da Silva’s paintings, like those of Norah Borges and María Izquierdo, have been characterized as “primitive,” “naïve,” “ingenuous,” and/or “folkloric” because they are associated with the simplicity, purity, and traditions of the state of Goiás in central Brazil. However, as curator Bernardo Mosqueira has noted, da Silva’s work is nonetheless also characterized by impurity, complexity, intention, slyness, and transgression.³⁰ In aesthetic terms, the seeming contradictions may be explained by the convergence of artists who inspired her: the Concretist Ivan Serpa, who was her teacher at the Museo de Arte Moderno (MAM) in Río de Janeiro, where she lived from the 1970s onward, and the votive painters whose works hang on the walls of the Hall of Miracles in the Igreja Matriz in Trindade, where da Silva was born and raised.³¹ There are several versions of the origin story of this small city located in the interior of Goiás. According to one, it was established in the mid-19th century by garimpeiros (miners) Constantino Rosa and Ana Xavier, a married couple who, while working there, found a medallion depicting the Holy Trinity crowning the Virgin Mary; another holds that Rosa made the medallion to justify building a chapel on his property. Whatever the case, the object attracted both the faithful and pilgrims, who prayed and gave thanks for the miracles associated with it, and it inspired the construction of a church that to this day houses one of the finest collections of Latin American votive art.³²

Steeped in this popular culture of devotion, da Silva changed its sign. She did not give thanks for miracles that occurred in the past but rather recast them in modern-day renditions on canvas. From this perspective, I analyze da Silva’s Marian representation Nossa Senhora dos Anjos (Our Lady of the Angels; fig. 5), in which the Virgin and Child are surrounded by angels playing musical instruments. In this festive scene set in a bright field of white, there is something surprising: Da Silva has depicted Mary as a modern young woman wearing red lipstick, blue eye shadow, and blush on her cheeks (as are the angels and the Baby Jesus). In turn, while in traditional images of the Virgin, she is fully robed from head to toe, da Silva’s Mary wears a dress that accentuates her slim waist and provocatively reveals her cleavage. Furthermore, with its shimmering blue fabric, puff sleeves, and sweetheart neckline, this garment corresponds to the fashion of the 1980s—as do her high heels. Nor is da Silva’s Virgin veiled; though her hair is down, it is partially pulled back in a contemporary style that distances her from traditional Marian representations. Finally, the Brazilian artist carried out a subtle inversion by clothing her central subject in a blue dress and red cloak—instead of the opposite as is traditional in the visual history of Catholicism. In this way, by transgressing and profaning the codes of Marian representation, the Virgin recovers her feminine condition, evoking the sensuality and body lost in the Christian myth of the conception, without ceasing to be a devotional symbol.

Da Silva’s Virgin makes sense within the artist’s imaginative universe, in which religious figures coexist with figures from popular culture and other forms of belief or worlds—for example, the tarot or extraterrestrials—in joyful, celebratory scenes. In this regard, da Silva’s Mary is inscribed within the chronicle of female characters—from traditional (like brides) to literary (such as Jorge Amado’s female protagonists) or legendary (like in pop culture, the Brazilian singer and songwriter Rita Lee)—that offers a more liberated version of female subjectivity, establishing what curator Kiki Mazzucchelli calls a “microsubversion of the dominant morality of the provincial middle class that rejects the manifestation of women’s sexual desire.”³³ Additionally, the artist has called into question the ideals of maternity; indeed, in da Silva’s paintings, the Virgin often appears exhausted, letting the angels help her to care for the Baby Jesus.³⁴

Da Silva’s “milagros,” or miracles, therefore, serve to dismantle the dichotomies separating the sacred and the profane, sin and holiness, purity and impurity, fantasy and reality, and of course, popular or mass culture and high culture. Regarding the latter, Mazzucchelli proposes considering da Silva’s work within the context of a Pop art all its own, that is, as a form of Pop that is “neither the Pop of postwar US consumer society, nor the politicized manifestations of Pop art that emerged in the Rio–São Paulo axis during the 1960s, but rather the ‘Pop’ of the visual culture of a largely rural country.”³⁵ In adopting this language, da Silva carried out diversions, inversions, and exaggerations that approach a camp sensibility. Through this aesthetic of irony, artifice, and exaggeration, she shaped her political commitment—as in her Seven Deadly Sins series. For example, in Calumny (fig. 6), a woman being slandered for expressing her sexuality and desire resembles the Virgin depicted in Nossa Senhora dos Anjos (see fig. 5) in not only her features and makeup but also in the neckline of her dress, while in Wrath (fig. 7), a femicide is taking place. Without moralizing or conservatism, da Silva placed religiosity at the service of a critique of gender bias and a denunciation of the forms of patriarchy in Brazilian society.

In his text on exvotos, the philosopher and art historian Georges Didi-Huberman declares that votive images seem not to exist for the art historian, since they generate unease and place the aesthetic model of history as a continuous narrative chain and a family romance of “influences” in crisis.³⁶ In a way, Miriam Inez da Silva’s interest in religious materiality has also placed her at the margins of the grand narratives of modern Latin American art—even though she knew how to combine the lessons of the avant-garde with manifestations of popular culture, rupturing the conventions of religious art, impugning the social customs and rules of the sexist behavior of her time, and creating innovations in the Brazilian artistic field, which thankfully has, in recent years, given her work greater visibility.

* * * *

In our contemporary era, room has been made for the sacred aspect of modernity, which has not died out amid secularization. But in addition, and more importantly, modern art has concerned itself with the intersections of religion, politics, and gender, allowing for emancipatory narratives and gestures outside the institutionality of the divine and thereby coming closer to daily realities. I propose that the work of Norah Borges, María Izquierdo, and Miriam Inez da Silva constitutes a vital contribution to this reflection, since all three, in different ways, used religious material as a means of artistic experimentation and a disputable narrative that they appropriated to imagine feminist ways of inhabiting the world—even when their personal positions did not coincide with this ideology. On the other hand, if one attends to the “activism of their works,” as Andrea Giunta proposes, the representations of the Virgin and the Biblical universe encountered in their paintings crack open the secular, rational agenda of modern art that, as art historian Erika Doss states, was defined by art historians and critics as “anti-religion” and “anti-religious.”³⁷ At the same time, they make it possible to call into question the patriarchal system that supports gender discrimination in both religious discourse and the field of art.

Translated from Spanish by Christopher Winks.

Spanish

“María es el mito de una mujer sin vagina”, sentencia Marcella Althaus-Reid en La teología indecente. Perversiones teológicas en el sexo, el género y la política.³⁸Con un tono polémico, pero no por eso menos certero, la teóloga queer afirma que la adoración de la Virgen en América Latina en el siglo XX no provocó una sensación de empoderamiento para las mujeres, ya que siempre requirió que se negara su cuerpo a través del misterio de su virginidad.³⁹También que se negara su voz, puesto que en sus múltiples apariciones en América Latina, y a diferencia de Europa, ella no hablaba, sino que aparecía ante sus elegidos y elegidas como una mujer de tez clara, envuelta por tela de alta factura y adornada con metales y piedras preciosas. Así, sin voz, pero con un poderoso discurso visual, su imagen cumplió dos roles que, en apariencia, resultaban contradictorios. Por un lado, fue un elemento central del dominio militar y espiritual desde la conquista hasta las recientes dictaduras militares latinoamericanas (patrocinio que se sintetizó en el apodo que asumió a partir del siglo XIX: la “Virgen Generala”).⁴⁰Por el otro, se la representó como madre y esposa ejemplar consolidando dentro del catolicismo un modelo de feminidad obediente, sin agencia ni deseo que, lejos de intervenir en el espacio público, debía recluirse en la “seguridad” del hogar ejerciendo tareas domésticas y maternales. Entre ambos extremos, la imagen de una Virgen María autoritaria se utilizaba en contra del Otro diferente o en contra de la igualdad de sus compañeras de género. La devoción mariana, de este modo, al sostener los valores de pureza, de heterosexualidad (y asexualidad), de eurocentrismo y de la maternidad como destino manifiesto, reprodujo y contribuyó a las desigualdades de clase, género y raza sobre las que se erigieron las sociedades moderno-coloniales y cristianas en Latinoamérica.

Tomando en cuenta estas representaciones de la Virgen inscriptas en un imaginario patriarcal como punto de partida, es posible rastrear otras visualidades en el arte moderno latinoamericano del siglo XX que enfrentaron el mito de una mujer sacra sin cuerpo ni voz. Entre otras, se destacan las obras de las artistas Norah Borges (Argentina, 1901-1998), María Izquierdo (México, 1902-1955) y Miriam Inez da Silva (Brasil, 1939-1996) al componer otras narrativas visuales, o contranarrativas, que no solo provocan los imperativos canónicos de representación mariana, sino que, fundamentalmente, imponen un modo alternativo y femenino de acercamiento a lo divino. Dependiendo del caso, sus aproximaciones se vuelven cercanas, afectuosas y sensibles; vivaces y populares; o corpóreas, táctiles e incluso sexuales. Sin ironía ni blasfemia pero siguiendo un impulso profanador que devuelve lo sagrado al uso común y comunitario, estas tres artistas se interesaron por la creencia religiosa y su potencialidad creativa que delinea otra forma de entender la religión en la modernidad y, al mismo tiempo, abre un espacio de experimentación estética y ética que si bien siguen el canon modernista, proponen miradas originales sobre el vínculo entre arte, política y género.⁴¹Como mostrará el análisis comparativo propuesto, el lenguaje religioso –contra todo pronóstico– habilita novedosas configuraciones afectivas, populares y corporales, que desafían el orden sexista y patriarcal vigente tanto en el campo social y religioso como en el campo artístico latinoamericano.

El misticismo cotidiano de Norah Borges

Primero poeta, luego artista, Norah Borges estudió grabado en Europa, en 1914 con el artista belga Frans Masereel, convirtiéndose –junto con su hermano Jorge Luis– en una participante activa de la vanguardia española ultraísta. Al regresar a Buenos Aires en los años veinte, esta experiencia vanguardista la acompañó y fue una participante activa del grupo de jóvenes renovadores que confluyeron en las páginas de las revistas Prisma, Proa y Martin Fierro.⁴²No obstante, a fines de esa misma década, ya casada con el crítico español Guillermo de Torre, Borges comenzó a interesarse por un arte alineado a la tendencia parisina conocida como el retorno al orden, que abogaba por la tranquilidad de las formas y contrastaba con las expresiones radicales del expresionismo; y esto coincide con su acercamiento a una incipiente intelectualidad católica que intentaba trazar lazos con escritores y artistas modernos.⁴³Por eso, su nombre aparece entre quienes exhibieron por esos años en la sala de los Cursos de Cultura Católica de Buenos Aires, al mismo tiempo que enviaba contribuciones visuales –dibujos y xilografías– a las revistas modernas del catolicismo cultural, Criterio y Número.⁴⁴En esta última publicación, aparecen “Niña vestida de primera comunión” y “Aviñón” (fig. 1), dos dibujos que, vistos en conjunto, muestran que el interés religioso de Borges no puede pensarse por fuera de la estética del retorno al orden y su vuelta a los valores clásicos, metafísicos y armónicos.⁴⁵

Si, dentro de la historiografía del arte, el retorno al orden permitió a artistas y escritores volver su mirada al pasado premoderno, a la figuración y a la búsqueda de los valores clásicos, Borges le aportó su singularidad ya que, como sugiere Patricia Artundo, su filiación contaba con la libertad de no pertenecer estrictamente a la cultura europea de posguerra.⁴⁶Esto es evidente en “Un cuadro sinóptico de la pintura”, texto publicado en la revista Martín Fierro (marzo de 1927) sin firma pero adjudicado a Borges. En este texto, los lemas de orden, proporción, contornos nítidos y formas definidas conviven con la necesidad de colores que, según la artista, “den alegría a los ojos”, como el rosa y limón, el rosa y verde veronés y el rosa salmón, junto con el llamado “color místico” que equivaldría al “color que las cosas tendrán también en el cielo”.⁴⁷Esta tendencia al pastel, que evita los contrastes cromáticos violentos, junto con su interés por los circos, los juguetes, los niños y los decoradores de carros, hicieron que los críticos varones, contemporáneos a su obra, enfatizaran el aspecto espontáneo e infantil y, por tanto femenino, de un modo condescendiente y un tanto paternalista, dejando de lado el aspecto constructivo de sus obras, guiado por las premisas de armonía y proporcionalidad.⁴⁸

Aunque la feminidad sea “una condición opresiva” para las productoras culturales, explica Griselda Pollock, los análisis de las obras deberían no solo explorar los límites sino también las maneras en que las mujeres negociaron y transformaron esa condición.⁴⁹En el caso de Borges, el trabajo con el afecto en sus obras es tanto consecuencia de los “buenos” atributos femeninos que debería cultivar una mujer de su clase social como posibilidad de una percepción, ya no visual, sino háptica. Una apuesta, de este modo, por la sensorialidad como experiencia de mundo y como forma de resistencia para algunos cuerpos (mujeres, jóvenes y niños, especialmente), los cuales, distribuidos en espacios pictóricos opresivos, forman comunidad a partir del contacto entre ellos. De esta manera, mientras que su modo de composición formal ofreció un desvío en la estética del orden al conjugar sin conflicto geometría con sentimiento, sus trabajos de impronta religiosa también se desviaron de la primacía viril y agresiva que tomó el discurso católico en esos años, al investigar recurrentemente el costado cotidiano y afectivo de la fe. De forma novedosa, Borges propone una espiritualidad apastelada, alegre y amistosa que acerque los personajes religiosos a quienes ven sus lienzos.⁵⁰A su vez, le otorga materialidad a la representación de lo sacro haciendo del cuerpo, y del contacto entre los cuerpos, un motivo recurrente.

En su escena de La anunciación (1945) (fig.3), tópico recurrente en la historia del arte occidental, Borges presenta el encuentro entre el arcángel Gabriel y la Virgen María dentro de una configuración formal moderna que, al mismo tiempo, está enmarcada dentro de un espacio familiar y afectivo.⁵¹Reunidos en un espacio íntimo, pero con tonos dorados que denotan sacralidad, la escena supone cierta jerarquía entre los personajes, ya que María está sentada y mira hacia arriba otorgándole mayor importancia al arcángel y su noticia. Sin embargo, a diferencia de otras composiciones, Borges representa esta escena sin necesidad de recurrir a símbolos o elementos que remitan a ese episodio bíblico; el arcángel Gabriel ni siquiera tiene alas ni viste de manera distinta a un mortal. De hecho, su vestimenta comparte cierta contemporaneidad con la de la Virgen María, que no solo no está representada con los tradicionales colores azul y rojo, sino que porta un peinado moderno y no utiliza velo, tal como lo haría una joven en la primera mitad del siglo XX. De esta manera, Borges vuelve cotidiano un mito fundante de la historia de la civilización occidental, acercándolo a los espectadores, quienes deben prestar atención al título para entender que no se trata simplemente de una charla entre amigos, ¿o amigas? La ambigüedad genérica es un rasgo presente en esta y otras de sus obras. La investigadora Roberta Quance ha señalado la presencia de una “androginia femenina” en sus pinturas a través de seres vagamente afeminados insertos dentro de un mundo rosa, como sucede con los amantes o los novios, o con sus ángeles.⁵²Sin proclamarse feminista y sin pretender hacer una reflexión de género, Borges desestabiliza los límites sexo-genéricos y, en sintonía, otorga protagonismo a la afectividad, esa cualidad marginalizada por la estructura sexista de la sociedad moderna que cobrará relevancia política décadas más tarde.⁵³

A través de una gramática del amor que no le teme al cliché romántico, los cuerpos representados se tocan o acarician en muchas de sus imágenes –incluso en el caso de La anunciación, la disposición de los brazos podría entenderse como el signo de un potencial abrazo. Enfrentando la relación entre emocionalidad, debilidad e inferioridad femenina, Borges reafirmó lo femenino en sus cuadros, en contraste con otras mujeres de la vanguardia que, como sugiere Quance, se asimilaban a los modos y actividades masculinas para “hombrearse” con los demás artistas (como Maruja Mallo o Frida Kahlo).⁵⁴Por ejemplo, en su obra titulada Holy Week (Semana Santa) (fig.4), una pintura en la que los personajes bíblicos se vuelven identificables por los símbolos que cargan, sus rasgos no se diferencian mucho entre sí. La Verónica, José de Arimatea y Nicodemo poseen rostros ovales, facciones suaves, ojos negros y grandes, sotanas de colores pasteles y una misma disposición icónica. Sin embargo, la representación de la escena y los personajes está más cercana de un contexto moderno-cotidiano, que a la historización y sacralización del catolicismo.

El universo apastelado de lo privado, lo místico, lo íntimo y afectivo de Borges convivió con la armonía racional de sus composiciones también guiada por una impronta espiritual. Lo religioso, en este sentido, es forma y motivo estético que acercan lo sobrenatural a las prácticas cotidianas, contribuyendo llamativamente a desbaratar los binarismos jerárquicos (sacro/profano, razón/corazón, moderno/primitivo, femenino/masculino, entre otros), pilares de un relato moderno occidental en el que las (artistas) mujeres se vieron excluidas.

Mestizar lo divino: los altares de María Izquierdo

María Cenobia Izquierdo nació en San Juan de los Lagos, Jalisco, un lugar de peregrinaje que se llenaba de devotos en busca de milagros. Se mudó a la Ciudad de México en la década de los veinte, con su marido e hijos. Ingresó a la Escuela Nacional de Bellas Artes en 1928, donde tiempo después Diego Rivera fue nombrado director. Cuenta la historiadora de arte Nancy Deffebach, que Rivera elogió los cuadros de Izquierdo en una exposición de estudiantes sin saber que ella los había pintado y que se sorprendió al enterarse de que era una mujer. Como consecuencia de este reconocimiento, pudo organizar su primera exposición individual en la Galería de Arte Moderno en noviembre de 1929, pero debió abandonar sus estudios ya que fue víctima de los celos y agresiones de sus compañeros que no entendían por qué ella era considerada la única estudiante con talento.⁵⁵Separada, compartió atelier y estableció un vínculo amoroso con Rufino Tamayo; ambos se relacionaron con los jóvenes de vanguardia conocidos como los Contemporáneos, quienes se oponían al discurso nacionalista y defendían la internacionalización del arte y la literatura mexicanos.⁵⁶No por casualidad Octavio Paz, entre otros escritores, reprodujeron, en la década del treinta, algunas imágenes de Izquierdo en la revista Taller como una forma de homenaje a esa pintora “heterodoxa”, cuyo arte, recuerda Paz cincuenta años más tarde, “estaba muy lejos de la pintura ideológica de los muralistas”.⁵⁷

Siguiendo la misma línea, la autora mexicana Elena Poniatowska sugiere que Izquierdo resultaba más mexicana que Frida Kahlo porque no era “folklórica sino esencial”, ya que pintaba naturalezas muertas, soperas, sirenas, campesinos, casas infantiles, manteles, autorretratos, en sus palabras, “una naturaleza viva con huachinango.”⁵⁸Junto con estos elementos, los personajes femeninos que tienen una presencia recurrente en sus cuadros (como bailarinas, equilibristas, trapecistas y domadoras del universo circense o desnudos femeninos) tienen roles activos y, como sugiere Jean Franco, contrastaban con las representaciones femeninas de los afamados muralistas mexicanos que usualmente otorgaban a la figura femenina un papel secundario y pasivo.⁵⁹

   Su serie de altares para la Virgen de Dolores en la que trabajó desde 1943 hasta 1948 –casi al final de su vida– canaliza su interés por el arte popular y religioso del siglo XIX a través de representaciones femeninas que toman características físicas de la propia artista. Según apunta Poniatowska, estas vírgenes portan el rostro de Izquierdo y la curvatura de sus labios, expresando una dureza y una rabia interior contenida, posiblemente un producto de crear en un campo artístico dominado por los varones del muralismo.⁶⁰También su autofiguración puede relacionarse con la vuelta a la infancia, al universo religioso de Jalisco, a las creencias populares y al mestizaje como representación de la identidad nacional mexicana.

Surgido como tradición en México en el siglo XVI con los frailes franciscanos, el Altar de Dolores pasa de colocarse solamente en templos a hacerlo en plazas, jardines y dentro de los hogares el sexto viernes de cuaresma, conocido como el “Viernes de Dolores”. Si bien su función era recordar el sufrimiento de la Virgen María por la pasión y muerte de su hijo Jesucristo, con el paso del tiempo comienza a tomar características festivas que lo popularizan y lo acompañan de música y bailes. Se utilizaban manteles de papel, cortinas y guirnaldas en blanco y morado que traían las ideas de pureza y luto; adornos brillantes, jarras y vasos de agua de diferentes sabores que representaban las lágrimas de la Virgen; frutas, como la naranja que remitía a la amargura y el dolor; banderas como símbolos de esperanza y triunfo por la Resurrección; y semillas germinadas como metáfora del ciclo de la vida, pero también en asociación con la agricultura, flores y velas. Por su parte, la Virgen viste de luto, a veces con un corazón clavado con dagas, siempre con lágrimas en sus ojos y mejillas.⁶¹

Izquierdo respeta los elementos tradicionales de los altares, los cuales aparecen en sus pinturas, e incluye dentro de estos también objetos de artesanía popular como apuesta personal –por ejemplo, sahumadores de cerámica decorados. Pero quizá el rasgo más distintivo es que, a diferencia de las vírgenes dolorosas novohispánicas, las vírgenes de Izquierdo no son blancas ni están solas. Tampoco están en un ambiente ni sacro ni atemporal, sino en uno cercano, secular y cotidiano.⁶²Al recrear la instalación de un altar a través de la pintura siguiendo cánones modernos, Izquierdo opta por concentrarse en la intimidad doméstica de esa práctica religiosa. En su altar de Dolores, la transparencia de las cortinas marca una religiosidad que continúa en la vida cotidiana, permitiendo una conexión con el “más allá” que, en realidad, se encuentra en un “más acá” de la cultura popular mexicana. Las telas transparentes no separan, sino que integran lo sagrado a la vida íntima, de modo que es evidente que corresponde a una realidad inscrita socialmente en la clase trabajadora sugerido por el marco austero del cuadro de la Virgen y la misma imagen que, según algunos estudiosos, está basada en la reproducción de una pintura barroca italiana que circuló masivamente en ediciones baratas en México.⁶³

A diferencia de Norah Borges, Izquierdo no se presenta como creyente ni está interesada en el pensamiento católico. Sus altares responden a una religiosidad popular que se practica por fuera de la Iglesia y que, por tanto, como ha señalado la antropóloga Renée de la Torre, no es ni institucional ni individual, sino social-comunitaria. Asimismo, de la Torre puntualiza que esta religiosidad popular se desenvuelve entre los sincretismos coloniales y los hibridismos poscoloniales, y no es extraño entonces que la Virgen que pinta Izquierdo se aleje de la representación colonial y blancocéntrica, proponiendo una imagen sacra-mestiza que recupera rasgos indígenas, como se ve en Altar de Dolores y también en Ofrenda del Viernes de Dolores (1943), a través de la piel morena, los ojos negros y las facciones gruesas.⁶⁴A su vez, el gesto político es explícito: como ha señalado Defferach, las imágenes de los altares son una afirmación de las costumbres populares que hace hincapié en el género, ya que en una época en la que gran parte de la escuela mexicana, asociada con el gobierno, afirmaba la virilidad de la nación, Izquierdo insistía en que el patrimonio nacional también estaba profundamente vinculado a las mujeres mexicanas.⁶⁵Profanas o sacras, no se cansó de representarlas en sus cuadros, asumiendo al mismo tiempo en su propia vida la osadía de una artista mujer que transgrede los códigos femeninos de su época.

