Black Is, Black Ain't

Here is my review for the exhibition "Black Is, Black Ain't" at the Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago. It was an intriguing exhibition that included artists exploring blackness from a variety of societal, cultural and ethnic backgrounds. In my review I focused on three pieces which included themes of desire. I thought it was interesting that Hamza Walker, exhibition curator, said that the postmodern approach to blackness is one of obsession. This is the unifying motif that I found within the three works I discuss.

Obsession and Desire in Black Is, Black Ain’t

In the age of post-ethnicity, a term coined during the Freestyle show at the Studio Museum in Harlem, the Black Is, Black Ain’t show does not deny the binary racial categorizations of black and non-black, but instead exhibits an apparent obsession with blackness. The exhibit shows a fascination with blackness that pervades our social experience, both accepting and simultaneously rejecting the racial categorization. Unlike Freestyle, the show that served as a cultural landmark to the post-black era, the artists in this exhibition come from diverse racial, political and social backgrounds. The inclusion of non-black, in addition to black, artists allows the exploration of blackness from various points on the cultural spectrum. It also makes for a more diverse approach to aesthetics, instead of the pervasive “black aesthetic” that dominated the majority of shows focusing on blackness. One poignant theme that emerges from the use of diverse artists is the issue of desire regarding blackness, from the perspective of the outsider as well as those immersed in the culture. Desire is represented in various forms; both aesthetically and ideologically. The most obvious form of desire is physical or sexual, but there are also elements of emotional, psychological and intellectual desire exhibited in various works. The majority of artists focusing on desire in relation to blackness are not black. These artists are investigating blackness in relation to racial taboos with an honest, and often personal, approach to ideas of race.
The desire exhibited in these works is not a desire to be black, but instead a psychological desire to understand blackness and a physical desire to “feel” blackness. Tom Johnson’s work, What a Black Man Feels Like, is a monologue performed by the artist in front of the camera, originally exhibited as a live performance piece. The artist speaks of a desire to massage a black man, because black men interest him more that other people. There is an obvious physical desire in relation to blackness in this situation, but the tortured persona of the artist’s inner thoughts reveals that the desire is not only physical. He is obsessed with the idea of black men and the piece functions as a kind of personal diary where he investigates the reasoning behind his fascination and obsession with black men. While the piece may seem wrought with homosexual desire, it goes beyond that into an exploration of the fascination with the “other.” Also the piece is very personal, it also reflects society’s persistent obsession with race.
The post-ethnic era relies on the simultaneous acceptance and rejection of racial categorization. Johnson’s piece reveals that racial distinctions and the identification of racial differences is still very much a part of our social discourse, even if many people choose to keep their fascination private. It also both accepts and rejects physical differences between blacks and non-blacks. He desire to massage a black man implies that there is a tactile difference between the skin of a black man and the skin of other people. This makes the viewer question that difference, and when the viewer realizes that the difference is not tactile, physical or even tangible, the inner struggle to understand racial differentiation emerges. This reinforces the notion that society’s perception of race is a social construct and not based on biological differences.
Joanna Rytel’s intense video, To Think Things You Don’t Want To, delves into the inner struggles of a white, Swedish woman who has a relationship with a black man. The language is abrasive, and not politically correct in any way, but is personal and honest. She explores the taboo desires related to interracial relationships. Again this work is based on the personal desire of the non-black artist, who deals with socio-historical constructs of race, even on the personal level. Racial discriminatory and offensive thoughts are publicly expressed by Rytel. The title of the works announces that the artist knows that she “shouldn’t” have these thoughts, but they are woven into our societal language of race. She admits that she sometimes thinks of her lover as nigger, and as much as she knows it is wrong, the word has been historically integrated into public discourse on race and therefore pervades even her personal relationship. Through this work she admits that the public is not color-blind in relation to race, and even people who are not racist have been socialized into seeing racial differences. She is continuously aware of the perceptions of others and how the public views her interracial relationship. The video represents a failing struggle to deny those public perceptions and the inability to somehow rise above the issue of racial opposition. Although her honesty is often offensive and uses racial slurs and stereotyping, she is making the viewer aware of thoughts that have previously been subconscious. Through her own honest investigation of her perspective on race, she asks the viewer to question if they think similar things that they do not want to think; or admit that they think.

Mickalene Thomas’s Lovely Six Foota (2007) relies on exoticism and stereotypical cultural signifiers of black women to create desire. The photograph depicts an African-American woman, clad in a multi-print dress in a room decorated in 70s décor and leopard print furniture. Thomas is an African-American artist, but she is not denying stereotyped exoticism, but reinforcing it to create a sense of racialized desire. She is creating a hyper-awareness of social stereotyping of black women. The animal patterns refer to cultural codes we associate with African that have been popularized in American culture, and the records in the lower right corner of the photograph are those of African-American musical divas. This reflects a cultural obsession with “black music,” and a desire that is based purely on media’s representation of the black woman. The perspective invites the viewer to look directly up the woman’s skirt, but then is met with darkness, denying the erotic experience. The subject stares directly at the viewer; both inviting them in and creating an unsettling awareness of their position in objectifying her. The sexually charged image creates desire, but the viewer is left to question the basis of that desire, which is created through stereotypical means. (you can see more of Thomas's work here)
The inclusion of non-black artists separates this exhibition from other post-ethnic shows, such as The New Authentics: Artists of the Post-Jewish Generation and Freestyle, because it opens up the discourse about race. Social taboos regarding race and desire are explored from the perspective of both black and non-black artists, which leaves the works at risk of being offensive, yet at the same time reveals the pervasive existence of racial categorization and discrimination. This subliminal element of desire is explored on the personal level, but the personal also mirrors public perceptions of race. The viewer is presented with racial taboos. These taboos are not only represented personally by the artists, but also as an affect of the historical influence on race in the public sphere. This exhibition reinforces one particular issue in the post-ethnic era; the fact that even though race is a socially constructed category, it is still very much a part of the cultural dialogue.

