Archive for January, 2007
My review of Mel Alexenberg’s new book, The Future of Art in a Digital Age: From Hellenistic to Hebraic Consciousness is in this week’s Forward, titled “The Jewish McLuhan.”
I talk about his installations which do everything from tying tzitzit strings to the corners of the United States to sending “Cyber-angels” (derived from Rembrandt) across the world by fax. And perhaps most provocatively, his Holocaust memorial honoring the 6 million Jews in Israel “incinerated by an Iranian nuclear bomb that is Iran’s prelude to global conquest in the service of a mad ideology.”
Here’s the email interview I conducted with Alexenberg, pictured (wearing a hat with the ambassadors of Israel and the U.S. at the opening of his exhibit, Cyberangels: Aesthetic Peace Plan for the Middle East, at the Prague Jewish Museum ):
MW: I find your ability to not only map the Torah out over postmodern/deconstruction theory but also to create numerous artworks that attends to those discoveries quite fascinating. I wonder, though, is there any limit in your mind to cooperation between Jewish texts/theology and technology? Is there ever a danger of creating towers of Babel?
MA: I discuss the greatest transgression in building the Tower of Babel as defying the Divine will to revere and applaud the differences between peoples (pages 150-151). With rapidly developing translation programs on the Internet, people can retain their different languages and cultures while communicating to each other freely. Internet translation programs that promise to be perfected in the next decade provide unprecedented opportunities to be both unified and different simultaneously.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Mel Alexenberg’
“Citizens and Kings” at the London Royal Academy of Arts shows early works in which “kings and queens [are depicted] in their pomp and finery, confident in the supreme power they believed was a God-given right.” But war and revolution “challenged that assumption, and painters and sculptors came to portray Enlightenment leaders as statesmen weighed down by civic duty and championing reason and scientific progress.” Included is Ingres’ 1806 painting of Napoleon, pictured, “making intentional reference … to Christ himself.” [Reuters]
The Contemporary Jewish Museum is “topping out,” with a taste of Chai. [Art Knowledge News]
An Israeli is suing Sacha Baron Cohen, claiming the line “Wa wa wee wa” is his. No wonder Cohen thanked “every American who has not sued me so far” in his speech accepting his Golden Globe. [CBS]
International Herald Tribune has a great profile of the Israeli Philharmonic from musicians’ selfless efforts to save the dying orchestra to performing Wagner. [IHT]
“The product of a Jewish father and Puerto Rican mother,” Alegria Hudes, has a new play out about Washington Heights, “In the Heights.” According to the Voice, “the ink’s barely dry on her Brown University MFA, Hudes is already writer to reckon with.” [Village Voice]
The Sulayman Al-Bassam Theatre Company’s new Arabic version of Richard III is set in an oil-rich desert and “presents Shakespeare’s tragedy from a contemporary Islamic perspective.” [Asharq Alwasat]
Aaron Roller is a poet (see here) affiliated with Mima’amakim. He recently graduated Yeshiva University, where he studied literature and ran the YU Arts Festival. He is now studying urban planning at Harvard University.
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art—must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or texts?
AR: We could use the term “religious art” to cover quite a few things. Religious art can be art created with the express goal of inspiring religious behavior or decorating and beautifying some aspect of religion. These would include illuminated manuscripts, stained glass or sculptural altars in churches, ritual objects in synagogues etc. This is art that exists for the sake of the religion. Perhaps this would better fit the definition of sacred art (though notions of sacred art seem to border upon the idolatrous).
Then there is art that deals with religion, which addresses it or interprets it in some way. It’s purpose is more personal and exploratory. Often created by religious people or people who are struggling with religion (either/or), such art is born of a struggle with questions of personal and group identity that informs so much creativity. The paintings by Tobi Kahn that you recently reviewed on your website seem to fit this category. A poem like “Kaddish” by Alan Ginsberg also seems to fit. Such work doesn’t figure into religious practice, but were it not for religion it wouldn’t exist. (Strange that both examples I cited also deal with death and memory; I wonder what that means.)
A third definition is art that is neither particularly religious in its intent or its subject matter, but manages to inspire religious feelings anyway. Paintings that make viewers aware of something eternal in the world. Maybe “Guernica” does this, or certain poems by Whitman. This is a more subjective definition of religious art (meaning its association with religion is dependent upon how a member of the audience views it).
Continue reading ‘Interview: Aaron Roller’
Jerusalem-born, Ramallah-based Khalil Rabah fights occupation by turning to the internet and using it “as a springboard into a virtual space without confinement or limitation.” His work, 10 years in the making, called 50,320 Names, gathers the names of 50,320 historic structures in Palestine. He says:
Occupation doesn’t allow for restoration … There is no infrastructure for reconstruction and people don’t have the resources, anyway. I thought there must be a strategy and a new way to narrate things. Can we imagine? Can we play? [The Daily Star]
Swastikas can breathe a sigh of relief; they are safe. The legislation, widely challenged by Hindus who cited the swastika’s role as a Hindu peace symbol, initially called for banning the symbol, but now “will not seek to prohibit specific symbols such as swastikas.” [India eNews]
Now the hymns of the Mass have mass appeal to the masses? In a move being called the U2-charist, Mysterious Ways and Beautiful Day are now part of at least one Mass service. [CBC]
The “Iranian Woody Allen,” Bahman Farmanara, banned from Iran for his films, is the subject of “Storm Warnings” at the Film Society of Lincoln Center (New York). [The Daily Star]
NYU is not quite saving the world, but its archaeologists are joining others from Yale and UPenn and teaming up with engineers from the Institute of Fine Arts to save a 5,000-year-old Egyptian monument. The Abydos Project has a catch: the workers have to employ “the ancient techniques.” [Washington Square News]
Creative biblical art that conveys a living bible still relevant today is rare for obvious reasons. It’s hard to convey a split Red Sea or Golden Calf without falling prey to the Scylla and Charybdis of religious art: cartoony or tacky work.