La sacralidad pop de Miriam Inez da Silva

Siguiendo las convenciones de lectura impuestas a las artistas, la obra de Miriam Inez da Silva, al igual que la de Norah Borges y María Izquierdo, fue categorizada como “primitiva”, “naif” e “ingenua” y/o “popular”, porque apelaba a la simplicidad, la pureza y la tradición del interior del estado brasileño de Goiás, en el centro del país. Sin embargo, según el curador Bernardo Mosqueira, hay impureza, complejidad, intención, malicia y transgresión en su trabajo.⁶⁶En términos estéticos, las contradicciones que crea su proyecto artístico en el sistema de categorización del arte podría explicarse por la convergencia de dos artistas que la inspiraron, según ella misma afirma: por un lado, el concretista Ivan Serpa, que fue su profesor en el Museo de Arte Moderno (MAM) de Río de Janeiro, ciudad en la que vive desde los años sesenta; por el otro, los artistas votivos, cuyas obras colgaban en las paredes de la Sala de los Milagros de la Iglesia Matriz en la ciudad de Trindade, donde nació y creció.⁶⁷Hay varias versiones sobre el origen de esta pequeña ciudad del interior de Goiás. Una cuenta que fue fundada a mediados del siglo XIX por una pareja de garimpeiros (mineros), Constantino Rosa y Ana Xavier, quienes encontraron una medalla de la Santísima Trinidad coronando a la Virgen María; otra versión sostiene que fue Rosa quien fabricó la pieza para justificar su deseo de construir una capilla en su propiedad. En cualquiera de los dos casos, la medalla atrajo devotos y romerías, que rezaban y agradecían los milagros, y también condujo a la construcción de una iglesia que, aún hoy, alberga una de las mayores colecciones de arte votivo latinoamericano.⁶⁸

Impregnada de esta devoción popular, da Silva le cambia el signo: no agradece a milagros ya sucedidos, sino que los crea en su tela para que sucedan efectivamente en la realidad. Desde esta óptica se podría analizar la singular representación mariana que da Silva realiza de Nuestra Señora de los Ángeles (fig. 6). Recortándose dentro de un fondo claro limitado por una moldura propia, se ve, como es de esperar, a la Virgen rodeada de ángeles. Estos la festejan, le cantan y tocan música con diferentes instrumentos. Pero dentro de esa escena festiva, algo llama la atención: da Silva representa a la Virgen como una mujer joven maquillada con labial rojo, sombra azul en sus ojos y rubor en sus mejillas (al igual que los ángeles y el niño Jesús). A su vez, si tradicionalmente las vírgenes suelen ser representadas completamente cubiertas, del cuello a los pies, la virgen de da Silva porta un vestido azul que marca la figura de su cuerpo y un escote que muestra provocativamente el borde superior de sus pechos. Además, ese vestido corresponde a la moda de los años ochenta, de tela azul tornasolado, las mangas abullonadas, el escote corazón y los tacones altos. La virgen de da Silva no porta velo; su cabello está semirrecogido, simulando asimismo una tendencia contemporánea, y alejándose de la convencionalidad de la representación mariana. Finalmente, la artista brasileña realiza una sutil inversión al pintarla con vestido azul y manto rojo, en lugar de mantener la iconografía utilizada en la historia visual del catolicismo. De esta manera, al transgredir y profanar los códigos de representación mariana, la virgen recupera su condición femenina, representadas por el cuerpo y la sensualidad, perdidos en el mito cristiano de la concepción sin por ello dejar de ser un símbolo de devoción.

Sin dudas, la virgen cobra sentido dentro del universo imaginario de da Silva en el que los personajes religiosos conviven con los de la cultura popular y con otras formas de creencia –como el tarot o los extraterrestres–, siempre dispuestos en escenas festivas, celebratorias y gozosas. En este sentido, esta imagen mariana se inscribe en una serie de personajes femeninos, tradicionales –como las novias– y populares –como las protagonistas de las novela de Jorge Amado– o masivas –como Rita Lee–, que ofrece una versión más liberada de la subjetividad femenina, estableciendo una “microsubversión del moralismo vigente en la clase media provinciana que repudia la manifestación del deseo sexual en la mujer.”⁶⁹Incluso también se pone en disputa la propia idea de maternidad, ya que muchas veces la virgen se muestra exhausta, dejando que los ángeles ayuden en la tarea de cuidar al niño Jesús.⁷⁰

Los “milagros” que pinta Miriam da Silva, entonces, apuestan por desarmar las dicotomías que separan lo sagrado de lo profano, el pecado de la santidad, la pureza de la impureza, la fantasía de lo real, y, por supuesto, lo popular y masivo de la alta cultura. Sobre esto último, la curadora Kiki Mazzucchelli propone pensar la obra de da Silva dentro del diseño de un arte “pop” singular, y lo distingue de otras corrientes al aclarar: “no el pop de la sociedad de consumo estadounidense de posguerra, ni tampoco las manifestaciones politizadas del arte pop que surgieron en el eje Río-San Pablo en la década de 1960, sino el ‘pop’ de la cultura visual de un país en su mayoría rural.” Adoptando este lenguaje, la artista brasileña realiza desvíos, inversiones y exageraciones que la acercarán a la sensibilidad camp.⁷¹A través de esta estética de la ironía, el artificio y la exageración, da Silva moldea su compromiso político, como se pone en evidencia en su serie de los pecados capitales. Mientras que, por ejemplo, en la imagen sobre la calumnia (fig.6), un personaje femenino es víctima de la difamación por su pose sexual de mujer deseante y sexual –que se asemeja a la figura de la virgen en sus rasgos, maquillaje y escote –; en la imagen sobre la ira (fig.7) se presenta directamente un caso de femicidio. Sin moralismo ni conservadurismo, la religiosidad se pone al servicio de la crítica de género y la denuncia de las formas del patriarcado en la sociedad brasileña.

En su texto sobre los exvotos, el historiador del arte y filósofo Georges Didi-Huberman afirma que las imágenes votivas parecen no existir ya que generan malestar y una puesta en crisis del modelo estético que piensa la historia como una cadena narrativa continua y una novela familiar de “influencias”.⁷²De alguna manera, este interés de Miriam Inez da Silva por la materialidad religiosa también la colocó al margen de los grandes relatos de la historia del arte moderno latinoamericano, aun cuando supo combinar las enseñanzas del arte de vanguardia con las manifestaciones de la cultura popular generando rupturas a las convenciones del arte religioso, impugnaciones a las costumbres sociales y reglas de conducta sexista de su época e innovaciones en el campo artístico brasileño que, gratamente, en los últimos años ha dado mayor visibilidad a su trabajo.

* * * *

Nuestra contemporaneidad ha sabido darle un lugar al costado sagrado de lo moderno, que no se extinguió pese a las teorías fatalistas de la secularización. Pero, además, y más importante, el arte moderno se ha interesado por el cruce entre religiosidades, política y género, permitiendo narrativas y gestos emancipadores por fuera de la institucionalidad de lo divino, y acercándose así a las realidades de la cotidianidad. Propongo entonces que la obra de Norah Borges, María Izquierdo y Miriam Inez da Silva constituye un aporte imprescindible a esa reflexión, ya que las tres, de diferentes maneras, eligieron el material religioso como una vía de experimentación artística y como un relato que podía ponerse en disputa, del cual se apropiaron para imaginar modos feministas de habitar el mundo, más allá de que sus posicionamientos personales no coincidieran con ese ideario. Si se atiende, en cambio, al “activismo de sus obras”, como propone Andrea Giunta, las representaciones de la virgen y del universo bíblico que se encuentran en sus cuadros agrietan la agenda secular y racional del arte moderno que, como sostiene la historiadora de arte Erika Doss, fue definido por críticos e historiadores del arte como “antirreligión” y “antirreligioso”.⁷³ Y, al mismo tiempo, hacen posible la puesta en cuestión del sistema patriarcal que sostiene la discriminación de género tanto en el discurso religioso como en el campo de las artes.

The post Female Approaches to the Divine: The Marian Representations of Norah Borges, María Izquierdo, and Miriam Inez da Silva / Acercamientos femeninos a lo divino. Las representaciones marianas de Norah Borges, María Izquierdo y Miriam Inez da Silva appeared first on post.

Bombay cinema looms large over media and cinema studies in India even though the history of the Bombay film industry is more recent than the history of film culture in the Subcontinent. The Bombay film industry as we know it today consolidated during the 1950s in the wake of the massive political and economic restructuring that followed the Partition of British India into India and Pakistan. Much before erstwhile Bombay became the prime filmmaking hub of independent India, film marketing, spectatorship, and criticism were already thriving practices in late colonial India (Fig. 1).

The rich history of pre-Independence film culture in India, however, remains understudied, and this has a lot to do with the difficulties of tracing non-textual and ephemeral popular-cultural forms through predominantly textual institutional archives. Recent film-history studies have drawn attention to the limitations of relying on sparse and badly preserved film archives, and scholars have instead begun to draw on a patchwork of sources, leaning particularly into the vast “parallel archives of paper” across vernacular languages to write deeper and more connected histories of print and cinema publics in India.¹ Adding to this web of scholarship, I examine three early twentieth-century Urdu film magazines published during the 1930s—The Film Review, Film Star, and Filmistan—as gateways into early film culture in India.² It was during the 1930s that film culture took off in earnest in the Subcontinent as the decade heralded the rise of the “talkies,” which introduced sound and, therefore, spoken language to Indian cinema (see Fig. 1). The decade thus marks a crucial moment of transition not only in film history but also in the trajectory of Urdu in twentieth-century India, which had by then become the subject of a reactionary language politics led by literary elites that was shrinking the boundaries of the Urdu public. Circulating in this sociopolitical context, film magazines bring into focus how Urdu was instrumental in cohering regionally diffused early film production into a shared and mutually legible film culture, and cinema, in turn, widened conceptions of the twentieth-century Urdu public by animating modes of viewing, listening, and speaking that blurred binaries of “high” and “low” culture in different ways.

Film Culture and the Urdu Public

The cover pages often offer the first clues about the audiences Urdu film magazines were addressing. The Film Review, established in 1930 in Calcutta, defined itself as the film magazine of mashriqi (eastern) India (Fig. 2), but this strong regional claim did not restrict the cinema public it was addressing. Publicity material across the magazines shows that the pre-Independence film-production business during the 1930s was scattered across a range of locations: Calcutta, Lahore, Bombay, and to some extent Delhi were the cities where noteworthy production companies were based (Fig. 3).

There is no indication of regional insularity in the way that the films were presented in Urdu magazines since, regardless of origin or language, they were framed as part of a wider market of “Hindustani” cinema—a collective imagination that overlapped with Urdu’s transregional spread as a lingua franca. Both the pseudonymous stylings of Filmistan’s editor as “Hindi” and the title dedication of the magazine evoke this transregional “Hindustani” imagination that is woven together by Urdu (Fig. 4).       

Moreover, the magazines themselves originated from regions just as disparate as the film industries they marketed—ranging from Calcutta (The Film Review and Film Star) to Lahore (Filmistan)—drawing attention to the expansive regional spread of the Urdu-speaking cinema-viewing publics being addressed. For instance, an advertisement in The Film Review alerting readers to the publication’s vast circulation network lists not only the Indian and foreign agencies but also the railway book stalls selling the magazine. These extended from Dhaka (Dacca) in the east which comprises present-day Bangladesh all the way up to Peshawar on the northwestern reaches of what is now Pakistan (Fig. 5).

The frequent and generous use of English across Urdu film magazines—with advertisements, film publicity material, and even cover pages of Urdu film magazines often appearing entirely in English—suggests a substantial transnational and multilingual audience. The tagline at the bottom of the page shown in Fig. 5 urging buyers to pick up a copy for their journey indicates that the magazines were largely ephemeral objects meant to be consumed as quick, on-the-go, pulpy pleasure reads. Finally, the ad’s emphasis on railway stalls as primary nodes of distribution and the explicit framing of consumers as travelers pointedly evokes an Urdu cinema public that was just as mobile and regionally porous as it was multilingual.

Advertisements targeting emerging middle-class interests were certainly not features unique to film-oriented magazines, as Urdu literary publications carried eclectic and visually evocative advertisements for new commodities and technologies that were visually keyed into the cosmopolitan character and consumerist impulses of Urdu periodical culture (Fig. 6).

Participating in the same consumer-aware print culture, Urdu film magazines displayed a much more direct and transparent understanding of their audience as consumers, and at the same time, films tended to be presented explicitly as commodities. This can, for example, be seen in a recurring ad template for Calcutta’s Krishna Film Company in The Film Review that extols the good quality of its film products to potential exhibitors, while also playfully evoking the mazah (pleasure) of a crowd mobbing the theater’s ticket window (Fig. 7). By evoking filmgoers as unruly masses, the ad also encapsulates thematic tensions in film-culture discourse, examined in the following section, which show that even as film magazines leaned into cinema as a trade and business, the way they imagined cinema-viewing publics was laden with both excitement and anxiety about public cultures derived from the bazaar, street, and quotidian life.

Gender, Urdu, and the Film Bazaar

In Filmistan’s 1932 afsana (story) issue, a regular opinion column by an anonymous critic vehemently derides filmmakers for including unnecessary bazaari (commercial songs) to ensure their films’ success.³ The column exemplifies how textual discourses on twentieth-century Urdu film magazines played into and perpetuated respectability politics by deriding the corrupting influences of the bazaar. Their visual culture, however, simultaneously undercuts this moralizing by magnifying the bazaar-associated sensibilities that had been absorbed into films. Relying heavily on cinema’s visuality, film magazines made generous use of glossy film stills, which is most evident in the great emphasis the publications put on being ba-tasveer (illustrated), that is, on including image supplements that usually carried half-tone photo blocks. The Film Review’s aforementioned full-page advertisement for its distribution agencies leads with the availability of half-tone photographic stills, establishing the inclusion of pictures as a key attraction and selling point for the magazine itself (see Fig. 5).

The most notable element of Urdu film magazines’ visual culture are the subjects of these images: female performers (dancers, singers, actresses, etc.) who are featured variously, in staged studio photographs, film stills, and illustrations (Figs. 8–10).

The illustrated cover of a 1931 issue of Filmistan’s special afsana issue (Fig. 8) depicts a provocatively dressed and sensuously postured woman as the literal conduit between literature and cinema. This imagery captures the sharply classed and gendered anxieties that films triggered by steadily blurring the boundaries between literary/“high” and popular/“low” cultures. The image underlines the contradictory impulses of Urdu print culture through the 1930s, when ideas of competitive nationalisms and social reformism awkwardly jostled for space with depictions of vanity, indulgence, leisure, and consumerism.

The ubiquity of feminine imagery attests that films made women, who in general had thus far been reduced to passive subjects of reformist and nationalist agendas, increasingly and dramatically more visible in the public sphere. Since the actresses of early Hindustani films usually came from courtesan lineages, they were socially marginalized, but cinema enabled them to craft something akin to professional identities.

O one from this humble earth, where is your destination?

Do you come from within four walls (home) or the market?

If you are honorable, then you are a beacon of beauty without question;

and if not, then get off the stage, for you are simply without shame.⁴

Apart from invoking the gendered private-versus-public divide that is typical of nineteenth century nationalist-reformist discourse, the poem specifically shows that the bazaar emerged as the lynchpin for anxieties about cinema in general and performing women in particular.

Conversely, conservative attitudes were also satirized in Urdu film magazines that gave voice to a range of opinions and commentary, including expressions of the new indulgences and pleasures that films afforded. A frequent satirical column titled “Gulabi Urdu” (Garbled Urdu) in The Film Review in 1931, penned anonymously under the moniker “Mulla Rumuzi,” plays with notions of adab (refinement) and sharafat (respectability) and mocks elite perceptions of cinema as the bawdy circus for the gawars (uncultured masses).⁵

Another article by an anonymous author in Filmistan expresses the exciting new modes of sociality that films were shaping through the trope of tafrih (enjoyment).⁶ Adopting the perspective of a young male flaneur enjoying the big city, the article describes the distinct pleasure of watching thrilling adventures in a cinema as part of a crowd. Cinema here is characterized as a form of tafrih for a rangeen pasand tabqa, or a colorful (leisure-loving) social group, a mildly derisive descriptor identifying the typical cinemagoer as a city slicker with money to burn. In addition to being a specifically urbane pastime, cinema-going is also cast by the article as a gendered activity that imagines the cinema theater as a space occupied exclusively by men.  

At the same time, the vision of film viewing as an avenue for male homosociality conjures tropes of early modern literary traditions like rekhti poetry, particularly the shahr ashob genre, which describes a young urbane dandy exploring the city and romancing young male paramours. Immersed in sensuality, rekhti poems express all manner of bodily and sensory pleasure with witty abandon, and they explicitly evoke homosexual desire.⁷ Such transgressive themes were derided by male literary elites whose views channeled Victorian ideals on gender and sexuality and sealed off Urdu literary genres into separate silos of “masculine” and “feminine.”⁸ Despite the mapping of these notions and attitudes onto early Hindustani cinema, cinema and film culture went a long way in allowing Urdu to transgress and transcend text-centered discourses in the twentieth century.

These examples show that Urdu film magazines, in both form and content, offer considerable insights that deepen the history of both film and Urdu in late colonial India and also highlight how they intersect and influence each other. The tensions in textual-visual discourses in Urdu film magazines reveal that cinema’s embrace of the bazaar in particular—as a space of social, cultural, linguistic, and gendered mixing and as a site of tafrih—animated uses, arenas, and publics for Urdu beyond the literary at a time when dominant discourses advocated for excluding entire vocabularies, registers, and indeed non-elite social worlds from the Urdu public. Early Urdu film magazines and other remnants of popular-culture ephemera therefore deserve to be analyzed more closely. Rather than simply folding its postcolonial history into totalizing narratives of national language politics and institutional erasures, Urdu film magazines have the potential to throw open discussions on the alternate lives of Urdu in twentieth-century India.

The post Imagining <em>Filmistan</em>: Urdu Magazines and the <em> Film Bazaar</em> in Twentieth-Century India appeared first on post.

This edition of post Presents was part of the 2023 C-MAP Seminar: Transversal Orientations III. The 2023 C-MAP Seminar was organized by Nancy Dantas, C-MAP Africa Fellow, Inga Lāce, C-MAP Central and Eastern Europe Fellow, Wong Binghao,
C-MAP Asia Fellow, Julián Sánchez González, Cisneros Institute Research Fellow,
Elena Pérez-Ardá López, C-MAP Coordinator, and Rattanamol Singh Johal, Assistant Director, International Program, with support from Marta Dansie, Department Coordinator, International Program, and Jay Levenson, Director, International Program. It was presented in collaboration with the Patricia Phelps de Cisneros Research Institute for the Study of Art from Latin America at MoMA.

The post post Presents: Unsettled Dust—Archives, Epistemologies, Images appeared first on post.

In Campesinos Testifying, Palace of Justice, Cuzco (c. 1929) by Peruvian photographer Martín Chambi (1891–1973), six Andean peasants huddle together at the Cuzco courthouse—four on a wooden bench and two standing behind them. Behind this group, two men are seated along a wall and, to their right, two functionaries sit at a table, one bent over his paperwork. Receding into the background of the room, these four men in suits underscore the peasants’ incongruous presence in a government office. The stripes of their rough ponchos contrast with the faded floral carpet beneath their bare feet. Bearing expressions that flicker from impassive to imploring, obdurate to contrite, the peasants meet the camera’s lens with serious gazes. Scant information about this arresting—and possibly arrested—group exists beyond the title of the photograph. Who are these people and what brought them to court? The image alone provides no answer.