Ultrabaroque

The Ultrabaroque show seems to illuminate a cross-cultural interest in hybridization (or mestizaje) in contemporary culture. These hybrids are obvious in content (i.e. local and global issues, transculturation, various histories), the use of mixed media, and the mix of styles from different eras. Zamudio-Taylor talks about the ultrabaroque emphasis on the affirmation of an object, versus the dematerialization prevalent in modernist arm. While the aesthetic emphasis is on minimalist aesthetic, the conceptual element relies on cultural, societal and political meanings of objects.

This is evident in the work of Cildo Meireles. His Circuit series investigates popular media objects and the relation they have to societal hierarchies of power.



However, the artists in the Ultrabaroque show also investigate the heterogeneity of Latin culture. The culture of Latin countries can no longer be culturally defined on a national level, but instead the artistic investigation is post-national and looks at the heterogeneous nature of regional culture. The transcultural status of these countries largely results from the effects of colonialism. The post-colonial state also contributes to the contemporary issues of hierarchy and unequal distribution of power.

Jose Antonio Hernandez-Diaz's work incorporates religious connotations with popular cultural objects and imagery combined to describe the contemporary condition of Latin America that is largely influenced by its colonial history. In the work below, Hernandez-Diaz uses the washboard as a signifier for the cleansing of the skin, or ethnic cleansing.



The term baroque has conflicted meanings. Some scholars believe it to be the decline of a civilization while others see it as a complex investigation or advance of a civilization and questioning the power structures that operate within a society. If we take it to mean the latter, I believe Hans Haacke would fall into the category of the baroque. I recently went to hear him talk, and political upheaval is evident in almost all of his works. As a German-born artist, he is bringing a different perspective to politics in America that allow for a comparison between German and American histories, resulting in transculturalism. It may be a stretch to include him in this discussion, but much of the hybridization and transcultural perspective mentioned in the Ultrabaroque readings made me think of his talk. For example, regarding the picture below he had mentioned that he was thinking of the American flag over the face acting as a blinder to the implied American that is under the "bag."

However, because of the pervasiveness of the Abu Ghraib photographs, the viewer now sees the image as the American flag being put over the head of the "other" as a torture device. A reading of a work that was first national has become transnational due to contemporary events. Much of Haacke's work questions the systems and hierarchies of power and decision-making in our country, which was of much importance to the Ultrabaroque artists. Below is a public art piece in a political plaza. The sign on the from of the building contained the words Dem Deutschen Volke, which translated to "the German people," but culturally meant the people of Arian blood. The word Haacke used, DER BEVÖLKERUNG was used to describe people equally. This caused a politically controversy that had to go to parliament to see if the work could be installed. This questioned, not only the use of language, but a history of violence and suffering toward a group of people.

Although baroque is a term that has become the Euro-American cliche description of Latin American art, baroque, as used in show, signifies the complexities involved in visually describing a turbulent and complicated culture. This "impure beauty," as describe by Elizabeth Armstrong is not only evident in the technical aspect of the works, but also in the conceptual framework. Adrianna Varejao's work investigates the histories of colonial expansion and the effect it has on traditional Latin American cultures.
Meyer Vaisman looks at the affect of the transcontinental economy. This type of touristic economy relies largely on the commodification and marketability of culture. These works make us question the histories that have been taught to us and how we think about the commodified culture of the "other," which is the way in which we generally experience other cultures. He blends high and low culture by working with everyday materials and imagery, yet questions the way in which our experiences our mediated by our outsider attitude.

I found the idea of allegory in relation to the baroque to be very interesting in terms of postmodern artistic practice. While we generally associate allegory with Renaissance art, the postmodern desire to link our contemporary conditions to the affects of the past is evident in the work in the Ultrabaroque show. I was thinking about the combination of contemporary media and religious imagery in terms of my own project for this class, which deals with the pervasiveness of the Madonna ideal in contemporary representations of motherhood, and what that means for contemporary notions of identity.

The idea of colonial displacement was also a large topic in the Ultrabaroque show. Arturo Duclos's work brings together multiple references to different cultures, and the different images seem somewhat out of place, which can be related to colonialism's influence on the displacement of native people. This made me think of Itagaki Yoshio's work, which I don't find particularly interesting, because they are wrought with digital manipulation and seemingly lacking in conceptual investigation, but deals with the same idea of displacement of marginalized or minority cultures. His two projects, "Native American Reservation on the Moon" and "Cyber Amish County," point out the ridiculous nature of pushing people into locations that don't suit their lifestyles and need.

White...not Transparent

In looking at the changing perspective of whiteness through the readings for this week there were a few repeated themes I noticed. These include:
Whiteness as a racial category that is no longer transparent. A need to be self-critical and self aware regarding whiteness.
Whiteness as it is related to economics and class.
Whiteness and privilege.

I have expanded on some of these themes below.

There were also some discrepancies I noticed between analyzing whiteness compared to a post-ethnic ideology.
The theorists and critics seem to be talking about whiteness in the same broad terms as other minorities (i.e. blackness).
It seems that in order to really analyze whiteness the playing field between white and other "ethnicities" needs to be leveled. The historical analysis of whiteness is no where near as in depth as other cultures.
And Roediger brings up an excellent point in the difference between theoretical whiteness and how whiteness functions in lived experience.