Adi Nes brilliantly avoids both pitfalls and creates some of the most inventive work I’ve ever seen.
In “Abraham and Isaac” (2005), Nes invokes a Duchamp like move in portraying the altar as a shopping cart and the two patriarchs as homeless men. But “Isaac” is not as fortunate as the biblical Isaac, because there is no kid nearby stuck in the bushes to rescue him from his poverty. Nes shows that there are tough sacrifices all around if one knows to look for them. Instead of the stones of yesterday, today’s sacrifices happen on altars of empty, squashed soda cans.
Nes’ other work (on exhibit at Jack Shainman Gallery) is equally powerful. “Hagar” (2006) shows a woman so torn apart by Sarah, who cast her out with her sick son and only a jug of water to survive the harsh desert (perhaps the biblical version of what was to become the Arab-Israeli conflict), that she cannot even meet the viewer’s gaze. And yet, she is scheming knowingly, as if already plotting to take Abraham back — as Keturah — after Sarah dies.
Another photograph shows Abel lying dead on the ground in an animalistic pose. Cain is nowhere to be seen. In another image, Noah lies drunk (dead?) on the floor, and elsewhere David and Jonathan lovingly embrace. Ruth and Naomi gather trash in a field of asphalt. Elijah is indeed surrounded by ravens, but they ignore the pitiful old man and offer no promises of feeding him.
And yet, however brilliant Nes’ images are as biblical interpretation, the work has a whole other level, which the press release describes in terms of “masculinity and Israeliness” and addressing “preconceived notions of the ‘ideal’ male body, homoeroticism as a pictorial device, and the story of Jews who immigrated to Israel from Arab countries.”
Although I did not remember his name, I remember visiting the Tel Aviv Museum in 2001 and seeing Nes’ 1999 “Untitled (The Last Supper),” which modeled 14 Israelis for da Vinci’s last supper.
Many will consider Nes’ work offensive and sacrilegious for daring to displace biblical stories from their pedestals. But as I wrote about Tiepolo, it is important to remember that biblical stories, even within the logic of their own narratives, were about real people. Nes is not only provocatively suggesting that there was something homeless in Abraham — indeed he did flee his home and become the wandering Jew — but also that there is something to be canonized in the daily sacrifices of otherwise unexpectedly glamorous and heroic people.
From time to time, Iconia will offer the religious art aficionado’s quick guide to specific publications. Some will appear only in print, in which case links will not be provided. This feature is intended to help readers not only expose themselves to more religious art coverage, but also to get a feel for what type of coverage different publications give to religion and art. This post tackles AIA.
Page 107 ff: In “Shape Shifter,” Nancy Princenthal covers Allan McCollum’s installation that seeks to assign a shape to each person alive (through the year 2050) titled “Shapes Project.” Seven thousand were shown, and 31 billion shapes are planned. The piece has a bit of Brave New World in it, but however uneasy it is to see people collapsed to Adobe Illustrator constructed “monoprints,” Princenthal sees McCollum’s piece as not only preoccupied with “absence, and with death” (his words), but also as “a frank exploration of mortality — indeed, so breezily candid that it’s easy to miss its depth.”
Page 111 ff: Joan Simon interviews Hedda Sterne, 96, the last surviving member of the first generation of the New York School. Sterne was born in Romania, and she escaped the Nazis and moved to Paris and then America (via Portugal) in 1941. Asked if her family was religious, Sterne replied:
No. Jews were assimilated and they had the illusion that if they didn’t look at the problem, maybe it would go away. And to be quote assimilated was to be civilized. Everything associated with religion was backward. My father was a thinking agnostic, or atheist if you want, and my mother was totally uninterested and indifferent. So I was brought up without any kind of mention of religion at all. Well, there was a moment when I wanted to convert to Christianity [laughs]. I was about 11, and I read The Imitation of Christ. I read everything.
Page 152: Jonathan Goodman reviews Phil Joanou’s work, including “Tower of Babble” (2000), which Goodman calls “a tower of bust-length figures that rises above a teeming crowd, as smaller, ghostly bodies fall through the air.” Goodman adds, “Calling out without connecting to each other or the crowd below, the characters comprising the tower seem to symbolize the loneliness of human existence, as Joanou’s brush bears down on an existential truth.”
Page 155: Robert L. Pincus writes about Lisa Venditelli’s work, which includes the “major element” of images that resemble “religious apparitions.” Included are the Virgin Mary made from tea stains on an ironing board (with piled clean laundry) and a wall mounted piece that incorporates thin strands of pasta (no elephant dung this time) which suggests that “religion doesn’t trump food, nor the reverse.” To Pincus, “Venditelli knows how to manipulate conventional icons and make them work for her.”
