Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us

8/14/2019 Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us

1/7

T a lkin g Art a s t h eSpi r i t M ov e s U s

IN H n K crit ica l book Radiance/ rom tbeWattrs. an histori an and crit icSylvia Ardyn Boone theo rizes the aesthetic understandi ngs that shapeideals of beau ry in Mende an . Wh ile the subtitle to this work implies acent ral focus on the "feminine," in actual ity Boone begins with rhe srandpo inr of Mende women to lay th e foundati on for a complex reading ofart ,aesthet ics, and philosophical assumptions in Sierra Leone. Again andagain in her book, Boone shares a popular proverb in Mende society thatdeclares: "There is a thing passing in the sky:some thick clouds surroundit ; rhe unininared see nothing ." Explain ing to chose who not int imatelygrasp the Signi ficance of rhese words, Boone start'S: "This proverb present s che idea of init iation 0 1 a ronditiM of Ittlnc. as personal enli gh t enmem oEverything is OU t in t he open ; noth ing is purpose fully hidden ,Seasons change; flora and fauna go through their life cycles: people moveabo ut, inremcr, hand le obiecrs: events fake place; things 'happen.' lniciares have t heir eyes opened , so they have 'eyes to see.' These 'eyes' aremetaphys ical: an informed intellect , a widened vision, a deepened di scem rner n." Th is proverb easily applies to the way in which art created byAfrican-Americans is looked at and ta lked about . All tOO ofren the "uninit iated see nothing ."

This cult ural inability to recognize the comp lexity of vis ion tha tinforms the wor k of African-American art ists CUtS across bounda ries of11I('e, Paint ing in rhe 1940s, Romare Bearden found that black folks wereoften freaked by rhe images in his work: "To many of my own peo ple, Ilearn , my work \\,115 very disg usting and morbid - and pc rrrayed a fypl:ofNegro that they were frying to get away from," Now rhar Bearden's workhas become an accepted parr of t he canon, ir is seen di fferen tl y by blacksand whi tes alike, Edward Lucie-Smith's book Ratt,So: andGendff' III (;011-I tl l lfHira r), A rt is a prime example of the way in which an by African-Americans conti nues to be regarded with contempt and suspicion. W hile one


2/7

10 ] AliT ON MV '-' 1/1


3/7

TAlKI :-G AltT AS TH[ SPr l. lT v E US 10)of marginalized groups rc understand the importance of aeseheucs. Thereare man)' ind ividuals in rhe mainstream an world who would insist tha tLucie-Smith is Irrelevant precisely because he is a generalist . clearly nor acrrrira l thinker, Yet his large book. with its provocative and compellingnde, interests me because it is marketed in rhe direcrion of a mass aud ioence. It relies on the inte rest in race, sex, and sender genera ted by theresista nce struggle s of the very s roups Lucie-Smith wri tes about withIgnorance. d isregard , and contempt. It represents a perfect gesture of eel-onizarion and appropriarion. Yet the noee on the desrjacker of this booktells readers that "works by Afncan-Americans. feminists. homosexuals,and Lenno- Hispanics-c-once conside red marginal - have come to rransform p r r an," a statement that few crit ical thinkers about artwou ld d isag ree with . However hrs insistence rhat "minoeiry" art hasbecome "our most major coocern" is ludicrous. Lucie-Smith carefully andsrr eeegicalty assumes the false posture of object ive neutral iry. He claimsthat the discourse of di fference is "deliberatel y obfuscating " and "constand y shifeiog" because irs pu rpose is ( '0 exclude genera list critics such35 himse lf, who "can rbeo be dismissed as racists, While racism, as ovenexploitation and oppression on the basis of skin color, ISnot somethingone can rrace in Lucie-Smith's book, his critical standpoi nts unabashedlyreflecr white-supremacist parrra rchal biases. The extent to which Lur-ieSmith arrogandy disp lays his ignorance about marginalized groups andlhe an we produce is shocking, Since the intent of the book is to insistthat most such art is not relevant. that it is a mere imitat ion of "grtac" artno doubt created prima rily by white men in the \'(lest, Lucie-Smith ends.....ith the statement : "T he main conclusion must be that the minorityVIsual arts. though on the su rface often an expression of revoir againstcomemponu y western society and ItSsocial and economic srruceures, areIII fuel complete ly dependent on that scctery," Contrary to this assertion.most art ists from marginal g roups would not choose "revolt" as the defining characte rist icof their work.