Opaque vs. Transparent
It becomes evident from the readings that we can no longer approach whiteness as meaningless, historically void and transparent. The very color white itself is loaded with social and historical symbolism; pureness, blankness, absence, etc. Roediger talks about the historical value of whiteness in terms of whites views of nonwhites. "When residents of the US talk about race, they too often talk only about African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans. If whites come into the discussion, it is only because they have 'attitudes' toward nonwhites. Whites are assumed not to 'have race,' though they might be racists," Roediger writes. White, as Roediger also writes, is an extremely imprecise term.

Whiteness, Economics and Class
It is undeniable that whiteness is often associated with class, especially the middle or upper class. Even the term white collar suggest a certain difference between whites' economic situation and the "others." We tend, as a society, to forget about the white poor, and associated the lower income population with minorites, often blacks. The fact that class is often closely associated with race was evident after the destruction of hurricane katrina. Poor and black became almost synonyms in the media representation of the victims of Katrina. Often poor economic situations are blamed on nonwhites. For example, Mexican immigration might be the most popular contemporary example. The US tends to blame the loss of jobs on illegal immigration and the influx of the nonwhite working class. However, there is nothing mentioned about the racial impllications of outsourcing US jobs. Maurice Berger uses the interesting phrase that it seems to be in people's best interest to "capitalize on their whiteness." Whiteness often implies economic power, even if that is mostly a false assumption. Even the poor have the ability to capitalize on their whiteness by having the benefit of assumed education and skill.

Broadness of Whiteness
In my own identity chart shown in a previous, I found it interesting that I didn't think to include "white" as a defining identity, but instead included norwegian, finnish, native american and german (with norwegian and finnish taking up the most "ethnic space.") This made me realize that in a way, my whiteness is still somewhat transparent to me. The first time I became self-aware of my whiteness was in preschool (around the age of 4), which I attend on a Northern Minnesota Native American reservation, where I was the minority. It was only at first that I was aware, and soon my whiteness was forgotten. Until I moved to Chicago, my areas of residency have had largely white demographic. However, I have always felt that my whiteness was more nuanced that just purely (for lack of a less ironic term) white. Stahlings talks about abolishing the normativity of whiteness in "Whiteness: A Wayward Construction," yet the very broad term WHITE is normatized not to include the different variations of whiteness. Although one could argue that the very appearance of whiteness bestows one with priveleges that others of different ethnicities are denied, it was not historically that way. Historically degrees of whiteness were much more divided, which is extremely evident in the neighborhood break-up in Chicago (although gentrification has erased much of that segregation, but not entirely). At one point Polish-Americans, Italian Americans, etc were not considered "white." However, these divisions have been erased, but what also seems to be diminishing is the ethnic diversity of whiteness. This is possibly why I chose to include my Norwegian and Finnish heritage as a large part of my identity, because the traditions associated with those nationalities are still very much embedded into my family life and tradition. It seems contradictory to try and integrate whiteness into the post-ethnic discussion when scholars seems to be using the broad discourse to talk about whiteness that they are trying to diseminate regarding other ethnicities.


Theory and Academics vs. Lived Experience
Although significant progress has been made in the intellectual and scholarly perception of whiteness, the fact that whiteness still holds severe economic, social, cultural and political priveleges in real live is pervasive. Although language has been invented in order to "politically correct" the way we refer to the social construction of race, it does not erase the social oppression, racism, prejudice and a certain degree of white supremacy that still exists. However, Wendy Ewald's "White Girl Alphabet" shows that language has symbolic racial connotations and there exists a certain lingual hierarchy that effect how we discuss and interpret race. Although post-structuralism has made vast improvements on the way we approach and talk about race, the existence of post-structuralism as it relates to race is not as evident in our general perceptions of society. All the "radical scholarship" does not equal radicial activism in society. Roediger explains that the intellectual demystification of race can cause disappointment when theory meets practice. I began making connections between the post-ethnic movement and the third wave feminist movement. It seems the 60s and 70s were a time of radical activism, for both feminism and civil rights, and now the "movement" is more intellectually based and there is much less "action" on the part of the general public. Maybe its a generational thing where the young, educated individuals feel a certain sense of apathy about how much good activism really does.

How does this all relate to art?
Art seems to function as a hyprid of intellectual study and lived experience. If we turn to Manet's Olympia, there is a reversal of the sexual, black female stereotyping and instead the white woman is the promiscuous sexual being, while the black servant (dressed in white) is the reserved, innocent, more asexual figures. During the multicultural period, it was common for nonwhite artists to make art about their ethnic identity, yet it was taboo to make art about whiteness (and to much extent...still is). However, one could argue that artists have been making art that is unintentionally about whiteness since the inception of art practice. William Kentridge's work has a lot to do with whiteness and apartheid in South Africa. Cindy Sherman made photographs about the B-Movie white female actress archetype. Still, the intentional depiction of whiteness seemed taboo. Maybe when this subject matter is no longer taboo will we be closer to a true post-ethnic ideology that includes the analysis of whiteness.

Whiteness in Contemporary Culture

In thinking about examples of "whiteness" in contemporary culture, the first thing that popped into my head was Al Yankovic's "White and Nerdy." A remake of hip hop artist, Chamillionaire's "Riding Dirty." Although it may be considered extremely low brow...it is actually pretty interesting when you consider that it is making fun of white stereotypes and the "white" infiltration of hip hop culture, which is generally assumed to be comprised of mostly black participants.