Page 158: Joe Fyfe explores Alix Le Meleder’s work, which a French art critic calls Taoist. Fyfe concedes “one can certainly see connections to Eastern thought in her apparent concerns with the unity of opposites,” but his own analysis is far more creative: “Le Meleder’s edifying paintings seem to demonstrate life as a kind of metronome, with many subtle but irreversible changes occuring at every click.”
Though his daughter tells him to paint butterflies and flowers and his friends tell him his work can’t sell, Lebanese artist Wissam Beydoun continues to paint defiant male nudes. He says: “We are all stuck on the ground … Eventually everyone tends to go upward - a certain spirituality. So I paint the struggle to go up while being stuck on the ground. The ground is important. When this human being is tired, he falls down on the ground, becomes one with the earth.” [The Daily Star]
His murals and altarpieces have appeared at many churches — the Cathedral Church of St. John the Divine (NY), Grace Cathedral (SF), Saint Eustache (Paris) and a church in Pisa, Italy — Keith Haring’s 85 foot mural at the Ascension School in New York, pictured above, shows figures that “dance, pose, slip and jump.” Somehow, it remained hidden. [NY Times]
“When I tell people at shul [synagogue] that I’m a cartoonist, they assume it’s for children, that I make educational Jewish stories … But they don’t really need it anyway. Truly religious people get their kicks from Torah and community, not art,” says Lubavitch Hassid Sammy Harkham, creator of the strip “Lubavitch.” In an interview with The Comics Reporter he adds: “It was a struggle to create a balance between being humorous and still talking about why anyone lives an orthodox jewish life, without being preachy or aggressive with my opinions.” [Forward]
Gehry’s Walt Disney Concert Hall changed everything, according to Nicolai Ouroussoff, who quotes Gehry: “My question has always been how well the developer could adapt themselves to this mixed ethnic neighborhood … It’s uniquely L.A. and it’s very powerful, and the push-pull is about how do you do that. Hopefully it’ll happen over time.” It is interesting to hear talk about ethnic neighborhoods from an artist, whom Mel Alexenberg (review forthcoming) claims was influenced by carps swimming in his grandmother’s bath tub on the Lower East Side. [NY Times]
After having dedicated past clothing lines to Hassidic Jews and to the Orthodox Churches, Jean Paul Gaulthier has titled his spring-summer show after the Virgin Mary, pictured (photo: NY Magazine), “Regina Mundi: on earth as in heaven.” He explains, “The Virgin is a mom. All women are madonnas, no?” [CWNews]
Founder of the Prosopon School of iconography, Vladislav Andrejev, has his masters students painting icons, “an extremely disciplined and symbol-infused form of religious art … [which is] created — or ‘written,’ as icon artists say — for only one purpose, to make visible and to glorify the divine.” A student in the course explains: “As a Christian, I’ve always tried to manifest my belief in my work … But at times, I’ve been frustrated by the lack of a common idiom. Modern artists are expected to be idiosyncratic, to create a whole new world, rather than to identify and celebrate the universal.” [Minneapolis Star Tribune]
Maintaining that the West German government paid his father for his poster collection in 1961, a German panel rejected Peter Sachs’ claims to regain his father’s 12,500-posters, which were seized by the Nazis. [NY Times]
A nine year collection in the making, Wang Lina’s 31 Buddhist scroll paintings called thangkas — Tibetan for “flat painting” — are being shown at Jing’an Temple. Two Tibetan lamas drew thangkas on site, but perhaps most unique is seeing an exhibit in a temple in Shanghai, though this article argues “it is a perfect setting for the thangkas.” [Shanghai Daily]
Symposium: “Wrestling with the Angel- Art and Religion in the Twentieth Century,” co-sponsored by the Fordham Center for Religion and Culture and the Museum of Biblical Art
“Wrestling with the Angel” is a two-day symposium, including major presentations and an inter-disciplinary panel, that will examine the complex interaction between art and religion in the twentieth century. It held is in conjunction with the exhibit “Biblical Art in a Secular Century: Selections, 1896-1993″ at the Museum of Biblical Art.
Links: MOBIA and Fordham.
Steve Martin’s “Seventy-Two Virgins” in the Shouts & Murmurs section of the New Yorker, which introduces the reader to 72 virgins who deliver one-liners, is both amusing and provocative. Although it is clear that the piece will offend many, it also manages to ask some serious questions, which have not been sufficiently answered about the concept of the 72.
Virgin No. 11, says, “First you’re going to have to show me an up-to-date health certificate,” while Virgin No. 21 says, “I hope you’re not going to sleep with me and then go sleep with seventy-one others.” Do the virgins in fact have any control of their bodies? Must they be complicit partners?
And so it goes, many of the virgins are not so virginous as they might seem:
Virgin No. 13: Do you want the regular or the special?
… Virgin No. 29: Well, I’m a virgin, but my hand isn’t.
… Virgin No. 35: By the way, here in Heaven “virgin” has a slightly different meaning. It means “chatty.”
Some are not Muslim themselves: “Virgin No. 18: I’m saving myself for Jesus” and “Virgin No. 40: I’m Jewish. Why do you ask?”