Significantly, thi s insistence on "revolt" as rhe quintessen t ial markerthat disringuisbes works of art produced by arrisrs from margi nal g roups.especially people- of color. is a srendpcirurooted in [he politics of domination.Often it isonly che anger and ragt" expressed by marginal groups thatis "seen" by white folks, [hat can gamer their attention . Th is is as t rue ofthe liberal and progressive whire gaze as it is of the conservaove right. I t


4/7

then becomes the (OtallZlng ethos, Without any mainstream preceden t.the 1993 Wh itney Biennial Exhibit ion highlighted works by artis ts frommarg inal g roups to inrervene and challenge the polnics of dominat ion inthe an world , Yet it failed in thi s intention because it indiscriminatelyframed all the work with in the context of revoir , That framing wasimposed the moment one arrived at rhc museum and confronted a largebillboard -sue blowup ofa really intense. provocaeive photograph ofappa renrly host ile young black malt's taken by the artist Par Ward Wi lliams.The g raff1 tilike text on lhe image wasan in-your-face confrontalivt' declaration : -WHAT YOU LOOKIN AT.- In actuality. the vast majoriry ofwork in rhrs Biennial Exhibition , particularly pieces that were not specifi cally commissioned and created for the show. wNe not concerned withrevol t. Much of the work d id not evoke narrow not ions of ide ntity andessence but, rather. reflected concerns with cull ural hybr idicy. bordercross!ngs. and constructive cult ural appropriat ions. That expansiveanddiverseartisticscope wassubsumed by the imposit ion of a totalizi ng curare na l ethos privilegin g revolr-c- reacnng [0 whi te supremacy. Ironically,even though the African.American curator Thelma Golden suggests inher catalog essay - \'Qhat"s White , . . rhar "am sts to the ninet ies havebegun t'O fully deconsrrucr the margmaluy-cenrrahey paradigm" because"rhe center is increasingly undefinable and perhaps irrelevant ,- that veryparadigm of margin and center usefully describes rbe underlying assumpt ions informing the curatorial process of th is show. Br si tua ting all chework of thesediverse arrisrs asagt'stur c of revoir against mainsrream culture and its values . whitene ss was n OI decenrered, it was coosranrly thepoint of depart ure, The cent er had not been di srupted . Foregrouodingwork (rom lhe "marg ins" was not transgressive or rransformarive preciselybecause tbar work was reappropr iated and positioned to serve rhe dominant culture's need ( O rbe margim as ~ y s a n only in revolt .

lodusron, without any dis rupnon of the srarus quo, usually reinscrib es , in a d ifferent form, the very patterns of domina tion th ai havebeen cru iqued and interrogated to make an opening . A major di lemmafaced by all marginal g roups suffering exploitati on or oppression in thisculture and by our allies in st rugg le is the sn uggle to resolve. in a c onsercceive way, rhe tension between reformist work that aims to changethe srarus quo so rbar we have access to the privileges accorded the dominant group and the more radical project of resisraoce rhar seeks to dis-


5/7

TA LK1!'G ART AS ru r SP I R IT )l OV ES l S i c tmaude or t ransform the existing St ructu re. All tOO often the price of t heticket for inc lusion is that we are subordinated in new and d ifferent ways.Clearly, th is has happened in the an world . \'Qhen wor ks of urr by peop leofco lor are highl ighted in an essent ialist way, nor because of the nature ofthe work but more because of the dommanr cul ture 's newfound int erestin the "other," then certa in stereotypes and assumpt ions about tokenismare simply reinforced . T his was certai nly the C3SE' with the W hit ney Biennial. Even so, the show had positive implications and effects. It posi rrvvlyhighlig htl'd th e work of individual arr isrs in a setti ng that accrues stat usand arrenrion and is visit ed by a large numbe r of people. The respollS(' (0the show by mainst ream white cultu re exposed the extent ro which whitesupremacis t biasescont inue to inform crit ical reception of work b)' art istsfrom marginal g roups , especially when that work does not directly reflect[he inte res ts and conce rns of the conserva t ive whit t' major it y. In th issense. the show served as a pain fu l "wake-up" call , rem inding us tha t apoli t ics of dominat ion remains in place in th e art world, unchanged b)'res istan ce snugg le. No t on ly, then , mu st t he s t ruggle cont inue, thest rategies for challenge and nu nsformar ion must be constantl y changed.reevaluated . reen visioned .

Before the \'Qhirney Biennial, many prog ressive artis ts , cruics. and artaudiences really believed rha t t he work of unlearning raci sm and orherbiases was be ing effecrively accomplished . Many of us believed that liberel ind ivid uals ofall races had come to new understand ings about d ifference. Yet negat ive reactions to the Wh itn ey show. fiercely host ile to thi satt empt to red ress pas t biases and deeply contemptuous ofboth the proJtet and the work , carne from all s ides of the political spect rum. And themost negating polemical responses came from cri t ics.

Althoug h cr itics are often seen as not really important when it comesto rhe making of public policy about an and rhe crearing ofspaces for cul-t ura l prod uc tion and curaror ia l d isplay, it is more rhan evident t hat amajor revol ut ion must happen in the areas of bo th t rad itiona l an criticism and new critical writing abo ut art eme rg ing from vanous in rellecmallocmons and standpo ints if we are to rransfcrm an prac t ices in waysthat inter rogate, challenge, and alte r in a last ing W d Y pol itics of domina-tion. At rhe same rime, our insig hrful cr it iques of white-su premacist capitalist pa t riarchy (which includes a challenge ro bererosexism) cannot bemade only in an inte llectua l o r academ ic subcult ure les e elit ism merely


6/7

10 6 " i tT 0 1'00 M Y M I N Dtake on a new form. Indeed, if progressive art ists and crit ics from diverselocadons want to make crit ical interventions that reach wide audi ences,we oeed to value general ist work as much as we do work that is more specific. We nero to express our views moreoften in popular mass med ia-in magaz ines , newspapers, etc. Much of t he negat ive cri t ical anent ionchar focused on the 199 3 Biennial Exhibiti on had irs origins in [he popular press. Th e discou rse: ofd ifference. rhen, does ente r the everyday livesof the masses. but rarely in a way that is at all const ructi ve.