I was also thinking about the movie Bruce Almighty, where the God figure is played by Morgan Freeman. Historically, God has been represented as being a white bearded guy. I read one review of the movie in which a person asked, "Is it supposed to be funny that God is a black guy?" I believe this statement shows that while in the scholarly world we may accept that race is a social construct, but in terms of lived experience, racism is still very much present. I was also thinking about Bruce's character, played by Jim Carrey, and the "moral" that is to be taught in the movie. Jim Carrey represents the "norm" (upper-middle class, white male). Morgan Freeman's character functions to bring a sense of "self-awareness" to Carrey's character about his privileged situation. It also shows how Carrey abuses his power when he is bestowed the power of God. This could also suggest how historically whites used Christianity as an excuse to victimize other populations. In terms of the readings on whiteness, this seems to fit right in with the historically transparent condition of whiteness and the growing need for whites to become self-critical about their own whiteness.

Or maybe I'm just reading too much into Bruce Almighty.

I couldn't find the seen with Morgan Freeman and Jim Carrey I wanted, but here is a selection from the movie.

Post-black...

Freestyle, a seemingly radical show of black artists work during the 1990s, caused a lot of controversy because of its disparate nature, suggested by its title. What the show suggested about blackness was that it was in fact a style...an affiliation filled with nuanced representations of what it meant to be black. What I find most compelling about the show is that is both accepts and rejects notions of blackness simultaneously. Lori Waxman's review of the show suggests that it may have been a earmark of the Post-Black movement. The show defied a collective interpretation of blackness, and instead presented an "overwhelming sense of individuality." I tend to enjoy work that relies on a certain "truth" about stereotyping, yet drawing a critical self-awareness to stereotyping (within the viewer) and uses the stereotype to confront themes about viewing the "other." I think that Susan Smith-Pinelo's video does this. It combines the stereotypical sexualized black female (specifically her breasts) with the word "Ghetto" on a necklace.



This is the same reason I have enjoyed Kara Walker's work. The graphic, cartoon-like nature is visually appealing and often reminded me of vinyl wall decals made for children's rooms. However, her work is very disturbing and relies on the stereotypical "look" associated with blacks (big lips, big butt, "nappy" hair) yet at the same time her black characters are enforcing "slave punishments" against their white counterparts. The violent and childlike juxtaposition often drew me to her work, as it functions like a fairytale gone awry. She bridges pop-art style with a multiculturalist view. Her view bridges the past (with characters from folklore) with the present (themes of racism, violence, gender and identity).




According to Thelma Goldin, Freestyle aimed to recontextualize blackness in terms of a multicultural, or even post-ethnic, society. I see the show as attempt to reclaim a black identity and not give in to a more normative society. However, I wonder if the show reinforces the racial relavatism that occurs when there are "all black" shows, or shows during February, or all women shows. Does this reinforce ethnic diversity and awareness over artistic ability? I would say that all the artists in the Freestyle exhibition are deserving of the exhibition, but I still believe that racial relavatism skews the artworld based on a societal guilt to incorporate diversity and a disregard for artistic accomplishment.

I also think that Holland Cotter brought up a good point in questioning if the label "post-ethnic" will merely become a marketing label. There was also an evident correlation between multiculturalist art and the economic market. When the market was down, multiculturalism was up. This follows the historical trend of art, to make what is considered to be "unmarketable" art while the country is in an economic valley.

Kerry James Marshall tuned into the success of hybridity, both in the representation of race and the use of media. His works, like Walker's, are very graphic; blending high and low culture. His work also deals with the juxtaposition, as sometimes overlapment, of stereotype and reality. All of his technical choices (color, composition, etc.) relate to the conceptual framework behind his pieces. I have generally been more impressed by the figurative work he created over the more experimental, mixed-media work.

The darkness of the figures in his work almost suggests an invisibility, or a simultaneously absence and presence. The figures remind me of the mass of a black hole, which is infinite and at the same time contains nothing. Many of the figures are indistinguishable from one another, which seems to speak to the stereotype of black not have individualized sense of identity. The narrative quality of his works also go against modernist art (generally ruled by the white, middle class male). He seems to be resituating the black figure back into history, giving the blacks more power.

What seems to be the overall them of post-blackness is both the acceptance and rejection of historical assiciations with African Americans and a more individualized approach to black identity, or in some cases, a complete rejection of black identity. It is a resistance to social judgment based on historical stereotypes and visual, physical featues. On that note, I think it would be good to end with a piece from Glen Ligon, in which he simultaneously "exagerates his black features" and "exagerates his white features."

My Identity in a Nutshell

my blogs are a little sporadic since i got a little behind in my posts...but I attempted to make a diagram of my identity (the key word here is ATTEMPTED). This proved to be more difficult than I thought, as there are many that overlap, many that I affiliate with, many that are more heritage/tradition based that I don't affiliate with as much, and the size of the circles leads to a skewed view about how I rank them in importance. (For example, the FEMINIST oval is huge, and although feminism is important to me, I'm not sure that it makes up quite as much of my identity as this diagram would suggest.) I'm sure I left out a ton of things that contribute to my identity. don't be too critical.

Identity and Art

"Two factors determine the nationality of art: (a) the place where the art is produced and (b) the national background of the artist."
- John Graham, taken from Cultural Pluralism Versus the American Canon by Lowery Stokes Sims

Although this statement was made over 50 years ago, we still seem to be discussing its relevance today. In an earlier class we talked about the pressure to explore identity if you are an artist associated with any community which has experienced historical oppression. Ideally, as we move towards post-ethnicity, this will no longer be an issue.