But Martin’s column is most interesting in its attempt to make the virgins more accessible. Sure they are in paradise (”Virgin No. 72: It was paradise, until you showed up.”), but they are strikingly familiar (”Virgin No. 52: Not now, I’m on my BlackBerry” and “Virgin No. 10: . . . so I see Heath, and he goes, “Like, what are you doing here?,” and I go, “I’m hangin’ out,” so he goes, “Like, what?””). By infusing the virgins with character — and removing them from the amorphous realm of folklore and bringing them down to this world — Martin’s article is not only comedy, but also seriously engaging theology. Now all that is left to do is a 72-painting series.
Stanley Fish is Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law at Florida International University and dean emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois. He has authored many books and articles, including “Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost,” “Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities,” “Doing What Comes Naturally: Change, Rhetoric, and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies,” “The Trouble with Principle” and “John Skelton’s Poetry.”
Although Fish initially responded to my questions, “Dear Mr. Wecker, I’m sorry but these are not questions I am competent to answer–Stanley Fish,” he later added:
When I teach Paradise Lost, I do raise the issue of whether the fact that Milton had a Christian reader in mind makes a difference, especially given that his main theme is the primacy of faith. That is to say, with respect to religious art, is it possible to “bracket” the assertion of doctrine or treat it as you would any other “theme.” Helen Vendler wrote a book on George Herbert’s poetry and asserted that the value of the poetry could and should be determined independely of the religious truths it proclaims. I found that odd.
In a move being called “a fusion of Indian and Western spiritual streams,” a church in India is to include an idol of Jesus meditating under a bodhi tree a la Buddha. So what does one hang on the wall above such a Jesus sculpture? “Above the idol is a painting depicting the Last Supper, again employing Indian motifs. The painting shows the Christ and the 12 apostles sitting on the floor cross-legged with banana leaves spread out before them for the bread and wine to be served.” [PTI]
In an unfortunate but hilarious mistake, a “rookie censor” accidentally made religious art by bleeping out all references to God in an airplane version of The Queen. I simply couldn’t let this gem go: “Fortunately, at no time in the original film is the common phrase “God save the queen” spoken or else passengers from the United Kingdom might have been royally irritated to hear “bleep” invoked to save Her Majesty.” [AP]
Citing Raiders of the Lost Ark and Aladdin, some are claiming “There is no such thing as a Muslim good guy.” Apparently, there are even studies to back up this charge: 62 percent of British Muslims find the media “Islamophobic” and 14 percent say it’s racist. [Reuters]
Rembrandt’s “Saint James the Greater,” pictured above, sold for $25.8 million at a Sotheby’s auction, just more than the auction house’s prediction. “[Sotheby’s Vice Chairman George] Wachter said there has been a lot of speculation as to why Rembrandt started painting apostles.” In the Reuters article, Wachter offers no hints of the speculation. I wonder, since when has anyone ever needed a reason to paint apostles? Did El Greco or Tiepolo need an excuse? [Reuters]
You win some and you lose some — even in Holocaust restitution cases. Whichever side you are on — return the paintings or keep them in public collections — here is one success story and one about failure. [CBC]
A documentary about “stalagim” is in the making, and if that doesn’t excite you, it’s probably because you know what the term means. It refers to a genre of Israeli literature, more precisely: “pornographic books published in Israel during the 1960s that describe sadistic relations between beautiful Nazi women, who commanded Third Reich prison camps, and their tortured prisoners.” [Haaretz]
In my Jewish Press column this week, I review Tobi Kahn’s new show “MATERIA: Recent works on paper by New York artist Tobi Kahn” at Works on Paper in Philadelphia.
I title the review “Rock-Hard Paintings,” because Kahn’s work is so concrete that one gets the impression that each part of the paintings has a solid texture — nothing is fluffy.
Works on Paper director, Evan Slepian has done a great job of not only featuring images of the paintings on the gallery Web site, but also posting close-ups (which are very important with such textured works) and shots of the exhibition layout.
I note in the review that Philadelphia Inquirer critic Edward J. Sozanski made a startling argument that Kahn’s work should be considered as Eastern, rather than Western, art. “Kahn’s paintings don’t look particularly Asian, yet their exquisite balance and quiet intensity make them as serenely contemplative as the calligraphy of a Zen master. The more one studies these paintings, the more one realizes how much craftsmanship contributes to that result.”
The Inquirer review is quite glowing (I apologize to Slepian, because something got lost in translation, I did not mean in any way to suggest that he was critical of the review), and rightfully so. Kahn’s works seem to leap off the wall — Slepain told me two or three could hold the wall, which is why he hung them with so much space between works. They are highly personal works, deriving from the artist’s visit to the cemetery to his mother’s grave. He is a Cohen (priest), which means that he cannot visit a cemetery under normal circumstances, and found himself particularly inspired by the small stones that mourners left on grave sites to mark their visit.
My art teacher always told me that good paintings are like machines, with each part playing an important role, all-the-while interacting with other parts of the machine. Kahn’s works do just that. They are not only inspired by stones, but are in fact rock solid themselves.
Ari Gordon is the assistant director in the Department of Interreligious Affairs at the American Jewish Committee.
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art—must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or texts?