Active between 1908 and 1954, Chambi photographed widely in the southern Andes of Peru, achieving significant renown in his own day. Born to an Indigenous family in a small highland town in the province of Puno, Chambi was a native speaker of Quechua, the most common Indigenous language spoken in the Andes. His skill behind the camera afforded him social mobility in a region riven by racial and economic inequality. Having first laid eyes on the apparatus as a teenager outside the gold mine where his late father had labored, Chambi apprenticed with the photographer Max T. Vargas (1874–1959) in Arequipa before opening his own photography studio in Cuzco. There, in the former Inca capital, Chambi made portraits of the middle and upper classes; shot scenes of urban and rural life in the city and its surroundings; and documented architectural and archaeological sites. At the time of his death in 1973, Chambi’s archive contained some thirty thousand negatives; in 1978, his son Víctor Chambi, collaborated with U.S. photographer Edward Ranney (born 1942) on a restoration project. The following year, in 1979, they selected a group of negatives to reprint for an exhibition that traveled to The Museum of Modern Art and subsequently entered MoMA’s collection.¹

Campesinos Testifying is presently on view at the Museum in a collection gallery related to Indigenism, a movement of considerable cultural and political influence across Latin America in the early twentieth century that sought to redress the oppression of Indigenous peoples. The Peruvian Marxist critic José Carlos Mariátegui offered one of the first literary theories of Indigenism, describing it as an emergent yet transitional genre, as a prerequisite for a future literature written by and for Indigenous people. “Indigenist literature cannot give us a rigorously veristic version of the indio,” he wrote, in the parlance of the time. “It must idealize and stylize the indio. Nor can it give us its proper spirit, for it is still a literature of mestizos.”² In these few lines Mariátegui makes two foundational observations about Indigenist art: first, that Indigenism is the prerogative of non-Indigenous or mixed-race intellectuals; second, that it aspires to representation but not realism. As an artist of Indigenous heritage and a photographer, Chambi challenged these precepts, even collaborating with Indigenist intellectuals who often chose or commissioned his work to illustrate their writings.³ A photograph like Campesinos Testifying, which has lost the original context of its production, demonstrates how Chambi’s work might speak for itself.

Campesinos Testifying pictures a trial, but researchers have yet to find written records that, corresponding to the event, confirm whether the peasants were defendants or plaintiffs. Literary historian Jorge Coronado located a descendant of one lawyer pictured in the photograph,who alleged that the peasants were on trial for attempting to assassinate a powerful landowner.⁴ Uprisings plagued plantations and farms in Peru’s rural provinces throughout the 1920s, and the press sensationalized particularly violent episodes, stoking elites’ fears of revolution.⁵ But Andean peasants also employed nonviolent methods as they resisted the exploitation of their labor and dispossession of their lands under the feudal structure of the agricultural economy. They petitioned local and federal authorities, for example, attempting to claim rights granted by the 1920 constitution, in which the state first legally recognized Indigenous communities—even as the justice system proved inadequate in the face of the political influence of wealthy landowners.⁶

In Chambi’s time, photography was perceived as a privileged mode of objective representation. During the nineteenth century, photographs gained the status of evidence through their role in the development of criminology, forensics, and surveillance.⁷ Campesinos Testifying shirks this social function. Even before the loss of context rendered the image ambiguous, it had failed to serve as a testimonial, revealing the camera to be an unreliable witness. According to historian Alfredo Flores Galindo, when called to court to testify against their interests, Andean peasants occasionally refused to speak. ⁸ As a mute record, perhaps Chambi’s photograph mirrors this strategy, its silence intentional rather than circumstantial.

The author wishes to thank Beverly Adams for facilitating this publication, as well as Horacio Ramos, Hannah Rose Blakeley and Fedor Karmanov for thinking through it with her.

Campesinos Testifying was on view at the Museum in a collection gallery related to Indigenism, a movement of considerable cultural and political influence across Latin America in the early twentieth century that sought to redress the oppression of Indigenous peoples.

The post <strong>Bearing Witness: Martín Chambi’s <em> Campesinos Testifying, Palace of Justice, Cuzco </em>(c. 1929)</strong> appeared first on post.

In the race to fill the gaps in global art historiography, exhibition histories have recently emerged as justifiable sources in recuperating local, regional, and national art histories. They cross-reference exhibitions, the sites and events of artistic creation, with institutional memories and stable discourses. Any exhibitionary impulse of artists, curators, and other cultural professionals is extracted to formulate arguments for and case studies of the sufficiency of art ecologies—if not to serve as a referendum for a major art history. The tides of interest in re-presenting these exhibitions are initiated in the practice of curatorial monumentalizing, the legible registers of academia, and the legitimate data produced by archival exercises. These procedures generate new information that sheds light on formerly inaccessible details of artistic production, patterns of exchange, and public engagement. Exhibitions of works of art are believed to produce these materials. From this sampling, artists and curators validate the conception and use of the visual arts.

Within the current grasp of exhibition history, every exhibition is a tool kit, a restoration laboratory, and a gravesite of the historian’s archaeological adventure. Art exhibitions now school empiricist art histories in historical time; the north of a compass, the public showcase of art—be it solo or group, thematic or geographic, museum- or DIY-initiated, biennial-ized or commercialized—directs the assembly of missing documents by following the traces of creative itineraries in order to reconstruct the wholes of artwork, artist, curator, gallery, art school, magazine or journal, or museum within the schedules of modernity or contemporaneity. What happens, however, when such a constellation is left uninterpreted, when all other neighboring art-historical pathways are cut off from it?

Such art-historical absence is not entirely unthought of in creativity. Considered by some to be a capricious diagnosis of art’s realities or phenomena, this condition has since set forth demands for a thorough review of its manifestation in circuits and biographies of appearance.  On the one hand, the demand comes from a normative understanding of an exhibition: it synthesizes the nature of the artistic in public exposure, when characteristics of art are technically approached via the instruments of exhibition-making. As we experience art on display, the artistic must be autonomously exhibitionary. On the other hand, when I close my eyes in the middle of a room filled with works of art, I should be able to distinguish this room from one that is empty or does not otherwise contain any traits of the artistic. This sensed quality, deemed an “apparition” by laypeople, is something that we art professionals have never granted to art. We expect the artistic to come to us in the form of objects distilled by exhibition-making. Yet the more sophisticated version of this arrival emits artistic ambience that envelops our senses. Thus, the exhibition of art crystallizes our experience, rendering the art knowable, convertible, and useful.  

A room of artistic’s own is not only the hyperbolic tendency to make space and time. It is also an artistic demand that sites the exhibitionary outside the qualities of artistic being and becoming. Likewise, the practice of exhibition-making has since acted as a synthetic operation that reunites the work of art with the descriptive ideas of exhibition, a historical tool in its own right and ideally collaborative in terms of progressive art history. Exhibitions that organize tools in meaning-making and historical distance conditionally endow conciliatory power to the historicization of exhibitions: first, the task of interpreting the contents of the world in art, and second, the predisposition to discursify the experience of the exhibitionary in art. The room that can be leased to this essay is necessarily—and at the very least must be—miraculous.

Today it is hard to traffic the word “miracle” in contemporary writing since it once found clarity in terms of religious indoctrination. Especially in the rituals of criticism, the reach of such divination, if I could be allowed to convene that term here, in the threshold of critique liquidates its ambiguity in our psychic borders separating the artistic, the exhibitionary, and the curatorial. Miracles can disambiguate our beliefs. They doubt our kinship to the world. They precipitate history into the faithful that writes them all together. I am one of the believers, and so in this short essay, I will cite the documentation of a miracle as the heritage that we anticipate in living with our belief systems (including art).

The miracle is the Marian apparition that took place in the city of Lipa, Batangas, in 1948, and its documentation is the series of articles covering it, which are lifted from the pages of the Mindanao Cross, a local newspaper founded by Catholic Oblate missionaries in Cotabato City in 1948. The former contested to be supernatural while the latter is presumed to be non-art-historical: these two identities could very well be signatures of a miraculous event that sample the concept of exhibitionary heritage. The miraculous, cut from its contextual sources via its documentation, is in effect transplanted into an external, nonobjective medium. The scope of this essay, however, will neither widen to incite new propositions nor contract to deepen contextual analysis;¹ most likely foundational, it will remain within the problem of interpretation of what we have already received in the artistic, the curatorial, and the exhibitionary. The motion secondary to this one legislates exhibitionary heritage into an art-historical problem. The range of my tasks is thereby determined in the theoretical grid that howls: We all deserve miracles.

Reports of the Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace in the Mindanao Cross (1948–50)

A.

In illuminating the overburdened tasks above, one can critically unsettle the objectives of an exhibition history through its interpretation. We have been acquainted with the exhibitionary that does not merely paraphrase/rephrase the work of art in works of art. The exhibition historian can certainly argue for the command of exhibitions in methodology ex post facto art history. Executed aright, such a historiography can invent an exhibition’s sources independent of artistic creation. This development can affirm the scientific legacy of an exhibition history whose principle has defined the entanglements of artistic manifestation with curatorial sensibilities.

The Marian apparition in Lipa in September and November 1948 was first reported by the Mindanao Cross toward the end of the same year. All of the publication’s fifteen headlines regarding the Virgin Mary, from late 1948 through early 1950, can be considered materials for an exhibition history. They are visual-cultural artifacts that site-specifically demonstrate public responsiveness to a national event. Proving local interest, these newspaper stories evidence that the peripheral can describe a subject of extraordinary caliber. The initial news about Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace, the form of address that she preferred, was written by an unnamed, local reporter who dramatized “a Manila newspaper woman’s” account as “rose petals suddenly fell in a shower about them. They drifted downward in graceful arcs and flooded the area with a sweet scent.”² This account signals that information can be mined from other sites or contexts and even across timelines. The coverage in the Mindanao Cross was already hinting at the universal accessibility of a miracle, i.e., its presence wherever one stands in the country, because after all, the petals fell from heaven. For the interpretive exhibition history, the miraculous can be filtered and parsed into elements that, when assembled, constitute background knowledge. The exhibition historian is a keeper of old documentation who is, from a practical standpoint, archiving new documents: the citation of the Virgin Mary in a newspaper in what is now Muslim Mindanao is expected to host and carry scientific traces of history, politics, and sociology. Unfortunately, when these documents are art historically determined, they cannot matter, because the miraculous remains on the edges of our material world. Uninterpreted, miracles and their documentation are merely transcribed into optional sites of knowing.

Let us unpack the earnestness of the exhibition historian. The cultural velocity in exhibition histories reflects priorities in interpretation based on its displacement within art historical techniques. Visual language previously rehearsed within art history, that is, at some points, the pure science of things, arrives in the sphere of art historical experience. We accept the force of this perspective because it constantly attracts the artistic, the curatorial, and the exhibitionary in our contemporary necessity to completely approach the faculties of exhibitions. By doing so, we hope to have a material-technological understanding of the exhibitionary. For example, the artist may hoard news clippings about Our Lady of Lipa that can fund any object or concept they make in their artistic milieu. The curator largely does the same thing in establishing the structures and scenes that welcome the most interesting object or artist. If exhibition history is patient or rich enough to drill the epistemological tunnels that will unearth the exhibitionary’s raw form when used by artists or curators, art history can finally unload its work into the open-pit quarries of exhibition history. Exhibition history must be approached like one of the industries of intellectual debate. Its formative force when tested in the field of arguments can intertwine categories that bind materials as much as complexify their meanings. At this point, the integrity of method is ensconced in the successful publication of meanings by an exhibition. Here, without the spatial and temporal participation of art history, the question of enactment becomes clear in the materiality of exhibitions, i.e., in the amount of matter that can be independently interpreted and audited in the dispersion of the exhibitionary. Donning interdisciplinarity, exhibition history undresses the theory in art right in front of exhibitions. It can never, however, stand over the heaven that showers rose petals. What then are the exhibitionary laws that describe the works of art when they are sited and cited within (the context of) exhibitions?

Having faith in exhibition history requires the restoration of insight: that “to see is to believe” is a heritage not only worthy of intellectual rigor, but also that risks the acuity of sight (the seer) in passionate misunderstandings, confusions, and rejections. No one demonstrates this more clearly than ecclesiastical authorities who announce that “miracles are possible, and that they have occurred; but in concrete, the prudent [believer] should be the last to accept an event as truly miraculous.”³ In itself, the heritage of beliefs contained in the traditions of “to see is to believe” is an instance of pure description of anything exhibitionary. It is a speechlessness that forms the smile upon contact with the miracle-like. For this reason alone, I raise the term “exhibitionary heritage” to the level of “exhibition history.”  Many astute readers will find the former term essentially problematic. From our achievements in art history, or from our philosophical and psychological refinement of pompous seers, my proposition easily crumbles in deference to the conceptual excursions of visual culture in its deployment of the term “exhibitionary,” and in the cultural engineering of anthropology of “heritage.”  Epistemology alone cannot fully endorse exhibitionary heritage when the concept itself is at once a reality, synthetic, and antithetical: exhibitionary heritage is a scaffolding that times, locates, and proliferates all that is exhibitionary—like a shower, or rainfall.

The shower of rose petals bearing the marks of the Virgin Mary in Lipa is the data of an exhibitionary signature. The event fits one description of the exhibitionary: the reports in the Mindanao Cross are exhibitions in the making. They are virtual. Transitory in written documentation and oral culture, they are continuously uploaded with the present participle. As the subject of inquiry, they seem homologous to exhibition history and the notion of the exhibitionary complex. Their diligent verbs cannot fully download these exhibitions: the former takes the past too seriously, and the latter assigns too much value in the progressive tense. The effective commentary of the exhibitionary complex chronically disentangles artistic creation and curatorial subjectivity against the prehistories and afterlives of an exhibitionary; this is the business of the politics of truth.⁴ It is crucial to note though that the matter in exhibitions is envisaged by both practices (exhibition history and exhibitionary complex), as if exhibitions develop in the self-containment of the heritage complex “to see” and “to believe.” Exhibition historians and critics indebted to the exhibitionary complex tend to eliminate the superstitious in the ludic tendencies of provenance and treatise. Two practical things happen here on the level of interpretation that at first glance appear to be one continuous procedure: The exhibitionary complex describes the problems of an exhibitionary heritage. The heritage of an exhibitionary can be known according to the operations of its complexities, where we find solutions to artistic problems in the description of exhibitionary complexes. But, like exhibition history, the practice of an exhibitionary complex recruits problems that have been conceptually sustained in the independent formation of artistic, curatorial, and exhibitionary problems. Both impulses are uniquely problematic and severely critical, but they are never unique problems per se. In this development, neither exhibition history nor the exhibitionary complex can take the exhibition of miracles to be the matter of exhibitions; they cannot turn falling petals into a miracle of content and form.

It is not surprising that many of us stumble upon the program of exhibition history (exhibitions about miracles) in the exhibitionary complex (the miraculous in exhibitions). The theory of the exhibitionary complex problematizes an exhibitionary heritage (miracles exhibiting themselves/self-exhibiting miracles) that the exhibition history theorizes to be its fundamental problem. Chronologically, eloquent judgment in these two popular schemata interprets exhibitionary heritage as an exhibitionary solution to problems that are represented by the works of art, which are supposed to correlate artistic solutions with fundamental artistic, curatorial, and exhibitionary problems. To see artistic solutions in the belief in an exhibitionary solution is a wasted opportunity that consumes the links between art, exhibits, and curation naturally and atheoretically. The starting program I propose here equates the relations of exhibition history with exhibitionary heritage, which emits a theoretical event that gives all exhibitionary “to see is to believe” the mass and energy to radiate on any given horizon. Exhibition historians and critics must detect a radiation in their own heritage of looking.

B.

Confounding the creation of art with the birth of an exhibition is one of the many individual problems of art history that has been churned in exhibition history. As history investigates the universe of artistic problems, it can no longer confirm the exhibition’s individual relationships to the system of art; we accelerate toward using the concepts and tools of exhibition history’s total interpretive function. The constant velocity of this interpretation can be altered when fundamentally the artistic is conceived in exhibitions and the exhibitionary in artworks. It is a practice that finds an interval of force.

We enter in medias res. The structure below is a line that balloons into the shape of an exhibitionary heritage composed of crisscrossing tension, pulled outward by accelerating forces. The activity results in a theoretical grid. It is the volume of the artistic, the curatorial, and the exhibitionary, i.e., where their heritage traverses. This is the site of publication of the miracle in Lipa and its documentation in the Mindanao Cross. By publishing the fluctuating shape of a theory, the exhibitionary cannot be subtracted any longer in the activity of exhibition history; the material can be admitted to “a transcendental art-theoretical discipline or [in] a fully interpretative enterprise.”⁵ Because the grid can postulate matter in terms of errors and questions and not necessarily in terms of exhibition or artwork, all the stories that emerge with the (non-)supernatural, non-art-historical are now responsive to the realities of historical making and the speed of hyper-historical data in “without art history.” The grid works as if there will be art history. This is the distinct feature of the exhibitionary heritage.

“Without art history” publishes the exhibitionary heritage of artistic (the miracle in ideas/objects), curatorial (categories of the miracle), and exhibitionary (the miraculous as datum of the world) practices. After this effort has been violently interpreted by prevailing art-historical concepts or has not been uniquely assigned in fundamental artistic problems, it collates lines that enhance the visibility of intersections in a scale of sensing and knowing. Publishing “without art history” searches for the second example of the exhibitionary, the all-important number that grounds exhibitionary heritage. This is the grid to be known in exhibition history (There is art history.) as a network of different weights of artistic, curatorial, and exhibitionary matter; to be articulated in or committed to exhibitionary heritage forces objectivity into inflation and deflation. In this grid, the miracle can be contained or can burst into the study of traditions and transmissions. Assumptions and interrogations interact continuously, forming little pockets in which additional materials find their places in these highways of meanings. Exhibition history is productive in widening the distance between the points of intersection; exhibitionary complex (There were art histories.) evaluates the truth of these converging points. Both will—during the expansion—at some points break into contents, falling as thousands of circumstances of exhibition-making. For example, the exhibitionary complex rightfully intervenes when it renders the subjectivity of an exhibitionary transparent to the public. In search of a “with” for art history, it re-misses the intrinsic “without-ness” in miracle, mirroring the condition of “without art history.” This is the force that entrenches the study of art in a history of ideas. For exhibitionary heritage to collaborate with art history, its tools must distribute the force of transmission and tradition deep into the source of problems. Exhibitionary heritage can do so because it treats the miracle as indivisible.

Miracle is content and form. This is the exhibitionary force that appoints our subjectivity along the scale and within the content of the world. The legacy of the exhibitionary complex and the influence of exhibition history are renewed in our tasks. Let us consider the representation of the Marian image in the repository of the Mindanao Cross. It symbolizes the narrative of miracles, and yet it lacks the miracle. Its abundance in the newspaper is meaningless, let alone without history, because the image is not graduated in descriptions. The grid bonds the objecthood of the image with our faith in the miraculous by linking the two with questions about experiments and correctives: What tests, errors, and accidents do they carry? How were these repaired, embellished, edited, and framed in order to be worthy of exhibition, printed on paper, and digitally archived? The material enters the system of new contrasts. The miraculous survives the erroneous, and therefore, it can live another timeline until the miraculous meets its inaugural artist and curator.

Any miracle is art’s direct competitor. This competition, even when it is declared to be fraudulent as in Lipa, grounds vernacular heritage in the literature that manifests the problematization of the exhibitionary into styles and types. The miraculous is the surrogate medium of the artistic, which shows itself unannounced because art is yet to be invented locally. Iconology approximates this immaculate content in cultural science; the triumph in image-text interpretation partially materializes “to see is to believe,” rerouting the miracle in objects and ideas in linguistic-conceptual heritage. The Marian image, the practices devoted to its iconographies, and the exhibitions promoting her aliveness in daily life penetrate the miracle empirically and physically. The panel below contains images that compose self-disclosing pageantry arising from Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace. For the sake of brevity, I point the viewer to the accretion of miracles in images from statues to fiesta, in cultural gatherings and processions that the Virgin Mary and her feminine likeness are suggested to pass through. What is central to these images is not the analogy to the Virgin Mary as the ultimate miracle, but how a miracle can turn the hopeful perplexity surrounding her into the relentless exhibitionary. The power of suggestion is curatorial, and so the materials can be rearranged—or other contents can be shaken off from them according to the demands of art history. This is the growing fragment of exhibitionary heritage that produces competing contents. These new pieces of information frustrate exhibition history as the emergent exhibitionary heritage puts forward more preliminary questions about the exhibitionary and the artistic, which, in this instance, might point us toward less stable documents in memory, nostalgia, and hope. This more forthcoming content is hospitable to experiments or interpretation. The exhibitionary is cultured in an aesthetic laboratory that relies on artistic reading and curatorial duplication: it diagrams the matter of the exhibitionary via, in this case, the pictorial⁶ so that we can speculate the science in exhibitions. In short, the material in a miracle is experimental. It can be prospected and owned by chance instead of verification. The picture panel, in effect, apportions historical development so that we can reimburse our analytical propensity with a more fecund attention to regeneration, the method of the exhibitionary heritage that can be tested by art history.⁷

C.

This final section concludes the condensation of theory. Preceding statements cannot be elaborated further; research on the miraculous is inherently divorced from progress. An article published in the Mindanao Cross in February 1950, summarizes stories that still resonate among readers and that have been “certified to be true.”⁸ One of them is the diagnostic analysis of rose petals sent to a famous American university laboratory. Two of the findings relate to the nature of the exhibitionary heritage: First, “the petals could in no way have ever been attached to a stem.” Second, “it was discovered that [the] particular variety of rose petals, which fell in Lipa, grow only in Russia.”⁹ These declarations have astounding impact on the migration of form and content. Supporting legitimacy, the article adds that these petals have been reported by pilgrims to transform: petals multiplying or turning into ashes. Miracles style the artifice of their likeness so much so that they surge in waves, defying the fact that they are uncommon.