I feel like this pressure still exists due to a phenomenon I will call "artistic/racial relativism," related to the exclusion of minorities in the artistic canon. It seems as though the art world is trying to make up for a history of oppression and/or exclusion by championing a select few contemporary minority artists (and female artists), yet the art institution still wields control over the context in which the art is shown, for example, during February there are numerous African-American art shows. Are these artists making detrimental choices concerning their careers by having work shown in "ethnic" shows? Or is it more important that they are getting their artwork into the world by any means they can?

Another P word...

Postethnic.

David Hollinger explores this concept in his book Postethnic America. This ideology follows a long list of interpreting how we approach indvidual identity, collective identity, and cultural diversity including Multiculturalism, Pluralism, Cosmopolitanism, etc. "Posting" any term seems to signify the end of the ideology, however Hollinger uses the term in order to show both a change in the way we see ethnicity and a continuation of previous views.

After reading Hollinger, I was initially left feeling a little lost. He seems to identify numerable problems with out current system of identifying based on heritage and descent, but also illustrates reasons that the ethnoracial pentagon is still necessary in terms of governmental or political factors. But what is the solution? Ideally, we would function in a world where identity is based on affiliation by revocable consent, yet the history of oppression that our government and political system is attempting to rectify still calls for ethnoracial divisions. However, these ethnoracial divisions are constricting and do not allow for more nuanced notions of identity, or tribal differences that are apparent in many cultures. I was thinking about people who have seemingly more complicated identities (although I do not intend to say that not everyone's identity is not complicated, by more complicated I mean those who do not fit into societal norms) such as people who are of mixed race, immigrants, children of immigrants and adopted persons.

I have mentioned my aunt before, who was Korean born and adopted by my grandparents at the age of 7. During the course of this semester my curiosity about how she negotiates her identity has continued to grow. I started to think about the ethnoracial pentagon and thought she would fit into Asian-American. However, after thinking about it, my aunt has met her biological mother (who is a native Korean) but she has never been told who her father is. Because her physical appearance is slightly different from her biological sisters and brothers, she has thought that her father may be white, however, she is unsure. Therefore, she may be of mixed race identity...or maybe not. Where do people who do not have concrete knowledge of their descent fit it? Also, she was born in Korea, yet remembers nothing about Korea and does not affiliate with the Korean community. She identifies with a Norwegian, Lutheran community.

After contemplating these questions, I decided to ask her about how she negotiates her identity and we have been having an email conversation back and forth about some of the identity issues she deals with. I feel like this gave me some insight. Here are a few excerpts from our conversations. Some of the discussions require some background information which I have put in parenthesis.

(Although my aunt did not come to American until she was 7, she does not remember anything about Korea. My grandparents thought it best to keep her Korean first name, MiSun, to ease her adjustment into a new family.)
Me: How important is your Korean heritage in your everyday life, if important at all?
MiSun: Really I don’t see my Korean heritage in my everyday life. Honestly my thoughts, beliefs and values are all based/influenced on my upbringing… which is Mid-western Scandnavian. The only times it impacts my everyday life is when I meet new people and they make the assumption I was raised as a Korean and will ask really questions like, Do you like to eat kimchi… Wow, you speak English really well… or my favorite of course – which is they say something in Korean to me and expect me to understand what they said, and when I say I don’t understand, they look at me in disbelief. I think the only times I’m really even aware of my heritage are during my visits to my biological family in Texas. Of course they really embrace their heritage and it impacts their everyday life – they all speak Korean, eat Korean foods every day, watch Korean shows… so it’s really only during those times that I ever really stop and think about my Korean heritage, the customs, values, and foods…

(My aunt was raised in a town of roughly 500 people in Northern Minnesota with very, very little diversity).
Me: Have you encountered times in your life where you were conflicted or made hyper-aware of your identity?
MiSun: When I was growing up I remember being picked on or teased about looking different… for me it was my Korean looks vs. someone else who may have had big ears or was chubby. There were days when I would beg my mom to let me change my name to “Heather, Holly, Susie” or other common names, and of course I had those nights when I would pray asking God why I couldn’t have blonde hair and blue eyes. Other than those early childhood years I think I was really isolated from a lot of the real predujice and discriminatory attitudes/behaviors, because as a small town they all accepted me as Clyde and Joyce’s daughter. In fact I remember it didn’t really hit me as an adult I was Korean until I went off to college at Concordia and many students and professors either assumed I was raised as one of the Asian ethnicities or would ask if I was a foreign exchange student.

(MiSun will be traveling to Korea with her biological family this summer.)
Me: How do you feel about traveling to Korea as an American of Korean descent?
MiSun: Really I feel more like I’m like many tourists visiting their ancestoral home out of curiousity. Maybe I’ll feel different once I get there, but right now I’m excited about visiting it just I would be excited about visiting Norway, England, France etc… I think my biological family in Texas are looking at the trip more as educating me about my past, and pointing out places that I probably knew as a young child (but don’t remember). For them it’s like going “home.” For me it’s a vacation to an exotic place with the best group of people to show me around. J Then again it will be really interesting to be in an environment where my race is the dominant one...