AG: Religious art is any form of visual or performed expression created to convey or stimulate a religious feeling, thought or experience.
MW: What is the relationship between religious art and kitsch? What is your favorite example of religious art? Why? How do collectors, curators, critics, and viewers respond to religious art? Are there unique challenges/dangers endemic to creating religious art?
AG: I believe that the first piece of this question is very dependent on the particular subject’s religious perspective. The reactions to religious art are very different between religions, among religions and for those with no religion. There are definite challenges in creating any type of expression which addresses subjects pertaining to identity, especially religion which aims to create an entire system of meaning and comprehensive organizing principles for its adherents.
MW: How, if at all, is religious art evolving and adapting to the modern era?
AG: Religious art is adapting in the same way that religion itself has been adapting. Some react to new trends by fully absorbing their direction, some more hesitantly and some are reacting in opposition to modern trends.
MW: The recent Danish cartoon incident that dominated the news seems to be part of a trend rather than an isolated incident. Why has religious art been such a divisive force, as opposed to a unifying one?
AG: Religious art can be divisive, but one must recognize the role that art HAS played as a unifying force as well. Biblical art (Hebrew Scriptures) plays a tremendous unifying role in creating a lasting conversation between Jewish and Christian scholars. Art has become a political unifier in Israel and the territories in several grassroots and institutionalized programs. Art is being utilized in several initiatives to transcend religious conflict and begin new conversations.
More than 100 Iranian artists and academics have signed a petition — created in part by Reading Lolita in Tehran author Azar Nafisi — denouncing the recent Iranian conference which denied the Holocaust. The petition is due out in the February 15 issue of the NY Review of Books. [CBC]
How does one evolve from “I was not interested in paintings” to “I decided to devote my entire life to it?” For Kenji Babasaki, the answer was Buddhist Thangka paintings. He has painted more than 130 since (some take up to three months each to make). [Phayul.com]
Miriam Cohen guest-wrote “Painting Chassidic Women” for my Jewish Press column about Esther Pam Zibell’s work, see above, at the Chassidic Art Institute. Cohen, who edits the Touro Independent, adds, “I usually (irreverently) think of artists as free spirits. I was interested in seeing how an ultra Orthodox artist would reconcile the rather warring impulses of conforming as an Orthodox Jew and uniquely creating as an artist.” She added:
Zibell seemed not to reconcile anything; her sensibility was Orthodox through and through. Her paintings seemed less artistic than kitschy to me, without displaying any discernible risk taking or noteworthy talent. When I probed her about the women she depicted, all of whom, who seemed to my eyes dissatisfied, she shrugged off my questions. “I don’t see that,” she would dismiss. Perhaps, in her paintings, as in her life, she truly cannot see it. [Jewish Press]
Wendy Ryan posted a new Madonna painting, with a touch of Modigliani in it. I am not scrambling to ebay to buy it, but I do think it’s worth a peek. [Wendyryanfolkart]
Harry Rand is Senior Curator of Cultural History in the Division of Politics and Reform at the National Museum of American History, specializing in modern art and religion. He has published a slew of books and essays, including “The Art of New York’s Jews: A Delicate Lesson,” “Arshile Gorky: The Implications of Symbols” and “Manet’s Contemplation at the Gare St. Lazare.”
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or
texts?
HR: The term has no meaning within religion, and only a generic meaning in art. Within religion all experiences (of the world or of mind’s self-reflection) point toward ultimate and un-contingent denotation. Within art certain subjects refer to special narratives or symbols that may or may not (at no greater risk or benefit to the artist) produce worthwhile art or “successful” art, which is work that has spiritual merit.
All art with spiritual merit identifies itself with and by the audience/ spectator’s experience of quality. Quality is an attraction rooted in time-delimited symbols, but which transcends them. Surmounting these local references directs us toward (take your pick or both, depending on how adroit or elastic your vision) 1. the wind of Providence driving the universe or 2. the Darwinian preferences that, when experienced by an organism, are recognized as the self-perception of evolutionary selection. (EG: Why do we find certain people “beautiful”–and want to mate with them? Because we are trapped in a meta-style whose curve is our own evolutionary development as a species OR, a holy attraction, b’shert, kismet, fate…etc. Why are certain paintings pleasing? Because on some level they communicate, confirm, or reveal an agreeable-to-experience order in the world.)