The concept and object are replicated. Soon after the manifestation in Lipa, numerous other flower showers were recorded around the archipelago, compelling the Church to investigate the “genuineness” and “accuracy” of the events in order to suppress the “bad faith” that had conjured them.¹⁰ More official missions were also initiated, such as the delivery of the Mediatrix replica to New York and Madrid during anniversary celebrations of the miracle. The weekly supplement of the Mindanao Cross, subtitled by four headings—ethics, philosophy, religion, and Catholic world news—mainly provided column inches for religious articles, except for in the case of the initial accounts of the Lipa miracle in the paper. One documentation of the Lipa miracle was, interestingly, positioned alongside another report on the coming of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima to Cotabato. The Mindanao Cross incidentally covered two types of Mediatrix apparition, the “false” and the “authentic,” the latter referring to the miracle in Fatima, Portugal in 1917, which was accepted to be a genuine supernatural event by the Vatican in 1946. The “authentic” Mediatrix gathered the communities in Cotabato to mark “an auspicious beginning for a lasting devotion.”¹¹ Two issues of the fortnightly were reserved for this—one dedicating the main headline to it and the other running an entire page of photographs documenting the arrival of Fatima to Mindanao. The proximity of the original miracle to the local scene was quietly inverted in the lonely attention given to the substandard Lipa miracle¹² in these issues that could have amplified the nearness of Lipa to Mindanao or the sameness of Lipa, Cotabato, and Fatima. Titled “Rose Petals of Lipa Work Miracles Abroad,” the report describes the miracle in its matter, the petal applied to the body of the sick and invalid, a sacred relic that is progressively distant yet proliferative.¹³ On its surface, the Lipa petal revealed an image other than the Virgin Mary’s: that of Veronica’s Veil of the Sacred Face;¹⁴ turned upside-down, the same subject redrawn in the petal’s natural vein. This representation proves that the Lipa petal was deceitful for not consistently carrying the Virgin Mary’s image; but could this be the Philippine Mediatrix’s claim to be officially exhibitionary? The configuration of faces on Lipa’s petals contrasts with that of Our Lady of Fatima, the benchmark of miracles, when she was perceived to be “brighter than the sun” by her visionaries.¹⁵

The permanence of the exhibitionary is enshrined in description. I wish to summarize the problem of the exhibitionary heritage in order to discursify that even miracles can be interpreted art historically, that they are worthy of belief. Many would not believe this because “true” miracles are sustainably brilliant. The theory that purifies description enhances the agency of documentation. When the visionary Carmelite postulant Sister Teresita Castillo (1927–2016), on the second manifestation of Our Mother in her Lipa monastery cell, recalled the loss of sight (“Although I was blind . . .”¹⁶), she kissed the Mediatrix’s feet. Sister Teresita’s kiss is the theory of exhibitionary heritage. The entry in her diary after the event can be proposed here to be the formative force of the exhibitionary heritage in art history and elsewhere: “I could hardly believe it, but it is really very true. I felt I couldn’t do it, because I felt so unworthy. But I did it: My feeling was beyond description.”¹⁷ Interpretation beyond description. Art history, or any historiography for that matter, does not have a choice because Sister Teresita had actually done it. She literally ingested the exhibitionary when she obeyed the Mediatrix’s order: “Eat some grass, my child.”¹⁸ Sister Teresita interpreted her theory in history. Functional unbelievability is the grid that anticipates all miracles to be the properties of an art-historical future.

This essay is part of an ongoing project titled Promising Arrivals, Violent Departures that (since 2018) is a curatorial study on the image-text production of/relationship in the community-oriented, culture-based publications Mindanao Cross (Cotabato) and Dansalan Quarterly (Marawi). The research has been supported by the Foundation for Arts Initiatives and National Commission for Culture and the Arts.

The post Exhibitionary Heritage: The Grid appeared first on post.

Read the English translation of Okamoto Tarō’s essay here.

In “Watashi to jinruigaku: Pari daigaku minzoku gakka no koro” (“Anthropology and I: My Time at the University of Paris Department of Ethnology,” 1971), the artist Tarō Okamoto (Japanese, 1911–1996) recounts his personal journey through the interdisciplinary, transnational environment of the University of Paris (the Sorbonne).¹ Okamoto’s text first appeared in Japanese in the academic journal Kikan jinruigaku (Anthropology Quarterly) in 1971. It is a retrospective consideration of how he developed a mature painterly style and intellectual framework in Paris in 1930–40—as opposed to a manifesto²— and provides one artist’s perspective on how the Sorbonne led to moments of profound connection as well as of isolation for its international participants. Okamoto registers attitudes and anxieties about how categories of identity (“self” and “other” for example) emerge and find expression. Such iterations can produce alternative epistemologies within a “shared social space,” as Weihong Bao argues.³ And indeed, for its international participants, the intellectual space of the Sorbonne spurred new interest in living cultural forms that troubled existing categorizations of identity.

Okamoto narrates his progress toward belonging within two interrelated Paris-based communities, often cited in studies of his work and career but little explored in English-language scholarship: those of the Abstraction-Création artists with whom he began exhibiting in 1933, and of the scholars pursuing a Durkheimian mode of “ethnology” practiced by Marcel Mauss (1872–1950), Paul Rivet (1876–1958), and others at the Sorbonne.⁴ Okamoto audited classes on Hegelian aesthetics with Victor Basch (1863–1944) from 1932, and he studied ethnology under Marcel Mauss at the Musée de l’Homme from 1937 before returning to Japan in 1940. During this time, he frequently exhibited at the Salon des Surindépendants, and elsewhere, with his new artist cohort.⁵

In this essay Okamoto recalls his feelings of isolation as a Japanese artist in Paris, particularly as World War II loomed and his Japanese nationality became a point of tension with his Parisian colleagues. He articulates a frustration with the “sojourn” style of painting practiced by his fellow Japanese expatriates that inscribed them as foreign visitors, and a feeling of “emancipation” from the sojourn mode at finding an intellectual home among the Abstraction-Création artists. Okamoto describes how this association of artists, with their interest in formal relationality, characterized abstraction as an approach rooted in a “globality” (sekaisei), specifically, their shared visual language of abstraction.⁶ Painterly practice began with the “self” and contributed to “movement” or mobilization—of forms, of ideas, outward.⁷

Okamoto’s painting Kūkan (1934/1954; fig. 1) appears in Abstraction-Creation’s 1934 catalogue alongside two works now represented in MoMA’s permanent collection: Vasily Kandinsky’s White—Soft and Hard (March 1932; fig. 2)⁸ and an alternate version of Constantin Brancusi’s The Cock (Paris 1924; fig. 3).⁹ Okamoto’s abstract forms exist on the edge of representation, much like in Brancusi’s sculpture, which seems to be in a process of anthropomorphic becoming. In Okamoto’s work, the left-hand object appears to drift toward the right-hand one within a dark, vacuum-like ground, suggesting the possibility of their coming together, albeit in a meeting that is imprecise or uneven—much like Kandinsky’s colliding and precariously balanced forms. 

In Kūkan, the soft, winglike form seems to be drawn to the dowel-like form—as if by gravity—about to glance off, orbit, or entwine it. This unbalanced duo calls to mind the concept of the informe as expressed by Georges Bataille (1897–1962). For Bataille, the informe is that which denies binary oppositions and instead points to entropic repetition or abrasion. It performs, as Brent Hayes Edwards discusses, a “declassifying process,” or a bending “out of shape” of categories of understanding.¹⁰ In Bataille’s Surrealist art magazine Documents (1929–1930), the aesthetics of the informe are heavily indebted to the “primitive” bodies and cultural artifacts that were also the subject of ethnological study in the 1930s. For Bataille, their juxtaposition to images from contemporary cinema or Montmartre jazz culture undid the usual opposition of modern to primitive.¹¹ Rosalind Krauss describes Bataille’s informe as a method of “deviance” for upsetting “the separations between space and time; . . . the systems of spatial mapping; . . . the qualifications of matter; [and] . . . the structural order of systems. . . .”¹² As Okamoto notes in his essay, Georges Bataille, along with Raymond Aron (1905–1983) and Pierre Klossowski (1905–2001), gathered around the Hegelian philosopher Alexandre Kojève (1902–1968) at the École pratique des haute études in the 1930s.¹³ In Hegelian terms, their project was one of “reconciliation,” or mediation, of the individual subject to greater and shared goals, and of the modern “now” to histories of community and shared identification.¹⁴ But this process of reconciliation, as both Okamoto’s painting and Bataille’s Documents explore, also uncovers gaps, inequalities, and those areas that resist falling easily into existing categories of understanding.

Kūkan was exhibited at the Salon des Surindépendants in Paris’s Montparnasse, where Okamoto’s self-expressed aim of emotionality was well received by art critic Pierre Courthion (1902–1988).¹⁵ In his review of Okamoto’s composition, Courthion observes a use of counterpoints to create resonance between objects. He comments that the Japanese expatriate “has a foot on each continent,” but as a painter, possesses “specific Japanese qualities” that allow him to work through the problems of plasticity.¹⁶ Ultimately, he draws a connection between Okamoto’s Japanese-ness; his perceived foreignness among his Parisian cohorts; and the appeal of the “refinement, musicality, and rhythm” in his compositions through 1937 to Parisian viewers.¹⁷ In his view, Okamoto’s artwork “resonates” with contemporary Paris while embodying cultural difference. 

In a series of memoires published in 1941, shortly after his return to Japan, Okamoto recalls often performing the role of a representative of Japanese “tradition” while in Paris—as he does in Courthion’s essay:¹⁸ “Understanding and communicating tradition, I came to feel, was a way of coming to know oneself. When you’re in a foreign country, ‘tradition’ and ‘self’ [jiko] can completely merge in one’s mind. . . . But it’s very dangerous to merge those things even if the latter is often conveyed in/through the former. . . . I came to believe that tradition is my verso [ura].”¹⁹

Tradition is in a person’s “blood and bones,” he says elsewhere.²⁰ In his view “self” sits between inward “tradition” and outward iterations of its significance, or difference as called out by the network or group. We might consider how constructions of racial difference in particular had high stakes in Paris and globally from the time anti-Semitism took center stage in French military justice and national politics during the Dreyfuss Affair (1894–1906). Mauss and his colleagues expressed concern in this period with the potential slippery slope of racial science within academia, the leaking of its judgments into the atmosphere of contemporary society, and the way it textured the rhetoric of colonial campaigns.²¹

Against this backdrop, the sociology-ethnology contingent at the Sorbonne attracted visual artists, writers, and theorists from diverse national and methodological backgrounds. They formulated interdisciplinary discourses in conversation with Sorbonne-based scholars. Okamoto himself attended Rivet’s seminars at the Sorbonne and participated in curatorial research at the Musée de l’Homme (Museum of Man) in the Trocadero. Through the amassing and curation of collections of specimens (biological and manmade alike) at the Musée de l’Homme, Rivet attempted to bridge the discursive gap between sociology, its new branch discipline of ethnology, and the older race-based physical anthropology.²² Rivet had trained in “in the field” in South America, in the vein of orthodox physical anthropology forged in such colonial contexts that used biological data—such as cranial measurements—to argue that civilization and cognitive capacity varied according to an observable world hierarchy of “races.” Rivet, however, rejected physical anthropology’s isolation of biological data and instead modeled a more comprehensive approach to the study of so-called primitive world cultures, one that included language, cultural narrative (particularly religion and spirituality), and material culture. 

The “primitive” was still a fraught category used by Mauss, Rivet, and other members of their extended circle. But Okamoto observed a developing interest in humanity’s universal, shared lifeforce (seimeiryoku), an understanding that emerged out of conversations regarding the primitive.²³ He recalled in an interview in 1980 that universal lifeforce, or “existence” (sonzai), elucidates commonalities between world cultures.²⁴ But Okamoto also saw this lifeforce as something intimately tied to national, ethnic, and personal identity—the basis for articulations of Japanese-ness, for example, the “original source” (as he calls it in “Watashi to jinruigaku”) of his own “entire self.” Mauss, whom Okamoto pointed out is the nephew of sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917), viewed ethnology as a new synthesis of ethnographic and linguistic methodologies.²⁵ He approached the science of man from a “social perspective,” informed by Durkheimian sociology’s interest in the “organs” and systems of cultural narrative and social behavior, particularly religion.²⁶ The “self” in this context is understood within and against cultural systems, institutions, and provisional categories of understanding such as the “primitive.”

As a foreign expatriate and student, Okamoto found himself occasionally slipping between the role of investigator/intellectual/creative producer and subject of inquiry or regard at the Sorbonne—as he does in Courthion’s description above as well.²⁷ We might, for instance, consider his description in “Watashi to jinruigaku” of a blood-typing experiment in the classroom Rivet shared with his research partner and wife, Mercedes Andrade (1875–1973). Students were supposed to prick their fingers and draw blood, but Okamoto “mischievously” (chamekki) recounts evading the experiment and simply reporting that his blood type is “C.”²⁸ Andrade finds Okamoto’s apparent squeamishness amusing, but Professor Rivet runs home to consult literature on the matter upon hearing of this novel type, Okamoto recounts.²⁹ It is unclear in this account whether the “C” blood type caused confusion because it defied assumptions about Okamoto’s “type” as someone of a particular cultural or ethnic origin, or for another reason.³⁰ But we nonetheless can observe here a rejection of the system of scientific inquiry on the part of Okamoto when it rendered him the subject of investigation. He also undertook a playful, perhaps critical, engagement with that system’s rules and history of formation at a moment when ethnology itself was still in the process of becoming.³¹

Okamoto observes in “Watashi to jinruigaku” that “art is a deductive rolling-out of an image from an isolated space.” Abstraction-Création provided Okamoto with a space in which his artwork and ideas were able to encounter those of others. Ethnology, then, provided the artist with the critical tools to question subjective judgment. He writes that Abstraction-Création and ethnology functioned as “two mental bearings” that informed his approach to art as well as to his sense of self. We can also observe how Okamoto actively shaped these intertwined spaces of art and intellectual discourse. His artwork elucidates commonalities as well as divergences among the artworks he and his peers exhibited, pointing to a diversity of interpretations and priorities. His voice in the seminar or museum space likewise shaped the group’s mutual understanding of major ideas, particularly when his actions point to the limits and tensions inherent to existing ways of studying culture.

The post Global Resonance, Belonging, and the Artist Abroad: Okamoto Tarō in Paris appeared first on post.

On the square, black, beveled face of Marianne Brandt’s table clock, two oblong hands inch past a dozen simple, painted white bars to mark the time (fig. 1). The hands’ pivot point is a white circle that is perfectly echoed by a dark one just below it, a keyhole in which to insert the key used to wind the clock—counterclockwise, as an arrow indicates—so that the timepiece can slowly unspool the minutes and hours. Appearing almost to hover above the mirrored surface of a chromed plinth, the clockface is left unprotected, that is, without a traditional glass cover. In its simplicity, Brandt’s table clock is the consummate embodiment of the principles of the New Objectivity (Neue Sachlichkeit): an object that is a pure expression of its function. And it also seems to have become the paradigm of modern clock design, for it now appears so standard that, but for its size, it could be mistaken for a contemporary travel alarm clock.¹ Brandt’s table clock came in two models: no. 4477, which had to be wound once a day, sold for 3.80 RM; no. 4478 ran for eight days but, at 8.50 RM, cost more than twice as much—a high price in Depression-era Germany (fig. 2). This was one of a number of clock designs that she originated or updated for Ruppel (fig. 3).² In the MoMA clock, Brandt, a Bauhaus alumna and the former acting head of the school’s metal workshop, created an iconic Bauhaus object: simple, stark, and sleek. Its rounded corners and chrome-and-black color scheme suggest furniture designed by her Bauhaus colleague Marcel Breuer (fig. 4), whose B91 desk (fig. 5) she used throughout her life. In its pure color scheme, gleaming metal, rounded edges, and functionality, the clock also evinces creative kinship with the tea and coffee sets she designed in 1924, her first year at the Bauhaus (fig. 6).³ But unlike these sets, which, made of silver or nickel silver and ebony, offered refined refreshment only to those who could afford their high price, the Ruppel table clock achieved the Bauhaus’s goal of uniting art and technology in a design affordable to a broad public.⁴

Brandt was hired by the Ruppel company in December 1929 to save itself from an ignominious fate: expulsion from the famed annual Leipzig design fair. Ruppel Brothers (Gebr. Ruppel), as the company was known when it first opened in 1894, specialized in mass-produced metalware for both local and export markets. While it was successful in production and distribution, by the late 1920s, its designs had become hopelessly old-fashioned, even kitschy. Brandt came to Ruppel with the Bauhaus name behind her, which, by 1929, had become synonymous with cutting-edge, practical design.⁵

For the better part of five years, from 1924 to 1929, Brandt had been a leading presence in the Bauhaus’s metal workshop, an astonishing fact given that it was one of the most male-dominated divisions of the school. Over the span of its existence, only eleven of the sixty-seven students who joined the workshop were women.⁶ With the exception of Brandt, those women who did join did not remain. In the end, Brandt was the only one to receive her degree in metal.⁷ She was also a photographer, and while at the Bauhaus and particularly during a 1926–27 hiatus in Paris, made series of photomontages that capture the dynamism of modern life and media culture. Many of these works, such as Our American Sisters, depict the “new woman,” a contemporary ideal appearing everywhere from advertisements to the silver screen (fig. 7).⁸ By 1924, during her first semester in the workshop, Brandt had created other useful objects, including an ashtray whose smoldering contents could easily be tipped into an airless receptacle below (fig. 8). By 1927, László Moholy-Nagy, who headed the metal workshop at the time, selected her to serve as his assistant (Mitarbeiter). In this capacity, she negotiated contracts with the firms Körting & Mathiesen in Leipzig, and Schwintzer & Gräff in Berlin for the mass production of the metal workshop’s lighting designs (figs. 9, 10). When Moholy-Nagy left the Bauhaus in 1928, Brandt took over as the workshop’s acting director, a position she left of her own accord in 1929, citing, in a letter to then Bauhaus director Hannes Meyer, challenges to her leadership and a desire to return to full-time design work.⁹ She departed in July, once she had secured a position designing furniture and interiors for the architecture firm of the Bauhaus’s founder and first director, Walter Gropius, in Berlin. Her employment in Gropius’s firm proved intermittent, however, and so in December 1929, she accepted the job with Ruppel in the relatively provincial Thuringian city of Gotha.

The year 1932, likely when the table clock went into production, would mark the high point of Brandt’s design career but also, ironically, its end. The Great Depression forced Ruppel to dismiss a number of its employees, and Brandt, having successfully redesigned their product lines for home and office (fig. 11), lost her job in October of that year. She was unable to find work during the subsequent National Socialist period, and after the war—though she served as an important mentor to a few young designers of the German Democratic Republic—her impact was limited by a regime suspicious of Bauhaus modernism.¹⁰ Although no one could have known it at the time, Brandt’s small table clock now stands as the crowning testament to all that she achieved in the space of less than a decade; it is a timepiece that marks the end of an era.

The post Marianne Brandt’s Bauhaus Timepiece appeared first on post.

Art and Arab Life, a Questionnaire

“Where do our arts stand with regard to the consciousness that is blossoming in the Arab nation?” This question was posed in 1956 in a questionnaire on “Art and Arab Life” that was circulated to artists in Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, and Syria in a special issue devoted to the arts of the Arab world of the Beirut-based, pan-Arab journal al-Adab, which was established in 1953 as an outlet for politically engaged thought and cultural analysis. The resulting answers reflect a diversity of viewpoints on the status of the arts vis-à-vis burgeoning independent nations, cultural heritage, and historical tradition, as well as on the legacies of colonial artistic influence.

The questionnaire, here represented in full, was excerpted for the 2018 publication Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents. To access a PDF of the original roundtable in Arabic and other sources translated for the book, please visit the Association for Modern and Contemporary Art of the Arab World, Iran and Turkey (AMCA) website.

Art and Us

In presenting this special edition, we are led to ask ourselves about the state of art in the Arab world in this period in which a true awareness is violently impelling us to renew our strength and exploit our potential. There is no doubt that the answer to this question will point to the state of the artistic sense within our being, indicating whether it is healthy or ill, whether it is active or ailing. It may not be an exaggeration to say that the artistic sense of a particular nation is a measure of its quality of life and its ability to create a civilization.

To what extent is this artistic sense healthy within our being?

Upon reviewing the state of contemporary Arab arts—including painting, sculpture, photography, music, singing, dance, theater, and cinema—those who know a bit about culture will find no difficulty in recognizing that those arts collectively inspire a sense of reassurance, and may promise a better future than their current reality.

Without fear of generalizing, we can say that all of these arts suffer, first and foremost, from the fact that they have not found a distinctive personal style, a style that would convey their characteristics. These arts have nearly lost their character, and for this reason, they are on the verge of being exposed as unworthy of immortality.

There may be individual painters who have found a particular style that reflects the integration of a character with clear features. However, they are all a long way from making painting an art with distinctive traits that are the result of inspiration from the geographical environment and social milieus, and from the historical heritage. It is rare that we find in the effects of our painters a focused direction, whether psychological or social. Although there are ties that could bind a number of these painters together to form a group, these ties generally fail to indicate a clear trend, let alone an outlined school. Perhaps the most prominent shortcoming that appears in painting in our region is that many who practice this art form are more likely to incorporate the characteristics of foreign schools of art—at the expense of seeking vibrant and genuine inspiration from the reality of their own lives and the lives of their people. Such painters do not have proper awareness of the issue of content, for if they did, they also would have proper awareness of form. Let any one of us question, upon seeing Surrealist, Cubist, or abstract paintings, the value of the psychological and artistic development that their creators went through before reaching this stage in their production!

We might not be wrong to say the same about our region’s sculpture, which is the brother of its painting. Most works produced in sculpture have, until now, been limited to statues of great, important, and notable figures; rare are the works that are produced by an “idea,” or that depict a “condition,” or denote a “trend.” Rather, in all cases they remain linked to the principle of commerce—a principle that is forever fated to corrupt the artistry of any work that seeks to be artistic. Among the reasons for this—or the results of this—may be the fact that we have yet to have the chance to see exquisite sculptural work that aspires to stand before one of those foreign works carved by nervous, creative fingers through whose veins runs the essence of sacrifice and burning inspiration.