(My aunt has 3 children with my uncle who is of Norwegian/German descent. They are both practicing Lutherans).
Me: How do you negotiate your identity and how will you approach educating your children about their identity, both their affiliations and their descent?
MiSun: I have for years told people “I’m biologically Korean, but environmentally I’m MN scandanavin.” Truly those environmental influences have shaped me into the type of person I am. I was raised Lutheran, so I practice that faith and am passing that onto my children. The holiday traditions, foods, slang that I use are all those that I grew up with… and so I pass those onto my children. Do I see myself as a “dual person” with two identities… no, I see myself as an Midwestern American. I struggle sometimes with my personal beliefs on how new immigrants can create their own subcultures within our country… creating whole neighborhoods and communities for their race. I can’t help but wonder if it isn’t better to see that Korean grocery store next to a Blockbuster in the middle of “mainstream America” then amongst blocks and blocks of other Korean stores and shops. I can’t help but wonder if the first isn’t really what America should be about… not segregation, but the blending and mixing of all the wonderful things from the many ethnicities that exist in our country.

For me, my aunt's identity really illustrates the barriers between identity by consent or descent, discussed by Hollinger, since her "biological identity" and "identity based on lived experience" are very different. I also think that a move towards post-ethnicity is extremely valuable in cases like this. However, my aunt's experiences with being viewed as "other," also show that society is still quick to assume identity based on visual/physical characteristics. Although her physical appearance may classify her as Korean-American, I feel like she is a perfect example of a Norwegian/Lutheran/Midwestern, upper/middle-class woman (although here I am consciously stereotyping what it means to be Norwegian/Lutheran/Midwestern and upper/middle-class.)

New Authentics....reflections

Admittedly, I do not know a whole lot about the Jewish faith, except for a brief description given to me by an atheist Jew acquaintance regarding what it meant to be kosher. However, I feel slightly more knowledgeable regarding the "history" of Jews in the 20th century. This is part of the reason why I enjoyed the New Authentics exhibition; there were loose ties to "Jewishness" yet many of the works spoke about human experience on a more universal level. I didn't feel like my lake of knowledge about Jewish faith inhibited my experience of the work.

One work that struck me as particularly universal to human spiritual experience was a 7 part video installation by Joel Tauber titled, "7 Attempts to Make a Ritual," which depicted exactly that. His attempt at creating a ritual was to dig a hole in the ground and meditate in it, but in each attempt the variants changed, although the hole in the earth and meditation remained the same. Sometimes he created a whole and sometimes he used a naturally created or found hole. A plaque below the monitor listed the procedure for that particular attempt. I appreciated the humor Tauber incorporated into the procedure, such as "This time wear clothes so I don't get cold and get out of hole." These were very pragmatic variants to create a spiritual revelation (which in itself does not seem inherently pragmatic). There's a ritualistic component to almost every religious sect, and I feel that this piece not only serves to show the frustration to find meaning in terms of religion or spirituality, but also in secular life.

In terms of Jewish history this piece is also interesting because it does seem "post-Jewish." Stacy Borris in the intro to the catalogue for the show identifies two main events that and early generation of Jews communed around, the repercussions of the holocaust on themselves or their ancestors and the longing for the homeland. However, the contemporary generation of Jews seems further removed from both of these things. This divide can be described as a difference between heritage and lived experience. The Holocaust and the longing for the homeland were collective endeavors, while many Jews have a more individualistic approach to their own Jewish faith (or lack of it). Tauber piece seems to be an individual endeavor to find meaning in the world and to have a personal spiritualistic revelation that is not specific just to Judaism. It was also interesting in relation to how Stacy Borris introduced the exhibit when she said that the exhibit was about "cultural and intellectual engagement, instead of religious," because Tauber is incorporating all three, although he uses a more personal ideology of religion.

If you are interested in another project by Joel Tauber, here is a link to another project that deals with a ritualistic saving of a tree in the parking lot where the Rose Bowl was held.

I also enjoyed Lilah Friedland's photographs in relation to a comment Stacy made about the "post generation" having more freedom to critique their Jewish background that previous generations. Her Jewish princesses depicted as sexual objects and Hasidic Jew (who is really a Jewish rockstar) critique orthodox Judaism. She seems to be also poking fun at Jewish stereotypes, but at the same time showing that those stereotypes are both negated and reinforced in contemporary culture. It also speaks to overlapping identities that is very pertinent to a post-identity ideology.

Seeing this exhibition made me realize that there is an obvious difference between the generations, in much the same way that there are differences in ideologies between second and third wave feminists. The contemporary Jewish generation seems more concerned with an individualistic approach to their identity (much like third wave feminism encourages a more individualistic approach). However, this causes the demise of the collective identity, which I still feel is an important part of an individual's history and identity. I was thinking about this in relation to the personal and political, specifically the New Authentics artists vs. older generation Jewish artists such as Ben Shahn, and his politically charged posters. His works reflects a more collective Jewish identity and a group reaction against Nazi Germany. The artists in the New Authentics show reflect a personal approach to their Jewishness, as they are futher removed from the collective identity of post-war Jews.

Subjecthood vs. Objecthood cont'd.

To go along with our dicussion about the subject/object paradox...I stumbled on this video of Andrea Fraser in a performance art piece called "Official Welcome" during my research for the future presentation. She directly addresses the subject/object relationship at the end of this section of the video. This is Part 2 of 4. You can find the rest of the video on youtube under Andrea Fraser "Official Welcome."

Struggling with feminism...