Sacred art has no meaning. An object of any kind (the knuckle-bone of
a long-dead hermit, a rusty can) can be sacralized through an elevated
context … like a museum presentation or puja. The holy (an uncontingent state) & the sacred (a human artifact) are too readily confused.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Harry Rand’
Women have been represented as goddesses in Hindu art and worshipped, but “women in society faced a different treatment altogether,” says Heather Elgood, who calls India “quite a contradiction” in that regard. Unfortunately, this dual conception of women as goddesses and women as temptresses who must be kept in check is hardly endemic to Hinduism. [Afternoon Despatch & Courier]
A new Tintoretto (who was recently renamed) show at the Prado “will focus on his facet as a painter of religious narratives, the field in which he produced his most renowned compositions.” Also note, the exhibit contains two paintings that haven’t been shown together in 400 years. (See left, Christ at the Sea of Galilee) [Antiques and the Arts]
The Memphis Peabody Place Museum has changed its name to Belz Museum of Asian and Judaic Art, to “better reflect the unique and extensive collection of art housed at the museum.” [Eyewitness News Everywhere]
A 54-year-old Orthodox Jewish artist (and mother of eight), Gitl Wallerstein-Braun is exhibiting photographs that relate to her identity as the daughter of Holocaust survivors — “often fragments of Hebrew manuscripts: ancient, medieval and more recent,” which a fellow artist describes as “images that appear to be fragments of a lost and destroyed world, reminiscent of the fragments of Torah scrolls which the Nazis used to make mundane items.” [Jerusalem Post]
Garrett Eisler pans Jonathan Leaf’s The Germans in Paris, charging that Leaf’s play about Heine, Wagner, and Marx “knocks these icons off their ideological pedestals, but in doing so strips away what’s most interesting about them.” My review is forthcoming. [Village Voice]
Steven Fine is a professor of Jewish history at Yeshiva University. According to his website, he is the author of “academic monographs, museum catalogs, articles and even a book for children” and is editor of “IMAGES: A Journal for the Study of Jewish Art and Visual Culture. The first issue will appear in January, 2007.” He is the author, most recently, of “Art and Judaism in the Greco-Roman World.”
MW: What is your response to people who say that art that depicts nudes ought to be censored?
SF: I assume that you are asking about Jewish contexts. At some point early in my student days I was startled by the number of nudes, mostly all female, that have appeared in Jewish contexts through the ages– from the daughter of Pharoah in the 3rd century synagogue at Dura Europos in Syria, to the 5th century male Libra in the Hammath Tiberias synagogue, to numerous images in medieval Hebrew manuscripts and on ritual objects such as Hanukkah lamps and Purim plates, to illustrated marriage contracts, and even the frontispieces of early printed editions of central Rabbinic texts and Orthodox synagogue decoration during the early 20 th century. The existence of these artifacts is a fact.
Censorship isn’t a category in academic scholarship, and my job is to present culture in all of its complexity. Each individual and each community has to decide what art “fits” their self perceptions and world views. This is not an academic question, however.
MW: What does the term “idol” mean to you? How do you feel about iconoclastic religions calling for the destruction of what they call “idols,” but what many archaeologists would call artifacts? Does it bother you as a historian that many such treasures were surely destroyed by iconoclasts?
SF: As an academic, “idol” is a value judgment, and my job is not to engage in value judgments. One culture’s idols are another’s religious artifacts. All are intrinsically interesting as reflection of culture, just as the destruction or hiding away of certain artifacts because they don’t conform with the usable history of a community is intrinsically interesting.
Religiously, of course, there are artifacts that I might not bring into my home, and whose service might make me uncomfortable. I might even tell my young son (now six) that some of these are “idols,” but that has to do with my own and my community’s sense of self.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Steven Fine’
Swann Galleries is launching what it calls the first ever auction of African American fine art. The auction boasts big names like Jacob Lawrence and Romare Bearden, whose “Baptism” (1975), pictured, is priced by Swann at $20-25,000. [Art Knowledge News]
The comparison is hardly fair, but a religious painting by Rembrandt is for sale for a bit more than Bearden — priced by Sotheby’s between $18 and 25 million. The painting in question, Saint James the Greater (1661), was owned by a descendant of Stephen Clark (from the Singer Sewing Machine family), and is said to have been commissioned. [CBC]
Jewish composer and conductor, Daniel Barenboim–famous to some and infamous to others for performing Wagner in Israel — is the first person to perform at Carnegie Hall on the day of the 50th anniversary of his debut, which he modestly downplayed according to CBS. [CBS]
The newest controversy on Broadway, the sex-filled “Spring Awakening,” hailed as “an erotic new musical,” has religious origins. The playwright Steven Sater solicited composer Duncan Sheik’s help after meeting him at a Buddhist gathering. If Sater can link Buddhism and a song called “The Bitch of Living” then perhaps the play is worth seeing. [Reuters]
It’s not every day that a Catholic writer wins an award for both his “deep respect and love for the Jewish people and Israel” and his skepticism: “Though in his later writings Kolakowski became more and more committed to his Catholic creed, he still remains a sceptical thinker — even regarding his own thought.” Meet Leszek Kolakowski, recipient of the 2007 Jerusalem Prize. [AFP]
Jewish cartoonist Saul Steinberg, whose work is being shown in three different exhibits in New York (see his New Yorker cover above), might be “a reminder of the way the immigration of intellectually gifted Europeans to New York before World War II - what we might call Hitler’s legacy to our city - made the local sensibility more diverse and urbane.” [NY Daily News]
Sylvia Herskowitz is the director of the Yeshiva University Museum. In the interview, she spoke of museums’ reluctance to show art with Jewish themes and a potential get-out-of-kitsch-free card.
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art—must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or texts? What is the relationship between religious art and kitsch?
SH: I would guess that much of so called religious art is probably kitsch.
I’m thinking of all the “saint cards” and l’havdil, all the crude depictions of the kotel. At YUM we really don’t think in terms of religious art –we call it art on Jewish themes, and it can be by any artist –not even necessarily Jewish. In a few months we will show examples of Yonah Weinrib’s illuminations on Sefer Shemot. I guess that comes very close to being religious art. And it is distinct from kitsch in that it has a strong intellectual basis, since Weinrib is a learned Torah scholar, and his images are not run of the mill but carefully thought out and executed.