As for instrumental music in our region, it verges on being absent. We cannot find a single Arab musician who has tried to compose a complete piece of music that expresses a thematic unity, such as the well-known classical works that, based in science, enjoy undisputed aesthetic value. It is almost strange that our modern musicians evidence such shortcomings in musical capacity, and that their utmost in composing is to make melodies to accompany the genre of poetic material being sung. As for sung music, it falls into one of two categories: The first is popular music, which may have personal characteristics. However, it is nearly petrified, for it is not developing, and it remains in a primitive state insofar as it is not following a course to becoming art. The second illegitimate form, in its claims to represent a renewal, is dependent on stealing foreign melodies without even attempting to be influenced or enriched by them, or to draw from them.

Whether this music is instrumental or sung, it has created for itself, within the realm of expression, a suffocating framework in which melodies and tunes revolve only around the subject of bemoaned love. This music is guilty of the greatest negligence in attempting to emulate the consciousness that the Arab nation is struggling to bring forth.

In terms of dance, I believe that no country has seen a deterioration like the one that has occurred in our countries. Individual dancing, almost entirely restricted to silly bodily movements based on repetition, shaking, and vibrations, lacks any artistic flair. Indeed, this dancing aims to arouse the senses in a superficial manner incapable of producing any refined pleasure. As for popular group dancing (folkloric dancing), it is virtually nonexistent, and there is not anyone who attributes any artistic value to this dance in its modern form.

Theater and cinema are what remain, and they are—outside of Egypt—nearly nonexistent. Within Egypt, the former has made significant headway but it has been unable to reach an artistic level that would satisfy an informed intellectual. We do not need to stop too long to consider cinema, as its value is deteriorating in all aspects. As such, it is no exaggeration to describe the cinema as being in a state of decline.

Now then, I am not painting a bleak picture of art in our region, but rather detailing the reality of the situation. What can we conclude from this review? Is our artistic sense ailing? Or has our ability to produce beautiful works of art disappeared, or at the very least, been reduced?

I myself am not able to answer these questions, for to do so would require that I study the subject more faithfully than I have—despite the fact that I consider this quick overview to be close to the truth, for it represents what many believe to be true, even though they may disagree as to why.

However, I believe that publishing this special issue on the arts, both Arab and Western, is a broad way of posing the questions: Where do our arts stand in terms of the consciousness that is blossoming in the Arab nation in this period? Is it possible for us to discern from the current state of these arts anything that points us away from pessimism and toward more positive signs about the future, in either the short or long term?

I doubt that the literature of our region, in terms of poetry and the novel at least, finds itself in a better state than that of the plastic arts. In order to experience a civilizational renaissance that is fruitful and productive, we should be provided with this important aspect—the artistic aspect—in the life of every idea. This art must be maintained at a high level to ensure that our artistic sense is alive and well.

—Souheil Idriss

Artists’ Questionnaire: “Art and Arab Life” (1956)

Modern Arab societies have gone through important periods of development and growth, to which numerous factors have contributed—and art has been one of these driving, influential factors. What role has art played in the field of your specialty (painting, music, theater, cinema, etc.) in terms of its impact on Arab society, and in terms of the impact of Arab society on it?

al-Adab posed this question to a group of people working in art in different Arab countries and received from them the following responses:

Response of Mr. Moustafa Farroukh (Lebanon)

If we examine the truth of our artistic production, and its relationship with our reality and our lives, we find that everything connected with culture in the Arab world is unconnected to anything of our reality. We find that chaos, unbelief, and turmoil dominate our reality and that the Arab thinker “lives in one valley” while the rest of the Arab nation lives in another completely.

Art, as one of the elements of culture and guidance, is rarely linked to our current reality. It fumbles about in the chaos of different foreign artistic currents. It is not inspired, whether in small or large part, by personal or national feelings, with the exception of certain phenomena. Most of this art was transferred or copied from foreign arts.

And we can see that art in Lebanon—which we might claim to be more developed than the other Arab countries due to its antiquity as well as for other reasons—is for the most part a copy, an imitation, and a repetition of foreign arts. Rarely does it express its reality, or derive from its surroundings and history or from personal feelings.

I do not wish to narrate events or to disclose certain artistic scandals; this is not my goal. Instead, I will leave this to time and the people’s cultural development, which will guarantee that all of it comes to light.

In sum, the dominant spirit of art in our region is a spirit of commercialism and the endless pursuit of money. Any careful observer will note that the jealousy, animosity, disaffection, and loss of communication between artists all comprise irrefutable evidence of the soundness of this statement. Thus, one does not hope that present-day art will undergo improvement or revival, for art anywhere in the world—and including in Lebanon—must be based on a spirit of love, and an artistic work must be for the sake of art and nothing but that.

As for the state of art in the rest of the Arab countries, it is no better off. Most of this art is based on copying and imitating art movements established in Europe, without making any attempt to deny this or to draw inspiration from the present realities and exigencies of Arab countries. At the same time, the mission of art, as we know, is the truthful expression of the feelings and reality of the nation.

For all these reasons, I am of the opinion that true artists must move away from the idea of commercialism and work solely for the sake of the art. They must seek inspiration from within themselves and from the nature of their countries, clearly after studying the principles and laws of art in proper art schools. Then they must leave behind the idea of commercialism and the acquisition of wealth, for art has never, throughout its long history, been a means of acquiring money and wealth. Finally, the adherents of art in our countries must not let envy permeate their being. Instead, they should possess a beautiful spirit and a good character, for this is the fertile soil in which true art can be established, and from which it can carry out its noble mission.

Response of Mr. Kaiser al-Jamil (Lebanon)

There is no relationship between our current reality and our artistic production. The artist has lived throughout the ages in a world of pleasure, pain, and imagination. He has lived among the people, with legends and the gods of legends. He, like the poet, if shaken by a sudden real event, will resort to symbolism to express his feelings.

Our social reality is not devoid of alluring novelty. If an artist is affected by this novelty, and if it penetrates the depths, he will transform it into a painting or sculpture, or compose it into a poem. However, adherence to reality limits the imagination and results in codification, which the artist’s nature abhors and to which it refuses to submit. I wish to say that the value of the subject of a painting is very insignificant, for the painting is in itself an independent artistic work—it is the world of the artist, in which he gathers his things, orders them, and then bestows on them from his mind and heart what tinges them with this strange hue that is what the tune is to the string, what the scent is to perfume, and what love is to the heart.

Response of Mr. Rachid Wehbe (Lebanon)

It is well known that art is considered the truthful mirror of every people. Indeed, it seeks inspiration from images of its past and its heritage, and it expresses its present and portrays its desires and hopes for the future. As such, art is a symbol of the spirit of that people. It echoes their responses to their environment and times, and in doing so presents a vibrant picture of life over time. If we search in the light of this truth for the relationship between our artistic production and our current reality, we will not find it to be a closely linked relationship. This is because, if we mention certain artistic works that attempt to approach this reality, and its stamping by national traits, we cannot forget that our present artistic production is represented by the theory of “art is for art’s sake,” where art exists in its ivory tower, far from the environment and the people; and literary ideas remain secondary to formal considerations, which center artistic value around the creation of a harmonious composition of volumes, lines, and colors.

Even though this theory enjoys a great deal of support from international artistic circles, we should nevertheless take into account our specific circumstances, as a people who are building for history, and ensure that we improve the alignment of the pillars onto which our solid edifice will be raised, so that our works present a true picture of what we feel and experience. Art is one of the most prominent of the intellectual aspects that accompany the renaissances of nations. The true artist is the person who lives in his environment, searching and inquiring in order to convey the feelings and impressions that influence him. Art in our region suffers from the foreign influences that nearly divert it from its ideal direction and separate it from our current realities. In many cases, our production comes as if it were another image from those schools whose artistic principles we have borrowed or taken. Drawing from others is necessary to develop our artistic culture, yet there is a major difference between consciously drawing from another’s work and adopting his ideas to the point of becoming lost in his personality, estranged from our context and our environment. Here, in order to successfully navigate this critical stage of our artistic life, we should work to liberate ourselves from all that obstructs our proper nationalist direction, in order to be rid of all foreign influence on our artistic thinking and to establish sound foundations for the independence of our artistic personality. We must search for this personality in our Eastern, Lebanese surroundings, which are full of vibrant, exciting light, as well as in our glorious national heritage and in the subjects that have value for us. We should remember that these surroundings have already enchanted Western artists and served as a source of innovation and inspiration for them. What would be more appropriate for us, as we revive these surroundings, than to draw from them the impetus for an elevated artistic production, consistent with our environmental circumstances—which we sense more fully than anyone else. Let us adopt them as a basis on which we plant the foundations of our artistic renaissance, that very renaissance we are working to bring about. And let us move forward by its light with strength, determination, and faith.

Response of Mr. Fouad Kamel (Egypt)

The art of Mahmoud Said is considered the first stage in the history of modern Egyptian art. He who researches Said’s two paintings zhat al-jada’il al-zhahabeyya [The One with Golden Locks] and ad-da’wa ila as-safar [A Call to Travel] will see in them the logical and emotional development of an artist who wished to link his studies of Western composition—including of light, shadow, and perspective—to the heritage of Coptic and Islamic art, so as to grow with his art in terms of humanism and populism.

Just prior to 1940, sets of liberated ideas began to be formulated, based on a social awareness built on a material and psychological understanding. The magazine at-Tatawwur [Development] and then al-Majalla al-Jadeeda [The New Magazine] continued to publish these ideas, alongside the activities of the Art and Liberty group, who organized exhibitions of free art. We saw for the first time in modern history a union between art and literature, for the sake of achieving a revolutionary social language. Egypt read the poetry of George Hanin, the stories of Albert Cossery, and the articles of Anwar Kamel, Hussein Yousef Amin, and Yousef al-Afifi. It also saw the images of Ramses Younan, Kamel al-Telmasany, and Fouad Kamel. A revolutionary spirit filled the air, denouncing the facts of this corrupt life. Images and hopes of a new life were crafted out of the symbols of this dream.

Yousef al-Afifi and Hussein Yousef Amin made a significant contribution to the field of art education by developing the “New Awareness” current, and especially when Yousef al-Afifi dedicated himself to establishing the Higher Institute of Art Education for Teachers. A generation, led by Mahmoud Y. el-Bassiouny, Hamdy Khamees, Saad al-Khadim, and Latfy Zakki, completed their studies abroad. They resumed the work of spreading artistic awareness by forming art schools in public education.

The Contemporary Art group, established by Hussein Yousef Amin, drew from Egyptian legend and popular literature as the basis for its philosophy. It also took the tools used in daily life as forms for its artistic composition. Myth emerged for the first time from the literary domain into the realm of form and color. We find in the art of Aj-Jazzar and Hamed Nada a trend that is more compatible in this respect, while we find in the paintings of Samir Rafa’, Ibrahim Massa’ouda, Kamel Yousef, Mahmoud Khalil, and Salem Habashy certain subjective, rational, or poetic traits that are the result of the encounter with world cultures. As for art criticism and its value in defining and creating artistic currents, there was no clearly defined dogmatic criticism prior to the writings, lectures, and discussions of George Hanin, Yousef al-Afifi, Hussein Yousef Amin, Erik de Ghosh, and Cyril de Bou. This criticism and argumentation was only rarely published in the press. Rather, it was circulated within the art community and at private events. These discussions played an important role in forming and developing numerous artistic personalities.

We cannot ignore the importance of the attempts of Ahmed Rassem, who wrote for the first time to the Arab Library about modern Egyptian art in its first stages. We must also note that Rassem was interested in presenting the art of Kamel al-Telmasani in a lengthy article in the al-Ahram newspaper.

It was necessary for critics to emerge to re-create the history of Egyptian art and awaken the youth to its treasures and sources. Philip Darscott wrote and provided general images in which he chronicled and critiqued modern trends, yet he did not adopt a specific viewpoint, in contrast to the critic Aimé Azar, whose book The History of Modern Art in Egypt is comprised of six parts. After establishing a philosophy and objective for the book, Azar gathered together an assortment of modern Egyptian art. We should mention the crime that is committed by the Egyptian press today against these rising generations through its atrocious disregard for art criticism—or its recourse to personalities who are not knowledgeable or studied in either the origins of criticism or providing guidance. Numerous artistic personalities attempt to continue producing art, and they come together or split apart when showing their works. We find Yousef Sayyeda, Taheyya Haleem, Hassan al-Telmasani, Hamed Abdullah, Fathi al-Bakri, Ezzeddin Hamouda, Saleh Yosri, and Walim Ishaq, and yet this is an irresolute and ambiguous continuation.

Since 1953, Egyptian artists have felt the need to establish more vibrant arenas in which to display their developing art. Discussions in some of the newspapers have begun to ask about the role of art in relation to society, and debates have been initiated regarding the methods of realism in art—thereby following the current trend of freethinking that began with the establishment of the Art and Liberty group. Today we see that the Egyptian artist is nearly suffocating in his own art. If he does not set out for new horizons, armed with a progressive awareness of art and science, this artistic generation will be doomed to annihilation, and Egypt will continue to wait for another new generation to hold its dreams in their minds and hearts. These new horizons are the mural arts. And fortunately, the modern Egyptian artist has a long artistic heritage at his disposal, beginning with cave paintings from the prehistoric era and including pharaonic art and the art of churches and mosques. These different images and various materials can well serve as a fertile source for study, revival, and development. The Egyptian artist may be assured that the mural is also found in modern artistic heritage, as in the creations of Mexico’s artists such as [José Clemente] Orozco, [Diego] Rivera, and [Rufino] Tamayo, which occupy government buildings, halls of science, theaters, restaurants, and all the popular institutions. These are tall, broad pages, on which developed, modern artistic principles may be manifested in murals, without slipping into prevalent academic taste.

Today’s insightful critic senses the seeds of this art in the works of Hamed Nada in its latest phase.

The collective dreams of today should push beyond the limits of the frame and the salons, to be rejuvenated and to live under the sun, before the eyes of millions.

Response of Mr. Hamed Abdalla (Egypt)

Art and society simultaneously influence and are influenced by each other. The true artist takes reality as his raw material. He does not convey this reality literally, but rather revives it through his whole living being, “viewing it from within” as he creates it anew as a more vibrant reality. Society is also impacted by art and responds to its inspiration. For this reason, the content of art is the content of life.

As for the artists who, adhering to pure formalism, imagine that pedantically creating empty forms is art, or the artists who imitate external reality or depict it in an anecdotal manner, considering art to be a means of comprehension and not an actual modality of knowledge, or who create art for the purpose of propaganda in any of its forms—those artists represent superficiality and stagnation in art, for they are only grazing the surface of life.

We note that every phase of society’s development is also a phase of the development of art and all sorts of ways of thinking. We find in Egyptian society’s phases of struggle—in the middle of this century, for example, for the cause of independence—that modern Egyptian representational art has been liberated from the influence of Western art and has been guided to its correct path: connected with its ancient, inherited past, and with the well of the art of the people and their traditions, adopting the principles of the artistic origins of the ancient East without imitating them, in contrast to the artistic origins of the West, which observe the rules of perspective painting, or the personification through the Modèle or Modulation. Those original principles of the West aimed to depict objects as seen by the eye without regard for their truth, and constitute a certain submission to the false appearance of nature—the principle that the contemporary West rejected when it abandoned easel painting for wall painting.

Response of Mr. Hamdy Ghaith (Egypt)

I would like us first to agree on the concept of the word theater, which is contained in the question. The theater, as I understand it, is this work or that artistic phenomenon that we see in the Dar al-Ta’lil and that comprises the literary text as well as production and acting in all their elements of movement, gesture, rhythm, music, sound, silence, lighting, and decor. In this way, theater becomes the complete dramatic act, not just the written play—for the written play, as long as it remains such, is not a theatrical act but merely a literary work.

If we understand the word theater in this way, then we are able to say that theater cannot influence nationalist thought, because it is, by nature, a result of this nationalist thinking, meaning, it follows from it rather than precedes it. If theater in Egypt (as opposed to Egyptian theater) has influenced nationalist thinking, this influence is reflected only in the men behind it, in that the producer and the actor have surpassed the playwright. This is because theater in Egypt began through the translation of Western literature. As such, its sole influence is in having established the art form of drama in Egyptian literature. If we wish to speak about theater in terms of the literary text that we call the play, it cannot be said that theater has influenced or been influenced by nationalist thought. This is because nationalist thought is a continuous current that takes on various forms, including the novel, poetry, photography, and plays. It cannot be said that the novel, for example, has influenced nationalist thought or been influenced by it, as the story itself is among the forms of this thought.

Thus, it is not possible to speak about the extent to which Egyptian theater has influenced or been influenced by nationalist thought. However, we can ask whether Egyptian theater has moved in pace with nationalist thought, or lagged behind it.

The nationalist thought contemporaneous to the establishment of Egyptian theater was itself what paved the way for the revolution of 1919. It preached political and social liberation. As for Egyptian theater, we unfortunately have to affirm that it has always lagged behind nationalist thought. In political terms, Egyptian theater did not play the same role as that played by other artistic and literary forms. Theater was never an expression of the Egyptian revolution; rather, it was surprised by it. Theater’s only role was to cry out in the wake of the revolution. The theater was highly insignificant on the battlefield, as the revolution’s events were always greater than it.

As the theater was mired in the melodrama that was translated or composed and that overran the Ramses troupe, Egyptian literature took a different course—a new path blazed by Taha Hussein, al-Mazni, and al-Aqqad. Though romantic theater may have been considered an expression of the middle class, meaning a natural expression of the Egyptian political and social revolution, it was incapable of comprehending this awareness; instead it took melodrama itself as a means of expression, but of what?

Perhaps we know that the melodrama was a theatrical expression of the regret of the collapsing landed gentry and its sense of doom in the face of the revolutionary tide of the middle class. In this way, the theater—represented first and foremost by the work of the Ramses troupe—was reactionary and misleading. This is absolutely clear not only from nationalist novels, but also from the novels that address social problems. We can take as an example of this the issue of women’s liberation, which has pervaded nationalist ideas in Egypt from the beginning of this century. On this issue, Egyptian theater adopted a reactionary position that, expressed in novels such as Zawgatina [Our Wives], asserts that the natural place for women is in the home.

All of this applies to Egyptian theater in the period in which we are living. The theater until now remains unable to adapt to new nationalist thought, for many reasons that cannot be mentioned here. While the realist school emerges in Egyptian literature, theater remains stuck in melodrama and vaudeville. And while Egyptian society is shaken from time to time by political and social uprisings, the theater is always surprised by these uprisings and never joins the calls for such uprisings in anything more than—in the best of cases—a weak voice that is quickly drowned out by these decisive popular movements. This is because the theater dealt with and continues to deal with political and social matters in an unsophisticated manner—rather than undertaking a real analysis and coming to a clear understanding of the truth of these matters in terms of their economic and social aspects, instead of solely within a socially regressive framework.

Finally, I wish to say that Egyptian theater has not been born yet, even if many signs indicate that its birth is not far off.

*Mr. Ghaith restricted his response to Arab theater in Egypt, due to its connection to his particular experience and his depiction of the general characteristics of theater in other Arab countries.

Response of Mr. Khalil al-Masry (Egypt)

Many researchers differ in their views of the arts in general, and of music in particular. Some say that art leads to renaissances. Others assert that art follows renaissances or, more clearly put, that art is a depiction of these renaissances, and that true art gives us a true picture. Since our views of this picture may differ, we may think of it as a point of origin, one that influences and guides society. Yet the meticulous researcher does not overlook the fact that this so-called true picture is merely a copy of the original, which is society. As such, art is but a chronicler of history, not an instigator of renaissances. If we accept this position, we find that Arab art has been able to depict the renaissances of its peoples and, with its limited or local capabilities, to give us a true picture of their prevalent anxiety. Arab music was influenced by Turkish music when the Turks had a say in the rule of our country, and it was influenced by the Western music that was present among us when we looked to the West and moved toward it. However, Arab music did not become completely devoted to the West, nor did it lose its identity and its ancient civilization. Rather, this influence embellished and enhanced Arab music, and moved it toward becoming a global art.

However, many factors existed in Arab countries that led to the decline of the arts, two of which are extremely important and thus worthy of mention:

1. Most funders in these countries are not from these countries.
2. These countries were struggling under the yoke of foreign occupation.

These two factors caused feelings of inadequacy among the Arab people and divided them into two groups, which moved in opposite directions. The first looked to the West, believed that Egypt was capable of rising to its level, and demanded the highest degree of freedom possible. The second was oriented toward the East, struggled to admit its own inadequacy, and clung to the flimsy threads of its Eastern identity—it called for conserving this identity by imposing strict censorship.

Despite this there is significant evidence today that Arab music is responding to and being influenced by the renaissances of the people. However, I disagree with those who say that Arab music is the creator and inspiration behind this reawakening.

Response of Mr. Maher Ra’ef (Egypt)

The West came before the East in revolting against men of religion—not religious teachings—who, without good intentions, appointed themselves the protectors and advocates of religion, after placing stumbling blocks on the road to the progress of civilization for so long. The impact of this was that the West made great strides in the fields of science, discovery, and invention, which with the East has been unable to keep pace. The West thus extended its authority over the East and launched a siege to prevent it from progressing, and even to block it from freedom. This became clearer than ever in art in general and particularly in the plastic arts, which are the topic of this discussion.

If art is the equal of science in the field of human progress, then we attempt to understand the truth of our external reality through science and to probe the depths of our internal reality through art. The two are linked in a way that reveals the extent of the importance of art to human life and the extent of its influence in the field of human progress.

The East, led by Egypt, has attempted to awaken from its ignorance and to cast off the effects of the political occupation and the foreign monopoly on Eastern thought and taste. By the East, I mean the Arab East. The effect of this revolution against this occupation and monopoly emerged in the field of plastic arts. And if it was right for us to keep pace with the West’s scientific progress and to take from the West its latest inventions, we do not have the least right to keep pace with the West in terms of its art, for art has a nation from which it must spring forth. And it has traditions, customs, and norms associated with a group of people who define its form and subject, and even the direction of its development. Those who attempt this not only carry within themselves the tools of their own destruction and the obliteration of their identity, they also help the West to directly or indirectly solidify its hold on the East.