After reading selections from Maria Buszek's Pin-Up Girls it seems to me that a great deal of the controversy between second and third wave feminism has to do with the subject/object paradox. While second wave feminists fought to control the patriarchal trend to portray women as objects, anticensorship and prosex "third wavers" have appropriated the use of the sexualized female body, and in some cases the male gaze, to repudiate oppression. This begs the question, can the oppressed stand up against the patriarchal hierarchy by using tactics that signify, somehow subversively, patriarchal superiority? Do these images, such as pin-up girls, liberate women or reinforce patriarchal notions of sexuality? This appropriation of the "male gaze" also made me wonder...what signifies a female gaze?

The pin-up girl is hyper-feminine and hyper-sexualized. I think that the pin-up girl can be used as a mascot for feminist art if it draws attention to the falsehood and artifice of and overtly sexual identity. I enjoyed Annie Sprinkle's "Anatomy of a Pin-Up Photo" and the way that she draws attention to the false nature of "beauty" in the pin-up model with phrases like, "Hair dyed to cover gray" and "Corset makes waist 4.5" smaller but I can't breathe."



It seems that much of second wave feminism was concerned with becoming more masculine in order to show equality, while third wave feminism is more concerned with retaining feminine identity and using it as a power source. The tension between the "mothers" and "daughters" of feminism that Buszek mentions seems to only be hurting their cause.

Third wave feminists are also embracing commercial or "kitsch" culture with the pin-up. The "sex sells" attitude of the media could be seen as detrimental to the feminist cause, yet third wave feminists are using the commercialization of the female body as a form of satire against stereotypical views of women in the media. However, I believe that there is a fine line between using commercialization as a tool and buying into the stereotyped views of women. This is also the fine line between portraying a woman as an object and portraying her as a subject.

For me, this subject/object paradox is heavily reliant on audience interpretation. I feel that the woman portrayed has no control over whether or not she is viewed as an object or a subject. Joanna Frueh's statement, "As long as I am an erotic subject, I am not averse to being an erotic object," solidifies my view on this paradox. She has accepted the notion that in portraying herself in a sexualized manner, she may be objectified. She explains more about her feelings toward erotica on her site Her work is an example of women assimilating to a visual language created by man, but expanding it to fit their own purposes. However, I believe the danger still exists of having the subject objectified. There is also the danger of playing into the commodity culture that objectifies women. This is where the older feminists mistrust of third wave tactics seems particularly credible. I think that if the work is done in a self-aware manner, it can still incorporate sexual imagery, but it is difficult to critique a social issue from within. This made me think of Erwin Olaf's fashion work pictured below.

He has done a fashion spread that is intended to sell products based on the "sex sells" phenomenon, yet at the same time he is poking fun at the fashion world buy over-exaggerating the sexualization of the imagery. Is this technique effective? It seems to be the same technique prosex feminists use to critique the sexualization of the female body.

One of the women mentioned in the excerpts reminisces about being fascinated by pin-ups as a younger girl. She compared her lesbian gaze on the pin-up woman as one of caring, while the man's gaze was objectifying and "dirty." This seems like a double standard that she would assume that the male gaze is objectifying while her own is not. As a lesbian woman, would she not see the woman as an object of sexual desire? Is her gaze not tied to notions of scopophilia? I feel that the lesbian woman's gaze and the straight man's gaze would both be looking at the woman as a sexual object. This made me think of Robert Mapplethorpe's work. He has admitted that much of his work has to do with his own fetishes and desires. I believe he sees his subjects as both objects and subjects. Just because he is a man photographing other men does not eliminate him from the hierarchal viewer/subject relationship, and in fact, he admits that this is part of his work.



The pluralistic nature of postmodernism also poses a problem for feminism and the incorporation of evergrowing individualistic views on feminism. How are all these overwhelming views incorporated into one cohesive movement? Can a cohesive movement even exist?

Why have there been no great women artists?

Nochlin starts with a statement that may, at first, cause an uproar among female artists...there HAS NOT been any great female artists. The real question is why. First of all, she points out the failure of the institution to expand the definition of "great." A great artist was believed to have the inherent characteristic of genius. Although the idea of artistic genius has largely been dispelled as myth in relation to contemporary work, the definition of great was applied in defining the art historical cannon which was constructed based on a Western male perspective. Therefore, the assessment of what defined "greatness" was biased from the start. In addition, the texts that summarize the history of art were largely written by white men.

I believe that the absence of great women artists is also linked to a failure in the art education system. Nochlin asks why there are no female equivalents to Michaelangelo or Rembrandt. The ultimate art subject of the Renaissance seems to be the human figure. However, women were prohibited from the study of the nude form and therefore, their artistic education was lacking in the area associated with artistic "greatness." We can also link the failure of education to what was discussed last week...what artist's are "supposed" to express through their art (ex. African-American artists "should" express something about the experience of being black and women "should" express something about being female.) By these limitations, the only artist with full artistic freedom is the western white male (preferably middle to upper class). Although I believe that these limitations are disappearing in terms of contemporary artists, it highly influenced the art of the 60s and 70s.

The limiting definition of "greatness" seems to be the cause of the absence of great women artists, since "greatness" seems to be entirely subjective and linked to the perspective of the western white male.

"Post-Feminism"
Amelia Jones sees post-feminism as a backlash against feminist ideals or the "death" of feminism that counters the Women's Liberation movement. However, there is a split between the definition of postfeminism in media culture and in scholarly culture. In media culture, postfeminism signals the end of feminism. Women become passive consumerists concerned solely with their position as a mother and homemaker. The scholarly perspective entails a new perspective of feminist issues. Jones believes photography and feminism are connected because photographs often serves a heterosexist and patriarchal commercial purpose. These advertising images reinforce "norms" associated with patriarchal culture. Women are the "purchasers" for the home, and are then passive recipients of advertising. Post-feminism associates feminism with the disruption of traditional family values. However, I wonder about the differences in 3rd wave feminism and post-feminism. I am under the impression that 3rd wave feminism supports the woman's choice to take on "traditional" female roles (mother, position in the domestic sphere) although she would retain her independence. 3rd wave feminism also supports the expression of "femaleness" (wearing dresses, pink, etc).