Kitsch, as I recall, is sentimental and trivial, using trite imagery and executed poorly or mass produced. In the Jewish world there has always been a lot of kitsch, especially since the 19th century when I believe the term originated.
One of our goals as a museum is to help the public learn the difference between what is good Jewish art and what is not. Thats is why we constantly show Judaica in its diversity — including contemporary Judaica, finely wrought work with the artists concepts made clear. But sadly the commercial stuff that is being turned out, often priced quite high, is kitschy, because it appeals on the lowest possible level to a mainly ignorant buying public. In this case, kitsch often is created by copying symbols long revered and trivializing them, often with poor workmanship and no artistry, which misleads a public who thinks more is better. I’m thinking, obviously of all the shlocky silver shops we both know. And what about all the tourist stuff?? Sometimes kitsh is even collectible!
In the early years of Israel, the patinated copper blue pieces put the Israeli symbols on everything from napkin holders to bottle openers. What do we call that? It’s important to allow room for folk art, which almost borders kitsch, but one has to rely on the integrity of the naive artist.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Sylvia Herskowitz’
Dina Zaman is a Malaysia-based editor and writer, who has written for the New Straits Times and a weekly column, “I am Muslim,” for www.malaysiakini.com (see her goodbye post). Online bios of Zaman stress “she has always been in the public relations and media industries though writing is her mistress. She writes both fiction and non-fiction, and is interested in religion, society and what makes Malaysians tick.” She is working on a book due out in March, and if her recent interview on Aljazeera is any indication, I look forward very much to reading it.
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art—must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or texts?
DZ: As I said ealier, I am not an expert in art, and to talk about religious art is something way over my head, so I’ll respond as a layman, yah?
I think it can be both. Of course, I personally would prefer if religious art is meant to mean something to the believer (whatever faith the person believes in) to be created by a spiritual artist for how would a person with no sense of spirituality udnerstand the ectasy of a believer? Having said that, I suppose art is how one responds to the world, and if an artist has his or her own views, then how can we stop the person from expressing himself?
MW: What is the relationship between religious art and kitsch?
DZ: Kitsch is pop culture at its… gaudy. But I do like it beacuse it
represents what the layman is thinking. I’ve seen some weird
representations of faiths… and it makes you think. Oh dear, is that how one views a religion? But it is interesting to note how the ‘masses’ feel.
The relationship? Probably in MY simple mind, like a student and teacher. Religious art is done by the masters, and kitsch by people like me who can’t draw to save her life.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Dina Zaman’
The Chinese Communist Party can’t decide how to handle Mao’s legacy, according to Ross Terrill. However godless the CCP appears, Chinese cab drivers carry Mao talismans “reminiscent of Chinese Buddhists … clutching images or statues of Guan Yin, the goddess of mercy, to keep them safe and make them prosperous.” [Wilson Quarterly]
A Pakistani team is searching for idols and images of Hindu gods to buy from India for inclusion in its restoration (at India’s request) of seven Katas Raj temples. Pakistan hopes the Hindu idols will attract visitors. [IANS]
Why is France afraid of Muslims, asks Christian Delacampagne. Like Rushdie, Robert Redeker was forced into a witness protection program of sorts after receiving death threats in response to his article “What Should the Free World Do in the Face of Islamist Intimidation?” The answer combines approaching elections, a complicit media and academic world and a slightly more historical set of factors: French colonialism, de Gaulle and “Orientalists.” [Commentary]
Abdul Hay Musalam Zarara works in sawdust and glue, inspired by the carpenter of the village where he grew up who used a glue-sawdust mixture to plug up holes, to capture pre-1948 Palestinian village life. He says he became an artist to document the Palestinian culture, allowing him to make “Committed art [which] is not less important than organisations or institutions in spreading knowledge of our cause.” [Jordan Times]
In a new take on Picasso’s blue period, Iranian artist Mehdi Hosseini’s works evoke a strange combination of David Hockney’s flatness and origami. Many of his forms look like books, and the characters appear to be praying (see pictured above). [Iranian.com]
“Palestine, now understood as the most widely documented conflict of the 20th century, has had a lot to offer the art scene in recent years,” says Iman Hamam in a review of “No Holidays in Gaza,” an exhibit which absurdly tries to portray Gaza as a travel agency would. The review is otherwise unfocused, but the show sounds very intriguing. [Al-Ahram Weekly]
The Imam Ali (AS) Religious Arts Museum (Tehran) is showing an exhibit of “one of Iran’s fading art forms,” stained glass, which portray “a combination of ancient Iranian art with Islamic stories.” [Tehran Times]
Turkey has passed a $93 million insurance bill on to Italy, the U.S., Korea and Japan for artifacts it is lending for exhibitions, including “Venice and the Islamic World, 828-1797″ at The Met (NY) in March. The extra bill aims to protect against not only the standard fare of theft and natural disaster, but also against terrorism and plane crashes. [Today’s Zaman]
Although to many, swastikas evoke Nazi anti-Semitism, they are actually Hindu symbols of peace. Many Hindus are trying to stress this publicly, as Germany, which is president of the EU, is calling for the banning of swastikas in the 25 EU member states.