Currently in Egypt, there are those doing all they can to embrace artistic trends to liberate Egyptian art from its slavery to foreign art, and even from a return to ancient Egyptian art—despite the fact that others claim the latter would return originality to Egyptian art. Yet this is not in accordance with the social environment, which defines the general image of art, even if the geographical environment is the same in both cases.

These modern trends have succeeded. In art, more or less, those embracing them have achieved their objective through their dedication to the principle upon which these ideas are based and through their keenness to expose themselves to modern global culture, which is necessary for the contemporary artist to be successful in realizing his mission. That he shares in abundance in addressing subjects related to social life in Egypt, with a view permeated by the logic of modern thought.

If the Egyptian public as a whole does not appreciate works of modern art, it is because these works are not as familiar to them as the thousand varieties of art presented to them by foreign artists and by teaching professors who took art from the institutes of Europe and circulated it, or worked to circulate it, in our region.

Response of Mr. Jewad Selim (Iraq)

In any time or place, all important and good artistic production is a mirror that reflects the reality in which it exists. How we perceive this product—whether it is truly human, and how it can be a genuine and powerful expression—all this is related to the freedom of the artist to express his surroundings. This is simultaneously an intellectual freedom and an economic one. There are hundreds of “shoulds” and “musts” that are repeatedly mentioned in our newspapers and magazines, and in most cases the writer is attempting to express his own superiority or the nobleness of his ideas, trying to extricate the artist from his stupefaction or backwardness. This generally indicates the presence of old commonplaces in new molds. Most authors who are agitated with lofty human ideas are quick to offer guidance to writers or artists, even when they themselves do not know or intentionally forget the contents of museums and books, and all the art that humanity has produced that restores our trust in humanity’s goodness.

Response of Mr. Hafidh al-Droubi (Iraq)

Our reality suffers in its appearance, but not in its essence, from the dominance of European character. Our way of life has taken on affectation in order to fit with European life. Local dress is on the verge of being swept aside by European styles as we leave the countryside and move to the cities. Moreover, there is a great contradiction between our core equilibrium as Eastern people and these almost completely false and affected appearances. This is in terms of our reality. In terms of art, the problem is different, for art in our region suffers from Western domination in both its essence and its external forms. In other words, the contradiction mentioned above is nearly nonexistent, for art in our region is in fact Western in its entirety. The reason for this goes back to the fact that painters, and Iraqi painters in particular, had their artistic beginnings and studies in Europe and in the style of European schools, and as such their views of things became that of a Western person. In addition, there was a dark period that cut us off from our heritage—whether ancient or Islamic civilizations—following which Iraqi artists opened their eyes and saw nothing but mature European art before them. As for our civilizational heritage, it remained concealed until only recently, when museums were established. As for local art, it is extremely simple in impression, so much so that is difficult to use it as any kind of basis. Another thing is that the local art market is invaded by an artistic culture with a European art affect, whether in in inquiry or in outline. We have barely any access to authentic Eastern art—such as Indian, Chinese, and Japanese art—despite the fact that the West has also been influenced by it, and despite its maturity and importance.

Today, we feel intense pain at this move away from local reality and national character. Most of us attempt and endeavor to establish an art that represents this reality, that influences it and is influenced by it, and each of us seeks to achieve it according to his specific point of view. Some deal with line and composition, attempting through them to claim something of the Assyrian and Sumerian spirit, yet they remain European nevertheless. Yet these artists try—always, they try.

Others continuously call for a specifically Iraqi art, yet they themselves have not found such a character. One of the Europeans who said that “dusty colors are of an Iraqi character” may have been mistaken, for Iraq is never dusty. And these are our colors. And this is our sun.

There are artists who consider their attempts to be Iraqi art, even as they follow the direction of the modern European school, and the French school in particular. This is because France had a major educational influence on these artists.

As for me personally, despite the fact that I continually endeavor to paint Iraqi subjects, on the basis of my upbringing in a purely Iraqi context, I continue to think of the work of European painters when picking up the brush and painting. As such, I continue to consider myself to be playing the role of attempting to establish a modern Iraqi school. Even though I have at times proceeded along the lines of the ancient Iraqi way, these were an imitation and nothing more.

As for how this relationship should be: we believe it should be a close relationship. Artistic tendencies are not subject to logical controls, but rather to the circumstances surrounding the art, the abovementioned factors, and other factors. These current schools will endeavor to create a sound, strong connection with reality, which continues to develop, and to strive to find its particular character.

Response of Mr. Ismaeil al-Sheikhly (Iraq)

For a long time, the Arab world has lagged behind the rest of the world in scientific progress as well as in social and political spheres. The inevitable result is a backwardness that is reflected in our social reality and that has led to a backwardness in thought, literature, and art.

The Arab world has been isolated from the rest of the world and thus rarely influenced by the intellectual currents that affect our times. The Baghdad school of painting under Abbasid rule deserves mention, although it ended with the Abbasid era. Al-Wasiti was one of the most prominent painters of this period. Yet throughout the last fifty years, the experience from which Iraq and the other Arab countries have suffered due to their contact with the civilized world—and to its innovations in the fields of science, industry, and thought—has led them to “borrow” from it. I doubt whether this assimilation of Western intellectual and artistic currents is deep and true, as our regressive reality is different from the natural, progressive reality of the West. For example, the appearance of Cubism in the Western world is justified, as it is an artistic form that evolved from previous artistic forms. We can say the same about the other artistic schools in the West. The Cubist trends in our country, however, fail to represent a genuine reality not only in terms of the type of production, but also in terms of our present historical circumstances. Owing to this, the artistic movement in Iraq has yet to acquire distinguishing characteristics and a clear identity in either form or content. The truth is that the artistic movement in our country represents nothing but confusion and turbulence resulting from the underdevelopment of the Iraqi identity in terms of expressing its condition, environment, and historical circumstances.

However, Iraq is on the verge of making major social, economic, and cultural progress, which will surely impact the production of our artists. Iraqi artists must seek inspiration from this new life, yet imbue it with their own particular Iraqi character. In my opinion, Iraqi artists should work toward establishing a connection to the public, for the purpose of developing the artistic taste of its people. This will not happen unless artists channel public concerns and feelings, through the expression of public and private subjects directly related to daily life, and unless the public acknowledges its own reality. However, at present this production carries no more than the purpose we envisage for it, which is only the development of artistic taste, a sense of beauty, and the artistic feelings of the public. The natural relationship between the artist and his audience will undoubtedly influence both the quality of artistic production and the public’s taste. Indeed, one of these factors will affect the other until art takes on an authentic form or many authentic forms that express the needs of the people and are simultaneously understood by them.

Response of Mr. Atta Sabri (Iraq)

Artistic production and reality have been interrelated since time immemorial. The first humans expressed the shape of animals due to their dire need for those animals and in order to cast away the dangers posed by them. Later came arts that expressed the ancient civilizations, such as in China, followed by those in Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia. In Mesopotamia, art represented power, might, and the conquests that were undertaken, such as the Lion of Babylon, the winged lion, and the reliefs that represent the kings of Assyria and others in their wars and conquests.

If we move on to thirteenth-century Baghdad and its famous artistic school, we see that the painter [Yehia bin Mahmoud al-Wasiti], in his illustrations of the Maqamat of al-Hariri, held today in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, in Paris, realistically depicted views of human social life in the form of large drawings that remind us of wall reliefs. He depicted thirteenth-century Arabs in mosques, in the desert or field, in libraries, or in inns. Another famous manuscript, Kalila wa Dimnah, was painted by other artists to express their social circumstances and events through pictures of animals.

Moving ahead to Europe, particularly the age of the Renaissance in Italy and other countries, we see the artistic productions of Raphael, Michelangelo, and Leonardo da Vinci in paintings such as The Last Supper by Leonardo, The Resurrection by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel in Rome, as well as his great sculptures of Moses and David, and Raphael’s many paintings of the Virgin and Christ. Then came [Francisco de] Goya in Spain, who expressed in his paintings the atrocities of the French and their occupation, as well as the scandals of war.

If we move forward to today’s era, we find that the chaos, decadence, confusion, moral collapse, and apathy that followed the two [world] wars have had a major impact on artists. We find them defeated by reality and moving in different, confused directions. Their artistic production was in ebb and flood, until artists in some domains arrived at Social Realism and began to assert their social and political opinions in murals that gave expression to the working class, peasants, and others. This is what happened in Mexico at the hands of the artist [Diego] Rivera and others.

Here we see that the state entered the field and supported and directed artists, or imposed its will on them, so that these artists give voice to their society or political regime, either directly or indirectly. Whereas [Franklin D.] Roosevelt, with his regime known as the “New Deal,” moved to encourage artists materially and morally and left the field open to them with complete freedom of artistic production, the dictatorships prior to World War II imposed restrictions and conditions on the kinds of art permitted.

As for today in Iraq, following a long period of stagnation, we have embarked on a new and blessed artistic movement, initiated about a quarter of a century ago with our deceased artist Abdul Qadir al-Rassam, the “artist of Tigris and Baghdad,” who captured peaceful views of the landscape in his oil paintings. Then, after 1930, artistic missions began to go to Europe at the behest of the Iraqi Ministry of Education, and returned to their homeland after lengthy study in a new mold and with a European character. These new Iraqi artists, and their students after them, began to look to Europe as a source of revelation and inspiration for their artistic paintings and even their subjects, which became Leda and the Swan, flowers, landscapes, etc. They forgot all but a very little of their surroundings and the environment in which they lived.

Others then emerged who conducted their artistic experiments in the manner of the European artists who were prominent between the two wars, with distinguishing circumstances and causes. They began, in painting their pictures and images, to adopt the schools and methods of Cubism, Surrealism, or abstraction, regardless of the reasons that led European artists to use such modes of expression in their own paintings. As such, they imitated [Pablo] Picasso and others in order to be “modernized” painters. The truth is that we today are facing social, economic, and political problems and circumstances and going through new developments that differ completely from those of European artists.

We noticed that the exhibition of Indian art held in Baghdad three years ago bore a distinctly Indian character, and was tending toward the formation of a modern Indian school. Undoubtedly, that had a pronounced effect on the psyches of Iraqi artists and on a majority of those who visited this exhibition, thus prompting Iraqi artists to think about new and prospective ways to arrive at an Iraqi artistic school, or create a local character, or to form a style that represents Baghdad. Yet this cannot be attained in a single day, or even in a year. Rather, writers, literary figures, and artists must unite to establish the solutions and capacities for attaining a local character, with connection to the international artistic movement.

The new generation in Iraq today has begun to appreciate art in a very encouraging manner for this goal. For we must present more art exhibitions, with facilitation from the Ministry of Education via the Institute of Fine Arts, so as to connect with foreign countries and bring art exhibitions to Iraq, whether of the old works by their masters and schools or of the contemporary. And I think it is incumbent for artists to work to create an artistic and literary magazine to consolidate a public of readers who are thirsty for arts and literature.

Iraq today is going through the birth of a comprehensive architectural and industrial movement. As such, our architects must open the field to painters and sculptors to create murals and bas-relief sculptures on the walls of these buildings, and particularly government buildings, so as to be completely integrated. On the other hand, attention must be paid to commercial art, so that it can meet the needs of the country’s industrial production for images, advertisements, and other commercial art forms. Art must also be used for social purposes, such as social services and other uses. The new and expansive squares and open areas to be created upon completion of Baghdad’s city planning will be among the best arenas for sculptors in our country to erect monumental statues, which will become a Ka’aba for visitors and for excursionists who seek an escape from the people or fill their free time, just as in the squares of Rome, Paris, and London.

Our artistic production should be a true expression of our current reality. It must reflect the pains of the people as well as their joys, in social and popular subjects. The artist faces an open field, for these subjects have not been addressed previously. Art today is moving toward a kind of new realism, by which it is possible to record daily life in our country in tremendous, expressive paintings.

Response of Mr. Fateh al-Moudarres (Syria)

The Arab arts have suffered through a long period of decline, from painting to styles of buildings, from metal engraving to textiles, and even popular traditions of dress and song. In addition, a permanent religious opposition, combined with the shallowness of the scientific culture, and the lack of genuine, constructive attempts by Arab governments to revive popular Arab heritage—all this has led to the obliteration of what remained of a distinctive artistic heritage.

Along with all these urgent ailments, European imperialism arrived to spread distortion and poverty and poisoned relations between the remaining religious sects so as to politicize them. All this destroyed the last remaining bastion of Arab art in the East, and it remains in ruins.

If we wish to define a character for any Arab artistic production, or if we wish to find a link between any such production and our reality, we will fail. If a European critic today were to view any painting by an Arab painter, he would not find anything but a Turkish fez, the face of a dome, an ancient minaret, a strangely designed water pipe in a carnival of cafés, or a piece of embroidery from a worn-out Shiraz carpet!

The modern concept of contemporary realist Arab art is difficult to define, as the nonexistence of inherited artistic features has, to a great extent, rendered our Arab artistic production weak in terms of its identity. Indeed, the contemporary art of each state in the world is based on substantial inheritances. In India, we see in the paintings of modern artists clear references to the ancient Indian artistic heritage. The same is true of modern China, as well as Japan. We see in the exhibitions of all the nations an originality and differentiation that indicate that this painting is Indian or that painting is Chinese or Finnish. However, the painting created in the Arab East has no identity, for its character is lost, its originality erased, and it consists of a distorted, mixed-up imitation of the European schools. We can thus assert, for all the preceding reasons, that Arab artistic production has no relationship at all with our reality or our renaissance.

In order to bless contemporary Arab taste with a truly Arab art that interprets its reality and its social struggle on all fronts, we must begin a new “renaissance” era—meaning an era based on the rebirth of ancient Arab art, grafted to current modern concepts, in a light rich in distinctive color and inherited, authentic designs.

The reasons for the chaos to be found in the exhibitions held in Cairo, Alexandria, Beirut, Damascus, Aleppo, and Baghdad have become clear: There is no close coordination between governments and painters, sculptors, musicians, architects, and authors. Nor is there even a sense that this collaboration is lacking.

Come with me: Stand next to me before an Arab painting, and let us assume that its creator has called it an Arabic name meaning “Awakening” or “Revolution” or “Protest.” What would you find in this painting? You would not find anything except a carnival of influences, firstly because the artist has no personal style. You would not find any colors from the East, nor would you find that authentic effort to highlight originality in the orientation of the design and the subject as a whole. Perhaps the reason for this goes back to the fact that Arab history is not studied, on one hand, and on the other to the dearth of understanding of common artistic schools. Thus, painters, sculptors, musicians, and architects are unable to establish a distinctive character by which they might define their place in the ranks of universal art.

The development of the artistic understanding of a contemporary people is not incompatible with the inherited ancient values that have a unique character. If you were to take even the most contemporary of schools, such as Surrealism, and if you as an artist fervently cling to your Arab nationalism, you would be able to render an original expression from your lines. And even if you were an advocate of the abstract or the nonobjective schools, you would be able to maintain a distinctive Arab character. This matter is inevitable for modern architects who insist on taking from the style of Le Corbusier! Indeed, if Le Corbusier had been Eastern or Arab, he would have given his school a distinctive character, while still observing the latest requirements of the age, because comprehending character requires it, and national pride as well!

I visited Europe this year, and found a unique character in every country I visited. When the steamer docked us back on Syrian shores, the absurd hodgepodge became apparent in the buildings, the music, and all signs of life—even in people’s faces! The East appeared before me as if it had been hit by a hydrogen bomb! How, then, can we respond to the original question: Does contemporary Arab artistic production have a connection to our reality—apart from what we have said in the preceding lines?

Our situation is disgraceful, our values cheap, and our confidence nonexistent. As such, our distinctive Arab identity is also absent. If we have been allowed to stand among the many nations, it is only because we have not yet died out completely.

Look: This man is Chinese, that one is Siamese; this man is Filipino, that one is French—and who do we have here? Tell me, by God, who is this strange creation who wears a fez on his head and on top of that a hat, and below them a tie, and on his shoulders an overcoat, and over that an abaya, and on his feet crepe-soled shoes. He speaks in a language that is neither Arabic nor Chinese nor Siamese, nor anything recognizable—his language does not even resemble the language of the birds! Now look at his face, and you will not even find distinctive Eastern features in it! After all this, how does your stomach accept and digest the painting the Arab holds in his hands, as if he were a beggar holding out an empty bowl, begging for the peoples’ sympathy before they judge him with sweeping verdicts, but not daring to reveal it! How do we accept to call this a painting? Such an Arab, when standing among the ranks of nations, should bow his head in shame.

We can lie to ourselves, but the matter is different in the eyes of others, who must see us as we truly are—who must see that our pride in our distinctive values has ceased to exist.

If we wish to have a modern Arab art, we must initiate an era of rebirth for all that has become extinct. We must build it up and graft to it what we will, according to what the old outlines will accept in terms of new turns and appearances. As I say this, regret fills my heart, because the matter applies to my own work as well!

Response of Mr. Munir Sulayman (Syria)

The question about art and its link to our Arab reality is frequently repeated, and the people respond to it with a host of different answers. The most important of these answers is that the greatest purpose of art is to express the features of life in its various aspects. In all Arab countries, art remains far from this. If you were to see a painting that represents a landscape or face or still life, you would feel that there is a dense veil blocking you from seeing the truth of these objects or separating you and the life that pulses within each of them.

The important thing in painting is that people see in every canvas something of themselves, something of their hopes and dreams for life. Even more, the artist seeks to depict through his painting the life that is lived by the people, as well as the hopes that stir in his heart and in theirs. The artist succeeds to the extent that he expresses these dreams and makes them speak in his painting with a power to affect the people, even influencing the simple souls among them who have not had the good fortune to enjoy a culture of art.

The function of art, whatever its color and whatever its form, is to serve life. A beautiful painting—whether of a river, or the breast or legs of a beautiful woman, or the shoulders of a man of great stature, or his arm—is beautiful because it suits its organic function, and its concept is nothing but the elevated rendering of our many needs. Indeed, it is the perpetual extension of these needs, meaning that the concept distills the future of these powerful, unrestrained needs and makes it evident, just as the flower and the fruit condense the tree, promulgate it, and extend its life into immortality.

Yet this eternal truth remains unfamiliar to artists in all the Arab countries. For this reason, we cannot claim that there is art in the Arab countries, and we will remain far from it so long as artists are distantly removed from the essence and secret of art, and even from its fundamental components.

“I have seen a vibrant genius and an innovative Arab sensibility”: Visitors’ impressions of the 1933 Palestine Pavilion at the First National Arab Fair

The texts below are entries taken from the 1933 guest book from the first solo exhibition of the work of Zulfa al-Sa‘di (1905–1988), a young Palestinian female artist, held in the Palestine Pavilion at the First National Arab Fair, organized in Jerusalem under the auspices of the Supreme Muslim Council. Al-Sa‘di, who had studied with the renowned “Jerusalem School” icon painter Nicola Saig (1863-1942), exhibited a range of work: oil paintings of landscapes, still life compositions, and portraits of Arab heroes as well as contemporary cultural and political figures—the latter, such as King Faysal I of Iraq, which is illustrated here, drew on the photographic sources then circulating in the expanding print media—alongside applied arts such as embroidery works.

Hundreds of visitors signed the guest book, many of them identifying hometowns and origins from across the Arab East. Entries are predominantly in Arabic, but also in French and English. The remarks offer a window into a moment when even the format of the solo art exhibition held a kind of modern novelty, demonstrating visitors’ searches for appropriate vocabularies to articulate their responses to al-Sa‘di’s work as well as a common impulse to express national pride.

Four of these entries were selected for translation and inclusion in the 2018 publication Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents. And in this online format, we are pleased to make five additional entries available in translation to readers interested in the development of artistic discourses around the world. To access a pdf of extended guest book entries in their original languages, please visit The Association for Modern and Contemporary Art of the Arab world, Iran, and Turkey (AMCA) website.

Guest book entries for Zulfa al-Sa‘di (1933)

The fine arts leave a fine impression on the soul, and the work I’ve seen here has left a deep impression on my soul. I can’t help but rejoice for Miss Zulfa, for this work has amazed me and my companions.

From Gaza, July 22, 1933

Have you heard the lovely melodies? Have you experienced how they make you quiver in delight and arouse sweet hopes and desires in you? This is how a person feels when he sees the refined lady Zulfa al-Sa‘di. The wonderful handicrafts on display in the Arab exhibition stir up great hope in the spectator—the hope that our women are on their way to a renaissance through such beneficial work. This brings us pride and joy.

Tanious Naser, newspaper owner, 1st day of the month of Rabi‘ II, 1352 [July 24, 1933]

We should have great admiration for the skillful hand that produced everything we saw in the first Arab exhibition—the hand of Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di, who truly counts as one of the treasures of the artistic renaissance in Arab Palestine. We plead to God for more women like Miss Zulfa, so that the men of this nation can come together to revive the glory and civilization that has been wiped out. God bless.

Abd al-Ghani al-Karmi and Muhammad Taha, 1st day of the month of Rabi‘ II, 1352 [July 24, 1933]

I am very proud of the artisanal renaissance that is being carried out by young Arab women in Palestine. I was delighted by the work I saw during my visit to the Arab exhibition, which demonstrates Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s excellent taste. Hopefully the young women of the future will follow in her footsteps. Bravo, Miss al-Sa‘di, and cheers to her work and to all who follow her example—onward until we acquire independence.

Abu Khaldoun, Tulkarem, July 26, 1933

Art expresses the purity and delicateness of the soul and the refinement of morals and excellence. The wonders of Miss Zulfa’s art are a source of pride for Arab handicrafts. She deserves our appreciation, and we commend the precision of her art and wish her brilliant success in her quest.