Question: Is the scholarly perspective of postfeminism the same as third wave feminism? Is it a generational difference?

Question: What does the scholarly view of postfeminism mean for artistic practice? According to Jones, feminism was seen as anti-modernist, since modernism was linked to the patriarchal structure of the art world and modernist art was often seen as masculine.

Wegman

I used to love Wegman's dogs on Sesame Street. Since we just saw a video with him on Art 21, I thought I would share this video of Wegman's dogs performing the "identity" of the artist and the model.

Postethnic, post-identity, post-gender

Last week in class we discussed what it means to be labeled a certain types of artist (i.e. black artist, woman artist, latino artist, etc etc etc.) and part of our discussion made me think about what this race/gender/class-specific labelling (which I believe still exists today) means in a postethnic society. Another classmate discussed her frustration with the pressure to express something about her African-American identity in her work. It seems that any ethnic/social/gender group that has a history of oppression is "supposed" to express something about their previously oppressed identity as some sort of compensation for the past. I sometimes wonder if I've given into that pressure since I only photograph women. However, those of us that fit into the category of middle to upper class caucasians are under pressure to be inclusive and pluralistic. While my classmate is questioned when she chooses not to express something about being an African-American woman, I have experience criticism about not including women of other ethnic backgrounds (since the majority of the women I have photographed have been caucasian). Another friend and I were recently discussing the fact that not as many people in the graduate photography program at Columbia are photographing people as there was when we started this program. Is this because of all the questions surrounding identity that an artist must deal with in depicting people? Are we, as artists, fed up with the "identity discussion" and avoiding it all together? It seems that we have become incredibly self-concious about offending particular groups of people (myself included) that we avoiding visual depictions of identity. This is opposed to Paul Cadmus's quote in Richard Meyer's article that artists have more freedom to break rules and get away with more than the general public. It seems that we are taking less advantage of our societal position that "allows" us to break the rules and potentially offend others.

Judith Roof discusses the idea of post-identity in her article "Thinking Post Identity." She suggests that the "post" doesn't necessarily mean a break with the past, but a change with the past still in mind. I think this is important because obviously from the discussion we are still having about racial/gender/class specific artists, we have not left the past identity "problems" behind.

Richard Meyer discusses the issue with interpreting artworks in relation to their creators. From an art historical standpoint, a work is rarely interpreted in the same context in which it was made. He uses Paul Cadmus as an example. He was creating works with homoerotic tones in the 1930s and he has been heroicized as one of the most influential gay artists, yet he refuses to discuss his identity as a gay man. He identifies himself soley as an artist. This brings me to the idea of "communities of consent" as opposed to "communities of descent." While we are allowed to join any particular community that we desire, political definitions of identity still often pigeonhole people in the five general categories (Asian American, African American, Hispanic, Caucasian, Native American/Indigenous). This idea of communities of consent made me think of my aunts personal identity or affiliation. She's a native born Korean, adopted at age 7 by my grandparents, raised Lutheran and in a traditional Norwegian family. She carries out the Norwegian traditions passed down by my grandmother, such as cooking lefsa and krumkaka, yet she checks the box "Asian-American" on official documentation. She's consented to be part of the Norwegian community, yet is still restricted by her physical appearance and geographical origins.

One artist that deals with the idea of communities of consent and integration is Nikki S Lee. I find it ironic that she is breaking social/racial/cultural boundaries, yet her biography identifies her as a Korean-American artist. I've always viewed her work more as performance than photography, although the documentation of the alteration of her identity is done through photographs. I feel that the most important part of her work is her attempt at seamless assimilation into another culture, which she often studies and participates in for a week or more. There is much more to participating in a community than physical appearance and this also suggest that an individual's physical appearance must match that of their chosen community.

Lee's work also emphasizes the idea of performativity instead of expression in relation to identity, which Judith Butler explores in her article. Lee has proven that she is able to perform other cultures and she is not expression an innate, internal identity. However, I feel that the snapshot photograph doesn't do justice to the effort in assimilating into another "foreign" culture. It makes her work seem as thought the alteration of appearance is sufficient in entering a community, when in reality, Lee learns the "lingo" and specific, nuanced gestures of the communities.

QUESTION: Although I feel that I have a concrete understanding of the difference between biological sex and socially constructed ideas of gender, however Butler identifies the idea of the body as an "historical idea" and not a "natural fact." First, I am wondering if she is talking about the physical body (made up of sex-specific parts) or the preconcieved notion of what the sexed body is. It seems that the physical body has an identifiable sex, determined by the genetalia, but the body can be "gendered" either male or female. I understand that gender is no longer viewed as a set of binary oppositions, and that sex is no longer seen as quite as oppositional, but there seems to be distinct physical differences in the actual body (i.e. the woman's uterus allows her to bear children).

I am also interested in Butler's argument that heterosexuality is a "condition" reinforced or even created by a social pressure to reproduce, and not inherently natural to the human condition. This suggests that if we were not concerned about populating the earth, we would not be as inclined to choose a partner based on sex.

With all these concerns regarding postethnicity, post-identity and post-gender, it seems that there are still a lot of issues from the past that need to be sorted out before we declare ourselves in any kind of "post" condition.