As a cultural critic. I began writi ng about art because I saw an absenceof progressive art crit icism in both rradirional and popular sett ings. Iwanted to respond to gaps and blindspoes. When I first began to read andstudy critical work about African-American art . I was t ruly appalled bythe lack of complex thinki ng. As borh a writer and an artist , I cont inue tofeel a tremendous sadness that there is not a large body of crit ical writ ingabour art by African-Americans that truly addresses the aesthetic d imensions ot rhar work in irs d iversityand complexity. Unfortu nately, when therare white critic pays arrenrion to art by black arti srs, (s)he tends to berewarded no matter what the content of the crit icism is. Ofceneirnes, afterall. ind ividual artists art ,USt SOg rateful to be the recipients ofeven a smallmeasure of rega rd.Often a hierarchyemerges within crit ical wriring aboutAfrican-Americans where any work by a whi te crit ic deemed liberal andprog ressive is held in such esteem that it is difficult for nonwhite criocs tointerrogate that work without censor. When we critique and chal lenge thecrit ical writings of our progressive white peers, we are often admonishedfor not recogn izing rbe "good" they do. It is the missionary ethic of colonialism all over again. To g ivean example: Several years ago I engaged in acritical conversat ion abou t art with Amalia Mesa-Bains ar the San Francisco An Institute. We wert crit ical of Lucy Lippard's book Afixtd Bltn-iJgl . W h we both prefaced our critique by acknowledging rbe book'svalue. some ind ividuals in the audience, rather th an hearing th e ide asraised and grappling with them, heard our comments only as a perso nalarrack. To them Lippard represented , and rightly so, a mean ingful ally.Yet being an ally should not mean rhar any work one produces cannot beengaged d ialect ically, criti cally. Concu rrently, people of color rend to berelucram to crit iq ue one another, We art fearful of losing comrades, conoecocns. or ofjusr adding to the st ress that our peers are alreadyfscing . Toproduce a bod y of excellent . sophisticated, d iverse crit ical wtiting tha t


7/7

TALKINC AI T AS T l I ( I l \I 0 VU OS I add resses art by Afrtcan. Americans and people of color m general. wemust collectively embrace rigorous dialece lcel exchange. \'Ve must be wi II ins to listen to one anorher. to read work carefully,and to engage it crir ically,Much of the marvelous crit ical writing on African.AmcriCllin art isemerg ing from cultural crit ics who have nor been rt'3d ilionally tra ined II Iacademic d isciplines focusing on art. In the future we will hopefully seecompelling critical work from a variety of locations.

Ofallr he crit ical writing I do . my work on an . though personall y ful-fi lling. ga rners rhe least amount of anen rion and reward . fr also requiresrremendous effort bot h to produce and to disseminate. If we fail ro privrlege critical wnr ing abou t Afric:m.Ameflcan art th at emerges from a progresstve standpoint, we will not see a change in how that art is criricallyreceived in mainstream culture. Cri tical writ ing must be valu ed byarrisrs and audiences of color if we are to crea te a cultu ral contex t wheremore crincal thinkers will ch002 to do rhar weinng .

Sylvia Ardyn Boone. who was my senior colleague and friend when Iraught in the African American Studies deperemeneat Yale University.was a brillianr progressive th inker and writer about art . \'Ve had manyconversat ions about the fact that an magazines almosr never sought toprint her work. that symposiurnson art held by foundations and uoiversiues did nor seck to hear her voice . Her book Radtanct! rom tht Warm,mennoned at th e beg inni ng of th is essay. has mrely been referenced ortalked about in critical writ ing on art. Boone often felr silenced . She feltrhar her voice could not be heard above the clamor crea ted by beeeerknown white pee rs receiving widesp read an ent ion and acclaim. Rarefyd id chese crincs call anen t ion to her work .1bough we no longer have theopportunity ro "hear" her voice speak about art . fortunately we can stillread and apprecia te her work. Yet I cannot close this essay wit houtlamenting the loss of Sylvia Ard yn Boone. whose crit ical persp ecti vechallenged me ro grow as a criti c. who often iniriared me. guiding me sotha t I would look more closely at a g iven subject, so rhar I would seedeeply. 800ne believed wholehear ted ly that the aesthetic dimension ofblack life needed our critical nrrention and regard -e- needcd to be w i nessed. To sustain thi s crit ical legacy. African.Amer ican crit ics and ourallies in strugg le mus t da re to courageously spea k our minds . to talkabout art as rhe spirir moves us.

Documents

Talking Art as the Spirit Moves Us