Omar al Saleh, lawyer, July 27, 1933

The works I found here in this room are truly the best I’ve seen in this blessed Arab exhibition, which is a good start for Arabs in general. The fair hands that worked at night to create these things are a testament to the Arab renaissance of the future. The hands of Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di will be the best means of spreading the Arab renaissance in the future. Good luck.

[Name illegible], July 27, 1933

I have seen a vibrant genius and an innovative Arab sensibility in Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s exhibited handicrafts. These works demonstrate precision and creativity. May God grant her success—I hope one day she becomes the director of an artisanal school for women, so that future young Arab women can benefit from her singular genius and her innovative taste. Many thanks to her.

Abd al-Raziq Mayri, Aleppo, Syria, July 27, 1933

Zulfa is a wellspring of verse and oratory, for poetry is nothing but tireless effort. Take a look at your creations, Zulfa: they’re marvels, the best on display at the Arab exhibition. The creation of Zulfa, is there wonder in magic? For the magic it contained, bewitched those who beheld it.

Yes, this is truly magic, and a wonder—or rather, many wonders: such extreme precision in the embroidery, such marvelous mastery in the craftsmanship, and such superb representation in the paintings, beyond even the skill of professional painters. When I saw her miraculous paintings, and in particular the one of the cactus fruit, I couldn’t help but try to grab one of the fruits and eat it!

This genius, this lady’s brilliance, is something every Arab can be proud of. It is fair to say that Miss Zulfa’s works are innovations to which nothing can be added—one is left speechless, for such creativity is unprecedented.

Al-Afghani, July 29, 1933

I visited the Arab exhibition, and the truth is that I couldn’t find anything that demonstrates more genius and artistic taste than Ms. Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s handicrafts, oil paintings, and other works. I am truly proud that someone in my dear country has achieved such status in the world of art, for I am but one of that country’s servants.

Akram Abd al-Salam al-Husseini, Ahmad al-Farjouli [?] Raouf Darwish [?], Adnan [illegible], Jerusalem

—From the guest book of Zulfa al-Sa’di’s 1933 exhibition, accessed from the research files of Rhonda Saad, departed colleague of the editors of Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents, who was preparing a study of Palestinian art and its publics until her unexpected death in 2010. Translations from Arabic to English by Kareem James Abu-Zeid

On the Concept of Painting and the Plastic Language

By Mohammed Chebaa | 1966

In Morocco in the mid-1960s, the National School of Fine Arts in Casablanca offered a new cohort of avant-garde thinkers—including artists Farid Belkahia, Mohammed Chebaa, and Mohammed Melehi—a platform for developing new models of decolonized, integrated artistic practice. Such an agenda is set forth in this position statement written by Chebaa on the occasion of the three-person Belkahia, Chebaa, and Melehi exhibition at the Mohammed V Theatre gallery in Rabat, and published in January 1966 in the Arabic daily al-‘Alam. In it, Chebaa argues for an authenticity of representation in modern Moroccan art. The poster by Mohammed Melehi that advertised the exhibition, in MoMA’s collection, signals this group of artists’ contemporary practice, grounded in vernacular forms and international graphic arts and design modes.

On the Concept of Painting and the Plastic Language (1966)

Mohammed Chebaa

The exhibition is a fitting occasion to take a look at the situation of our plastic arts in recent years.

We cannot deny that we are subject to the various problems that this situation poses, despite the impossibility of doing justice to them, with all their ramifications and complications, in a single essay or presentation. I believe that this plight comes from the fact that all of these problems have been fully raised, and now various opinions regarding them contend with one another.

Before we examine these problems, we need to take a small step back to see how the phenomenon of painting emerged in our country and what ultimately has become of it—virtually the only manifestation of the plastic arts movement that we have—and to examine the social and political influences it was subject to.

Our preliminary investigation foregrounds paintings by the oldest of the painters among us, who are now well-known figures: the likes of [Mohammed] Ben Ali Rbati of Tangier, around 1920, for example. Rbati’s paintings are not entirely primitive; rather they are symbolic figurative paintings. I believe that they are an extension of the paintings that typically accompany illuminated manuscripts—an art form still practiced by a small number of Moroccan artists, the most famous of whom is al-Qadiri of Fez—for they are closer to Persian painting than to European painting, not least because Persian artists have employed similar methods for ornamental painting on architecture as well as furniture, such as tables and chairs.

To this extent, this phenomenon remains purely Moroccan, although we notice that the abundance of painting production by these older artists often was due to the support of certain foreigners who discovered them and then exploited their production for various reasons, the most common being the quest for the exotic and the primitive. Rbati, for example, was a cook in one of the large English families living in Tangier at the time. And after this phase, which is still characterized by a Moroccan authenticity, came another phase that included many foreign patrons, most of who were expatriates in Morocco during the Protectorate and after it, whose inclinations and intentions varied.

We will only be concerning ourselves with two examples here. One of them is from the north, and the other is from the south. In the north, the Spanish painter [Mariano] Bertuchi was commissioned by the Spanish Protectorate to preside over the fine arts, and the most important of his initiatives was the founding of a school of fine arts, which, in Tétouan, is there to this day, and a school of Islamic arts. The school of fine arts played an important role in preparing Moroccan painters and sculptors to pursue studies abroad, in particular in Spain, just as the school of Islamic arts took part in revitalizing the national arts of the north: wood, metal, and plaster engraving; pottery; and mosaics. In the school of fine arts, Moroccan pupils became familiar with painting according to an academic concept of representation.

I believe the most important example in the south was undertaken in Marrakesh by the French painter [Jacques] Majorelle, who had both direct and indirect influence on the emergence of painting there. I once heard that the first female painter in Morocco was a woman who worked with Majorelle and who he guided toward painting.

In addition to these two examples, which are positive to a certain extent, there were also deleterious elements among the foreign painters, some of who exerted a negative influence on the emergence of our painting, for in their painting, they were only interested in views of daily life. This lent their work, and that of those Moroccan painters who were influenced by them, a touristic and documentary quality.

It is for this reason that those paintings are not in any way characterized by a Moroccan authenticity; rather, they are nothing more than distortions of what Moroccan painting might be, in addition to being inferior examples of what might be characterized as European art. And if we recall that European painting was, in that particular phase, in the process of distancing itself greatly from purely representational classical painting, we further realize that those foreign painters did not present us with good examples of what authentic Moroccan painting might be. After this, there came a phase that is much nearer to us, in which the phenomena of primitive painting and the naïf painter arose. The strongest examples are works by Mohamed Ben Allal and Moulay Ahmed Drissi, both of whom are from Marrakesh. It is common knowledge that the backers of these two artists were foreign patrons, led by a few foreign painters. I believe that this foreign support—first by the French Protectorate’s fine arts administration prior to independence, and by the French cultural mission after independence—was a way of highlighting an artistic phenomenon based (given our backward characteristics) upon exoticism, and not by any means upon support of popular art, as some people might believe.

Immediately after this, certain young painters emerged who demonstrated a particular openness to modern art, and especially to abstraction. They were sponsored by those same circles, and were sent to Paris to benefit from its school. All those painters did in fact return to Morocco, and most of them were greatly influenced by the city of Paris, and they are the ones who now represent the abstractionist trend in general, and Art Informel in particular, with [Jilali] Gharbaoui being their most prominent figure.

As a result, most of those painters also fail to demonstrate a trace of Moroccan authenticity, still less any African authenticity. The patrons and supporters I mentioned sense this, and so they seek a new outlet. When they opt to abandon these artists by renouncing their most prominent representative, Gharbaoui, then they soon find him wandering the streets without food or shelter, with illness gnawing away at his body! And in their search they find “new talents,” but this time we see those talents returning to the ranks of the primitives. For the best those foreign supporters can find among the artists who come after Ben Allal—who has become too old for them—is [Ahmed] Ouardighi. And so they bring Ouardighi out into the open, and set up exhibitions for him at home and abroad, and create a market that no Moroccan painter has ever even dreamed of (some of his paintings have sold for record sums).

Although this presentation was brief due to space constraints, we can see that our manifestation of painting is closely linked to our associations with foreigners, and consequently to our lived historical and political circumstances during the Protectorate, and during the independence after it. Indeed, some of the aforementioned foreign circles imposed their patrimony on the artistic and cultural renaissance. Painting’s turn away from African and Arab traditions goes back, firstly, to the guidance of those circles, and secondly to a lack of awareness on the part of our painters with our cultural and intellectual identity, in light of the weakness of their own education—most of our painters are illiterate.

The disadvantages of that artistic orientation do not stop here, however. Their repercussions also include the fact that some of our intellectuals now associate representational painting with Moroccan reality, unaware of the fact that the essence of our art was not and will never be representational, for there is nothing representational in either our Islamic art or our Berber art. Rather, it is abstraction and symbol—the abstraction of nature in geometric painting, engraving, mosaic ornament, and Berber carpets. It is impossible for us to be authentic in our work by orienting ourselves toward representation in painting, so how would such an orientation be appropriate for us at a time when research in the plastic arts in the West is turning toward the symbolic and abstract, after abandoning their classical traditions; attempting to draw benefit in that new research from our [collective] mentalities so as to reach a rejuvenation, a symbolism and art that is in keeping with what might be a foundation for art of the future?! This leads to a certain confusion between the understanding of plastic arts and that of literary language, and consequently to a lack of understanding of the true function of painting: they demand from the painting that it tell stories, that it depict events for them, as if it were a report or a narrative record. And they also demand that the painting perform the same task that the newspaper—or writing in general—performs, or that photography performs, and here there is a serious confusion between the characteristics of languages and their identity. For if I demanded of a painting that it merely record an event for me, then it would be more appropriate for me to read an article in the newspaper, which might very well be a clearer and more faithful rendering of that event!

The language of the plastic arts is not subject to the requirements of verbal or literary language, for these are two separate entities, each with its own rules and characteristics, and neither of them needs the other in order to accomplish its task fully, although both of them do have certain points in common with other languages—mathematics, music, theater, etc.—in embodying the human intellect and its civilization.

The treatment of this topic leads us to discuss an important problem: that of commitment in art. There are many conflicting opinions concerning this principle, but those who have hitherto posed this problem have, in my opinion, made the same mistake that we mentioned earlier: for in their understanding, commitment comprises “representational” painting, and the personification of the feelings and problems that the people are subject to in their bitter struggles. They also believe—and rightly so, this time—that painting must express the people and be understood by the people.

From this erroneous perspective, it appears as if the woman who weaves carpets in the remotest tribe of the Atlas Mountains does not understand the carpets she has woven, the designs of which she herself has created. A few conclusions can be drawn from this:

“Representational realism is not at the core of our artistic mentality. Rather, it was imposed by a different, European mentality—a reactionary one—which is alien to us.

Primitive art is not the only fitting direction our plastic art movement can take.

True commitment does not necessarily mean returning to regressive artistic models that are alien to us.”

So what is the solution, then?

Just as I do not claim here to comprehensively treat all the elements that were at the origin of our current situation in the plastic arts, neither do I claim to be able to put forward solutions to the problems that this situation poses. All I can do is suggest elements of solutions, which I hope we can discuss.

My presentation should not lead anyone to think that I am defending what is called abstraction simply for abstraction’s sake. Instead, I want to have been of benefit to the reader by demonstrating that the problem is not that of “abstraction vs. realism?” Rather, it is the following: research within the plastic arts befitting our rich traditions, our mentality, and our true perspective on the future.

And I believe that the best research within our plastic arts will be none other than investigation that takes the facts that we mentioned earlier into account. In my opinion, we must stop equating representation and figuration in painting with realism, since our artistic heritage—that of geometric ornament—is more realist and expressive of our historical mentality than any image that depicts a scene from everyday life!

I believe that this is the path of our true commitment.

Translated from Arabic by Kareem James Abu Zeid.

Belkahia, Chebaa, Melehi at the Mohammed V Theatre in Rabat, January 9–February 17, 1966.

Eds.: This is a reference to the mental illness and hospitalization of Jilali Gharbaoui, who had earlier gained fame in Paris as an Informel painter.

The Crystalist Manifesto

By Hassan Abdallah, Hashim Ibrahim, Kamala Ibrahim Ishaq, Muhammad Hamid Shaddad, Naiyla Al Tayib | 1976

Introduction

Man himself is the endeavor and the subject of a crystal that extends endlessly within. This happens simultaneously in isolation from and in connection to other things. We believe that the contradictions inherent in the claim that the universe is finite are no less than the contradictions inherent in the claim that the universe is infinite.

In the face of this crisis, the Crystalist idea emerges: the universe is at once finite and infinite; things have dual natures. When we say dual, we do not mean contradictory, for we go further and say that truth itself has a dual nature. When we refer to the duality of truth, we do not mean its multiplicity. This is not an issue that can be contained within a simple quantity; but perhaps it can be contained within a teleological quantity, namely, pleasure.

Theorization

Truth is relative, and absolute nature is dependent on man as a limited proposition. The struggle between man and nature always tries to find forms and claims for the opposite, that is, the absolute man, face-to-face with the limited forms and institutions in nature, which are themselves man-made. If the dialectic in classical modern thought is expressed with the phrases there are no isolated phenomena and man’s knowledge of matter lies in his knowledge of the forms of that matter’s movement, then we, in accordance with the idea of the crystal, may venture that the dialectic is a substitute for nature itself.

The basic premise for Crystalist thought, or modern liberalism, is to reject the essential quality of things, for it is now clear that any essence is nothing but a semblance for another essence. In the past, it was said that the atom was the irreducible essence, but then a whole world was discovered within it—nuclei, electrons, protons. This applies to subatomic particles, sub-subatomic particles, and to the limitless forms of existence of the entire cosmos. Man’s struggle with nature is but a transition from semblance to essence, which is in turn a semblance for another essence, and so the undoing of contradictions continues endlessly. This is what we mean when we speak of the transition from the opaque to the transparent, i.e., the removal of layers of concealment. The discovery of atoms does not negate the surface existence of things. Hence the naming of our school Crystalism, which implies the existence of both the semblance, or form, of the crystal and the dimensions and spectrums perceived within it. In the past, the transition from semblance to essence, and then to semblance, and so on, was regarded as idealistic thought, the standing objection being: Is there no difference between semblance and essence? And does that not also entail a beginning and an end? To that we say: The difference is primarily one of research methodology, and that the differentiation between semblance and essence is also subject to the same infinite sequence: semblance, essence, semblance, essence. . . .

But in order not to drag others into precarious territory, we opt for simplification and describe the process as follows: the transition is from relative semblance to relative essence, which creates another relative semblance that contains a new essence, and so the undoing of contradictions continues. Furthermore, the idea itself, as well as objections to it, are ultimately nothing but a potential embodiment of the crystal in its infinite spectra and its semblances, themselves also subject to endlessness. It is self-evident that a book lying before its owner is nothing but a semblance of a deeper essence, but we would here add that the same book is an essence for the semblance that surrounds it. That is to say, the crystal not only moves forward but also extends backward. To be more precise, it moves in all directions, or in all of space; or, if you will, the Crystalist school is nothing other than a negation of the objectification of objects.

The Unit of Measurement

The possibilities that nature lays before our eyes are not the ultimate possibilities. When an electron is two thousand times smaller than a proton, and one gram measures six hundred million trillion protons, it is understandable that a human being today—with disparate senses and a simple, empirical mind—would feel extremely alienated when attempting to grasp such massive numbers. We believe that the crisis lies originally in the old unit of measurement, for philosophy and the empirical sciences make man the unit of measurement, which leads to a dead end. The solution to this contradiction is to resurrect the essence, not the semblance, as the unit of measurement. Man’s essence is pleasure, and that should be the sole unit of measurement everywhere, including in the sciences, philosophy, and art—there is no other criterion. Pleasure in fact represents a full circle, in the sense that it is both a means and an end. Our goal is to seek out the teleological quantity.

The Chaos of Quantity

The dramatic struggle between materialism and idealism has resulted in familiar theories regarding the reality of things. Since antiquity, idealist thinking has claimed that the difference in things lies in expansions and contractions in quantity, and that, per Pythagoras and Democritus, numerical proportions are the basis of differences between things. Materialism, on the other hand, declared differences between things to be qualitative and occurring as a result of quantitative accumulation. From the crystal’s perspective, we believe that neither of these approaches sufficiently grasps the reality of things, for both deal with quantity and accumulation as fixed realities rather than a reality full of myriad contradictions. Quantity itself is simultaneously rational and irrational. Taking, for example, the number one as a unit of quantity, we find that it is made up of an accumulation of three thirds. But if, for the sake of precision, we divide it decimally by three, we unexpectedly find the result to be cyclic fractions that extend into infinity, which means that the accumulation in the number one is irrational, for it is both finite and infinite. Furthermore, when one is divided by an even number—for example, two—we find that the result is infinitely divisible by two.

We are confronted with the truth of the statement It is irrational for the finite to contain the infinite. We conclude that the number 1 is an irregular accumulation that, despite its finiteness, contains infiniteness. But we are still faced with the quantitative unit of “one.” In response to this quantum chaos, Crystalist thought emerges and proposes the teleological quantity, which is pleasure, and which also has a dual nature, being simultaneously a means and an end.

The Unit of Time

From the perspective of the crystal, we assert that things produce their own time, that there is more than one time depending on the diversity and difference of nature’s possibilities, and that what we live in is not that mythical collective time supposedly agreed upon by all people and shared by all things. Understanding the interconnectedness of multiple times is not particularly difficult, but it does require a high level of Crystalism. Man’s current alienation does not lie in the discrepancy of public times produced separately by separate things, but rather in the discrepancy of personal times, considering that each person is a construct of multiple and diverse things. The time unit of the individual is a matter of utmost importance.

Knowledge

Neoclassicism asserts that knowledge moves from the specific to the general, then back to the specific. We believe that generalization is a domain of repression. What really happens is that the specific and the free are pulled into the general domain and then returned in chains. We aim to liberate things from the repression of knowledge itself. To say that we seek knowledge that liberates things from knowledge itself does not make us self-contradictory; it makes us Crystalists. If knowledge was once based on the paradigm that a thing cannot be known in isolation from other things or from itself, then what we are currently proposing, in accordance with Crystalism, is that a thing cannot be known in isolation from infinity, or, in other words, that a thing can only be known in isolation from finiteness. We attach great importance to the claim that nothing is something, and that the dissolution of objective boundaries is itself a new objective boundary.

The Unit of Space

Matter exists in space. Things can exist above or below, to the North or the South, to the East or the West, etc. In other words, space is direction. But a thing is itself a space in the sense of an area, and area is determined by specificity, meaning that it would be difficult to claim that space is area, since area is extracted from the absence of area. We therefore say that when direction is specified it should be called an area, or, in other words, when it is perceived it should be called an area. Hence, North or East are also spaces in the sense of areas, except that they extend infinitely and are relative; indeed, infinite extension is possible from any relative point. Quantity is corrupt! We do not mean to claim that space does not exist in reality, but rather that it is an intellectual methodology. Based on the idea that space is direction, it is possible to say that the thing itself exists everywhere and, to complicate matters further, that the thing exists here and there in the same direction. In the face of this chaos of space, we propose teleological space, which is pleasure.

Language

Language, in its current state, being extremely close to objects, demonstrates its own corruption. The only way out of this is to dissolve language and turn it into a transparent crystal that moves in all directions: between the name, the subject, the thought, and their components; between the word and its components; and between the letter and its components. We expect this to happen in such a way that the fundamental opposition in language becomes an opposition between the crystal of meaning and the crystal of vocalization, which is a first and necessary step. We should mention here that the science of semiotics, [Claude] Shannon’s information theory, the methods for measuring quantitative possibilities of all information contained in a vocalization, the methods of measuring the information contained within one letter of the alphabet, and all associated mathematical laws—are nothing but dry academic methodologies as far as the problem of language is concerned. They are all based on the corrupt notion of quantity, and so do not rise to the level of the crisis.

Community

There are three types of repression suffered by the human form. Seen from a modern perspective, the first type is the repression that started with the separation of organic and inorganic matter, leading to the creation of man. The second type is the emergence of the objective mind, which is the mind of man’s entry into community. We also concede that at first, man collided with reality and outwitted it by creating certain institutions to fight it. It was inevitable, then, to form a community, and accordingly, man gave up a portion of his freedom in order to achieve harmony between his individual interests and the community’s interests. At the time, this price he paid was almost a freedom in itself. Ever since entering into community, man has been confronted with certain historical epochs characterized by different production relationships that were adopted by the intellectual institutions of each epoch, all confirming that instrument of repression. But the truth we are now facing is that the repression that occurred with the emergence of the objective mind continued to be inherited from one generation to the next. The idea of behavioral inheritance has much to support it, despite its being intentionally neglected for a long time. The obvious battle was between the schools of [Jean-Baptiste] Lamarck and [Charles] Darwin on the one hand, and those of [Hugo] de Vries and [August] Weismann—with their germ-cell research and evening primrose discoveries—on the other. In recent times, McDonough¹ came up with the decisive response to the question of behavioral inheritance. In all cases, we currently adhere to the idea that the function creates the organ and not the other way around. The third type of repression is the ongoing repression that is linked to the individual from birth to the present moment. As mentioned earlier, repression at first was both a necessity and a form of freedom, but through the acquisition of characteristics and its normalization, things become one’s nature, so that repression is no longer a price that man paid that ends with the end of its causes, but has become a human characteristic. Furthermore, man now finds pleasure in repression itself, having replaced sensual pleasure with nonphysical pleasure. There would be nothing wrong with that had the insufficiency of abstract pleasure not been scientifically proven. This has led to the creation of a new man for this age, the indifferent man, the refusing man, the man who does not experience pleasure. Modern literature, from Albert Camus’s “stranger” and Colin Wilson’s “outsider” to Tayeb Salih’s character Mustafa Sa‘eed, speaks of the indifferent man, the man who does not experience pleasure. We believe that anyone who reads such literature and appreciates it also carries a similar current within him. The risk is magnified by the fact that the undoing of that repression and the liberation of man, and thus all forms of his creative activities and energies—arts and literature—would be achieved by negating the objective mind.

Transparency

Crystalism seeks transparency, and so does Sufism, but the difference between the two can be summarized as follows: while Sufism (a mode of behavior) calls for dissolving into the self by negating personal volition, we believe that negating personal volition itself requires volition, or, in other words, that negating volition is itself a volitional act. When continued infinitely—volition, negation, volition, negation, and so on—an extending, infinite crystal is created, which again means the endlessly extending presence of semblances and essence.

But similarities do exist: the idea of the crystal is mentioned, both explicitly and implicitly, in a number of religions, for example Manichaeism, Orphism, Christianity, and Islam.

Beauty

In response to the question of what beauty is, we say that the crystal represents utmost beauty, and that the most prominent quality of the crystal is its liberality, in the sense of its being liberated. Furthermore, we maintain that a thing becomes beautiful when it has acquired a certain measure of dissolving objective limitations.

Plastic Art

Line: The basic value of the line lies in its direction. As mentioned earlier, matter exists in a direction, which is space, and matter is itself space in the sense of area. But in the final analysis, a line is a dynamic spatial dimension that contains temporal differences and transforms into them. The most exciting things about the line are its tangible bias toward the concept of space as direction rather than as area, and its containment of simple and dynamic temporal differences.

Color: Color is a composite. Taking for instance the color red, we find it to be unlimited both positively and negatively. This has prompted academics to break it down into principal bundles—scarlet, vermilion, crimson, and rose—in a desperate attempt to contain its limitlessness. To make things easier, we call for a change in the names of colors, so that instead of red we would say redness. Furthermore, there are numerous principal factors that negate the limitedness of color, such as:

1. The inclination of unlimited color toward other colors, [as] blue exists in reddish or greenish tones, in utterly limitless variations.
2. The amount of light falling on a color and reflecting off it.
3. The proportion of whiteness or blackness in a color.
4. The eye’s capacity to see, taking into consideration: a) the eye’s physiological makeup; b) the eye’s training in seeing and perception.
5. Spatial distance, which is also limited. Color is completely different, depending on whether it is one centimeter away or ten thousand meters away. This can be clearly discerned in natural landscapes, where the color red is the first to fade, turning gradually to brown until it disappears.
6. Also, the psychological state of the viewer, which can simultaneously be both certain and doubtful.
7. The possibilities of the nature of color presented before us at any given moment are not final, for the colors of nature are limitless.
8. Colors exist in nature in the form of surface. It follows that no surface in nature is without a specific color. Areas themselves appear geometrically or organically. Once again, geometric forms are limitless, as are organic forms.
9. Another relative factor for the surface of a color, if its form is defined, is its size. Blue, for instance, can exist in an area as wide as the sea, or it can cover just one millimeter. Again, there are no limits to how big or small an area can be. This leads us to unequivocally assert that colors exist in nature in limitless forms and possibilities: each color has limitless tonalities, the number of colors in nature is limitless, and the relationships among colors are limitless.

It can be said that simply being aware of a thing causes it to lose its essential characteristic, provided it had one to begin with. In this regard, Mao Zedong says that to know the taste of an apple you must taste it, meaning that you must change its taste in order to know it. Saying that green cannot be known in isolation from other colors would be an incomplete claim. The truth is that green can be known in isolation from finiteness.

Form: Objects acquire plastic value from their external movement: the value of a triangle lies in its triangularity. The academic perspective then studies the affiliations or relationships of a triangle with regard to other related forms, i.e., its external movement within the set of external movements of forms that it influences, or by which it is influenced. Aspects of similarity, balance, sequence, rhythm, and the rejection of disharmonies are studied. We assert that the triangle itself is of unlimited triangularity, assuming the validity of its reality as a triangle. The possibilities of its relationships with other forms are also unlimited. But let us forget all this and return to the academic perspective, where forms have always been divided into geometric and organic. Then, as knowledge progressed, academics had to budge a little, for it was proven that organic forms are only the product of geometric accumulations. As for geometric forms, those were eventually relegated to the museum of history with a massive sign that read “Euclid.” The old dreams have all collapsed—that two parallel lines never meet, that a straight line is the shortest route between two points, and the most impregnable stronghold of all, that light moves in a straight line. The old academics clung to these for a while, believing that an equivalent of the straight line existed in nature. But modern physics showed no mercy for any of these beliefs, and now the straight line no longer has any existence whatsoever. The differentiation between geometric and organic forms was a result of a quantitative understanding of things, but in reality everything is simultaneously geometric and organic.

An Appeal

We call on all plastic artists to use the color blue, for it has great potential in showing internal dimensions and depths—in other words, it has the ability to create a Crystalist vision. It is currently the clearest embodiment of Crystalism within the color spectrum. We must stress that the human ability to see internal dimensions in the color blue is not merely the result of a conditional reflex specific to the blueness of the sea and the sky.

Drama

The idea of the three dimensions of theater is irrational, for each theatrical performance is as multiple as the people who watch it. Someone sitting in the first row sees movements, expressions, and emotions, and hears vocal tones that are all completely different from what someone sitting at the very back of the theater, or to the right or left of the stage, sees and hears. So with the arrival of each new audience member, who would naturally occupy a different seat from all the others, a play remains open to further plurality and division. This plurality goes on infinitely, which is valuable in and of itself. But academics, with their habit of twisting the truth, deal with each play from a singular view, and it is on this basis that they issue their judgments, criticisms, and interpretations. Last year, when we covered the front of the theater with a transparent crystal, we were referencing this affliction. In the near future, in an attempt to ease critics’ consciences and give ourselves some rest, we will be interrupting the performance for short intervals in which we will ask audience members to change seats so that they can enjoy a greater variety of plays and have a more pleasant experience. This should result in less criticism. The idea of acting, or characterization, is itself an irrational idea: for two hours an actor can wreak havoc in the world through his assumed character, before hurrying off the stage for a previously arranged appointment, a cinema date for instance. This irrationality is not something that we discovered; the very history of theater is built on it. The struggle between theater giants like [Bertolt] Brecht and [Konstantin] Stanislavsky reflect it, and a dialogue with them is quite possible. Let us start with Stanislavsky’s question, “How can affective memory be turned into deliberate action?” And can this be achieved in isolation from the thesis of transparency? Is there not a need—even a minor one—for a theater of telepathy, history, clairvoyance, psychiatry, or automatism?

Concerning the appeal to morphology (the science of form) to provide a futuristic solution to the problem of drama, we say that human morphology is a set of developmental cycles and multiple adaptations to ensure survival. We still maintain that it is the function that creates the organ and not the other way around. Furthermore, present morphology reflects that struggle that relates to the different capacities of an earlier age. Now that man has entered the technological age, present morphology has become almost a burden on him.

Poets

Transparency is a genuine current in poetry. What artist and poet William Blake said about man’s four-dimensional vision—the ability to see an entire world in a grain of sand—represents a cornerstone of Crystalist thought. Sufi poetry is also full of references to the reality of the crystal. Indeed, it takes the crystal to its furthest and most impenetrable extremes. This can be seen in the following translation of a poem by Asif Jatt Halabi:

The colors went to the sun I need neither colors Nor the absence of colors The suns died, devoid of space I need neither light Nor darkness

Children

The interest and intense joy that young children exhibit toward the crystal in its simple forms—like a soap bubble or a kaleidoscope, which consists of a lens and broken bits of glass—add to the crystal’s authenticity. Children’s interest in the crystal is a deeply complex matter, for children are the most complex of riddles.

Conclusion

We conclude by repeating that the crystal is nothing but the denial of the objectification of objects. It is infinite transparency. We painted the crystal, we thought about the crystal, and so the Crystalist vision came to be.

—“Bayān al-Madrasa al-Krīstāliyya,” al-Ayyām, January 21, 1976; repr. in Ṣalāḥ Ḥasan ʿAbd Allāh, Musāhamāt fī al-Adab al-Tashkīlī, 1974–86, 2nd ed. (Khartoum: Madarek, 2010), 311–22. Translated from Arabic by Nariman Youssef.

The post Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents appeared first on post.

To stay alive—psychologically, creatively—the black South African sculptor and painter Ernest Mancoba (1904–2002) managed to leave home.¹ On September 2, 1938, he boarded the SS Balmoral Castle in Cape Town, destined for Southampton, England.² Mancoba’s berth on the steamship, and his concomitant personal and artistic rebirth, resulted from protracted negotiations with liberal patrons who finally agreed to fund a year of study in Paris.³ Many South African artists had already traveled to Paris and other European capitals since the nineteenth century,⁴ but Mancoba was the first black artist to do so. He would not revisit South Africa until after the end of apartheid, and would never live there again.⁵

Arriving in Southampton on September 19, Mancoba went directly to London, where he spent a week before continuing on to Paris.⁶ Aside from meeting a few contacts,⁷ he made use of his time in London by visiting the African collections at the British Museum. Some two years earlier, Mancoba had first encountered canonical West and Central African sculpture in a library in Cape Town, in the pages of a lavishly illustrated book entitled Primitive Negro Sculpture.⁸ Despite its unfortunate title, the book’s discovery in Cape Town marked a turning point for the young artist because it catalyzed his embrace of modernism, which to him meant a rough geometric aesthetic modeled on African sculpture.⁹ Mancoba would see a full African art collection for the first time in London.

To the fortuitous benefit of art history, Mancoba happened to tour the British Museum with an inquisitive writer who published an anonymously bylined article the next month (as “Our Special Representative”) relating the following: 

The rest of the story of Ernest Mancoba’s work was told me [sic] in the African room of the British Museum. For a time he was what I can only call passionately absorbed in the primitive art of his people, the carved stools, the figures of fighters, of great tribe-leaders, of women and children. “Look,” he said to me, “they are all serene. Do you know why? My carvings are made to show Africa to the white man. That is why they are sad. These primitive artists were working for the preservation of the group-life. The artists, with the chiefs and priests, are the great leaders of the world. In Africa they carved figures strong and beautiful and free because they wished to lead the people of their tribe to strength, to beauty and to freedom. ¹⁰

As recounted by the writer, Mancoba remembered his earlier “carvings” as compromised products of the colonial order. Conceived under church and liberal patronage, those sculptures were “sad”; they aimed only “to show Africa to the white man.” The “sad” designation probably did not apply to Mancoba’s recent modernism, but rather to his early production commissioned through the Diocesan Training College at Grace Dieu, an Anglican training college for black schoolteachers in the northern Transvaal Province (now Limpopo), where he had learned wood carving starting around 1925.¹¹

On first glance, Mancoba’s early sculptures do not seem so despairing as he later believed. Future Africa (1934), for example, is ostensibly cheery, figuring two African youths as torchbearers for the continent’s bright future. The sculpture’s reassuring representation of Africans garnered endorsements from liberal critics and patrons.¹² It is nonetheless pertinent that Future Africabecame “sad” once Mancoba stood appreciating African art in the British Museum in 1938. Quitting South Africa must have yielded a new perspective, and Future Africa betrays desolation upon closer inspection: the boys’ heads are bowed, their eyes downcast, their postures resigned. On a formal level, too, Future Africa arguably undermines its own emancipatory message by failing to break free of colonially imposed academicism.¹³

Mancoba’s contrasting, redemptive reading of African art at the British Museum—“all serene,” “strong and beautiful and free”—suggests a certain penchant for idealism and dreamed-up nostalgia. Still, the artist’s oeuvre would come nowhere close to replicating the romantic “primitivism” of, say, Paul Gauguin (1848–1903) in the South Pacific, or Irma Stern (1894–1966) in Southern Africa.¹⁴ Soon after arriving in Paris on September 27, Mancoba began attending classes at the École Nationale Supérieure des Arts Décoratifs, where he befriended several artists associated with the Danish Abstract Surrealist group Linien: Christian Poulsen (1911–1991), Ejler Bille (1910–2004), and Sonja Ferlov (1911–1984).¹⁵ Communicating in English, Mancoba and the Danes shared an outsider status in Paris, as well as common interests in modernism and African sculpture.

Although canonical African sculpture had initially informed Mancoba’s modernism, and would inform it subsequently, his practice took a different turn in 1939 after his experience in London and at the start of his relationship with the Danes. Not only did he stop making three-dimensional work, but he also jettisoned any ambition toward representation. To cease production of “sad” images, the artist fully—if momentarily—embraced abstraction. Two surviving watercolors from this period adopt an elementary visual grammar: straight lines and pure color. In one composition, pale swaths of blue, red, and orange-brown make up a shallow plane overlaid with black rosettes. The other composition suggests a spherical space, with crosshatched grids permeating a cloud of soft hues. Given the artist’s particular trajectory, his abstractions hint at something personal and political mapped onto a new formal horizon. Abstraction, for Mancoba, meant turning his back on South African patrons’ demands for sanguine images of “native” life.

Instantiating those demands—and setting the stage for the abstract turn—was a job offer Mancoba received from the South African government’s Department of Native Affairs in the spring of 1936.¹⁶ Dr. N. J. van Warmelo, a Native Affairs ethnologist, hoped to hire Mancoba to craft saleable souvenirs for the Empire Exhibition in Johannesburg, scheduled for that fall.¹⁷ Echoing Warmelo’s aims, press coverage from this period reinforced common colonialist conceptions of black artists as instinct-driven traditionalists and representatives of their “race.”¹⁸ Mancoba initially accepted the offer, which carried a certain privilege and would guarantee steady work. But he subsequently reconsidered the position and refused it, pivoting instead toward Paris.¹⁹

Mancoba’s challenge to art history partly involves learning to interpret his circa 1939 abstraction—and “black” abstraction more broadly. Whereas Euro-American art genealogies tend to be discussed in terms of ideas and imagination, tout court, art from outside that realm still often gets pegged to artists’ identities, and framed as the product of experiences marked as “other.” Some black artists historically have responded to such formulas by seeking to evade them, notably by way of abstraction. In noting that Mancoba’s 1939 watercolors anticipated abstract art among African-descended modernists elsewhere, the lesson is not one of establishing precedence but rather of seeing parallels across contexts—including a perennial insistence on pigeonholing artists of color, irrespective of the nature of their work. Wherever the artist seeks to escape compartmentalization, the critic or scholar works at cross-purposes by qualifying his/her abstraction as “African” or “black.”

Art historian Darby English, researching the painter Ed Clark (born 1926) and other postwar African-American abstractionists, has found “the urge for symmetry between biography and picture-effects [to be] so strong in black art history that the turbulent color work in the art is impotent next to the sureness that it, or something in the picture, reflects back all the unassailable epistemological stability of [. . .] racial blackness.”²⁰ Surveying the South African context, historian Daniel Magaziner has similarly charged that art history may “share with the apartheid state the conviction that as black artists, individual creators approached their canvas, wood, or stone with a set of predictable concerns born of their supposed racial identity—to be political or not, to be ‘modern’ or ‘traditional.’ Who they were thought to be determines how we understand their work.”²¹ These statements, and the important recent studies from which they are drawn, grapple with complications and difficulties involved in reconciling “black” and “art.” Racial and political dimensions to art-making cannot be expunged with the will to abstraction. But neither can they be taken as all determining. As Mancoba’s work reveals, abstraction could itself be a form of retaliation against racialist orthodoxies, executed with freedom in mind. Such moves are nuanced and complex even as they relate back to a basic question: how might it look to be simply human, yet extraordinarily alive?

In the event, Mancoba’s signature style required one more decisive move. Rather than stay with nonobjective painting, the artist reintegrated the human form in a radically new configuration devised by appropriating figural and design elements from the African canon.²² Mancoba’s Composition (1940)—his first effort in this vein and his first-ever painting on canvas—imaginatively “modernizes” a Congolese Kuba mask (as art historian Elza Miles has convincingly proposed)²³ by integrating flat chevrons, geometric shapes, and grids. Did Mancoba stray from nonobjectivity for the reason that hypothetically, once emptied of all signs of identity, his art could appear to have been made by anyone? Since authors of abstract art around this time were presumptively European descended, the resultant confusion would hardly suit an African modernist intent on overturning assimilationist doctrines underpinning imperial “civilizing missions.” For Mancoba and others of his generation, complete abstraction carried a danger of signaling alienation, in the sense of posing or passing as something foreign. Perhaps to preempt any such misreading while retaining key lessons from abstraction, Mancoba reintroduced elements from African material culture and abstracted them, resulting in a deep amalgamation of indigenous African and modernist European formal aesthetics. This tactic would continue to animate Mancoba’s production in the decades to come.

The post Identity and Abstraction: Ernest Mancoba in London and Paris, 1938- 1940 appeared first on post.

“I have seen a vibrant genius and an innovative Arab sensibility”: Visitors’ impressions of the 1933 Palestine Pavilion at the First National Arab Fair

Date 1933
Language Arabic, French, English

The texts below are entries taken from the 1933 guest book from the first solo exhibition of the work of Zulfa al-Sa‘di (1905–1988), a young Palestinian female artist, held in the Palestine Pavilion at the First National Arab Fair, organized in Jerusalem under the auspices of the Supreme Muslim Council. Al-Sa‘di, who had studied with the renowned “Jerusalem School” icon painter Nicola Saig (1863-1942), exhibited a range of work: oil paintings of landscapes, still life compositions, and portraits of Arab heroes as well as contemporary cultural and political figures—the latter, such as King Faysal I of Iraq, which is illustrated here, drew on the photographic sources then circulating in the expanding print media—alongside applied arts such as embroidery works.

Hundreds of visitors signed the guest book, many of them identifying hometowns and origins from across the Arab East. Entries are predominantly in Arabic, but also in French and English. The remarks offer a window into a moment when even the format of the solo art exhibition held a kind of modern novelty, demonstrating visitors’ searches for appropriate vocabularies to articulate their responses to al-Sa‘di’s work as well as a common impulse to express national pride.

Guest book entries for Zulfa al-Sa‘di (1933)

The fine arts leave a fine impression on the soul, and the work I’ve seen here has left a deep impression on my soul. I can’t help but rejoice for Miss Zulfa, for this work has amazed me and my companions.

From Gaza, July 22, 1933

Have you heard the lovely melodies? Have you experienced how they make you quiver in delight and arouse sweet hopes and desires in you? This is how a person feels when he sees the refined lady Zulfa al-Sa‘di. The wonderful handicrafts on display in the Arab exhibition stir up great hope in the spectator—the hope that our women are on their way to a renaissance through such beneficial work. This brings us pride and joy.

Tanious Naser, newspaper owner, 1st day of the month of Rabi‘ II, 1352 [July 24, 1933]

We should have great admiration for the skillful hand that produced everything we saw in the first Arab exhibition—the hand of Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di, who truly counts as one of the treasures of the artistic renaissance in Arab Palestine. We plead to God for more women like Miss Zulfa, so that the men of this nation can come together to revive the glory and civilization that has been wiped out. God bless.

Abd al-Ghani al-Karmi and Muhammad Taha, 1st day of the month of Rabi‘ II, 1352 [July 24, 1933]

I am very proud of the artisanal renaissance that is being carried out by young Arab women in Palestine. I was delighted by the work I saw during my visit to the Arab exhibition, which demonstrates Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s excellent taste. Hopefully the young women of the future will follow in her footsteps. Bravo, Miss al-Sa‘di, and cheers to her work and to all who follow her example—onward until we acquire independence.

Abu Khaldoun, Tulkarem, July 26, 1933 

Art expresses the purity and delicateness of the soul and the refinement of morals and excellence. The wonders of Miss Zulfa’s art are a source of pride for Arab handicrafts. She deserves our appreciation, and we commend the precision of her art and wish her brilliant success in her quest.

Omar al Saleh, lawyer, July 27, 1933

The works I found here in this room are truly the best I’ve seen in this blessed Arab exhibition, which is a good start for Arabs in general. The fair hands that worked at night to create these things are a testament to the Arab renaissance of the future. The hands of Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di will be the best means of spreading the Arab renaissance in the future. Good luck.

[Name illegible], July 27, 1933

I have seen a vibrant genius and an innovative Arab sensibility in Miss Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s exhibited handicrafts. These works demonstrate precision and creativity. May God grant her success—I hope one day she becomes the director of an artisanal school for women, so that future young Arab women can benefit from her singular genius and her innovative taste. Many thanks to her.

Abd al-Raziq Mayri, Aleppo, Syria, July 27, 1933

Zulfa is a wellspring of verse and oratory, for poetry is nothing but tireless effort. Take a look at your creations, Zulfa: they’re marvels, the best on display at the Arab exhibition. The creation of Zulfa, is there wonder in magic? For the magic it contained, bewitched those who beheld it.

Yes, this is truly magic, and a wonder—or rather, many wonders: such extreme precision in the embroidery, such marvelous mastery in the craftsmanship, and such superb representation in the paintings, beyond even the skill of professional painters. When I saw her miraculous paintings, and in particular the one of the cactus fruit, I couldn’t help but try to grab one of the fruits and eat it! 

This genius, this lady’s brilliance, is something every Arab can be proud of. It is fair to say that Miss Zulfa’s works are innovations to which nothing can be added—one is left speechless, for such creativity is unprecedented.

Al-Afghani, July 29, 1933 

I visited the Arab exhibition, and the truth is that I couldn’t find anything that demonstrates more genius and artistic taste than Ms. Zulfa al-Sa‘di’s handicrafts, oil paintings, and other works. I am truly proud that someone in my dear country has achieved such status in the world of art, for I am but one of that country’s servants.

Akram Abd al-Salam al-Husseini, Ahmad al-Farjouli [?] Raouf Darwish [?], Adnan [illegible], Jerusalem

—From the guest book of Zulfa al-Sa’di’s 1933 exhibition, accessed from the research files of Rhonda Saad, departed colleague of the editors of Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents, who was preparing a study of Palestinian art and its publics until her unexpected death in 2010. Translations from Arabic to English by Kareem James Abu-Zeid

The post Modern Art in the Arab World: Primary Documents – Visitors’ impressions of the 1933 Palestine Pavilion at the First National Arab Fair appeared first on post.