Sanjay Mistry, a spokesman for the Hindu Forum of Britain, told the Herald (Scotland): “There was an attempt to extend the ban on swastikas throughout Europe in 2005. The UK government opposed that and we hope it will do so again. Outside areas with a large Hindu population, people do not know it as anything other than a Nazi symbol and we have been running workshops to make them aware of the history.”
Iconia contacted Mistry and asked him to clarify what exactly the swastika means to Hindus, and whether a symbol can ever get stolen. Here is what he had to say:
The swastika has been around for 5,000 years as a symbol of peace. In Sanskrit it means May Goodness Prevail.
This is exactly the opposite of how it was used by Hitler
In Hindu tradition, it is one of the religion’s most sacred symbols of peace. Also a symbol of wealth and good fortune.
In the Hindu version it is often decorated with a dot in each quadrant of the swastika.
It is also seen as pointing in all four directions (North, East, South and West) and thus signifies stability and groundedness. Its use as a sun symbol can first be seen in its representation of the god Surya.
The swastika is considered extremely holy and auspicious by all Hindus, and is regularly used to decorate all sorts of items to do with Hindu culture. It is used in Hindu religious designs.
Throughout India it can be seen on the sides of temples, written on religious scriptures, on gift items, and on letterhead. The Hindu god Ganesh is often shown as sitting on a lotus flower on a bed of swastikas.
It is used in all Hindu weddings, festivals, ceremonies, houses and doorways, clothing and jewelry, motor transport and even decorations on food items like cakes and pastries. Amongst the Hindus.
While Aum is representative of a single of creation, the Swastika is a pure geometrical mark and is one of the 108 symbols of Lord Vishnu and represents the sun’s rays without which there would be no life.
It’s hard to not find Mistry’s argument compelling: If swastikas must go, then so should crosses, which were hijacked by the KKK.
Just days after the New York Times Magazine’s “Does Abe Foxman Have an Anti-Anti-Semite Problem?” a pro-Israel group is lobbying the Pope to send a “clear and strong signal” that he is not supportive of anti-Semitic references in Catholic art, Haaretz reports.
The letter to the Pope, which was also handed over to Reuters, said, “The fact that this culture (of anti-Semitism) continues to survive in parishes is very worrying and alarming for us.” The letter, of course, then references the Holocaust: “It is a sign that the embers of intolerance and hate continue to smoulder under the ashes, which, after the Holocaust, we had hoped were definitively put out.”
The president of the group singled out one particular piece, on exhibit in a church, the “Miracle of Trani,” which shows a defiled host, allegedly stolen by a Jewish woman in the year 1000, which she fried in oil. A miracle then occured, and the defiled host became bleeding flesh, which foretold the woman’s own death by hanging.
I fully understand why there are many Jews who hear of art of this sort and get scared. The same sort of discussion arises whenever Mel Gibson makes a piece of art. But I think there are two important points to be made here. Although I’d love to say that I thought people took paintings so seriously that fine art could influence people’s political and social lives, I think that era has long departed. If studies showed that Gibson’s Passion didn’t make any more anti-Semites, I sincerely doubt that paintings of defiled hosts will cause much stir.
But more importantly, I found myself experiencing the exact opposite feelings when I covered the sacred missals show at the Walters in Baltimore. The show contained two illuminated manuscripts which showed defiled hosts touched by Jews. I devoured the accompanying texts beside the pieces, and felt proud as a Jew to find references to Judaism within a show otherwise packed with Christian iconography.
I have had far too many exciting conversations about religion and art with friends of different faiths, which were launched by discussing difficult art, to support the censorship of paintings, even if they appear anti-Semitic. There are plenty of anti-Christian and anti-Muslim images in Jewish books and art, and though I think artists should be enlightened enough to not make hateful pieces, these sorts of paintings were made in different eras. They should be embraced as artifacts and historical treasures, and even as launching points for interfaith discussions.
Although Rouault (whose “Crucifixion” is pictured) was one of the most prolific religious artists, whose work very often drew from biblical narratives, Jorg von Uthmann argues that the most interesting works in an exhibit of Rouault in France are the “savage nudes, the prostitutes and alcoholics from Place Clichy,’ which yields a “Rouault who emerges [who] is not the one most of us remember.” [Bloomberg]
Robin Cembalest’s latest Nextbook column is out about the film The Longing, which tracks South American Jews raised as Catholics, as they journey back to Judaism. She interviews filmmaker Gabriela Böhm, who decided during filming that she was chasing the wrong story:
What happens when the forces who are saying ‘no’ are the Jews rather than the Catholic Church? … Not only are they alone in their struggle to go back to Judaism, they have no community to support them. Why would anyone want to do that if they didn’t feel it was their true faith? [Nextbook]
Roman Vishniac (pictured) was a photographer who described himself as a “Jewish spy to serve Jewish people.” Of his 16,000 (very risky) photos of Jews in Nazi Germany, only 2,000 survived confiscation, and 80 are featured in the exhibit “A Vanished World” in Paris. Vishniac had to use a hidden camera for his art for two reasons: “both to avoid the charge of spying and because Orthodox Jews did not like having their picture taken (due to the commandment against the making of graven images).” [European Jewish Press]
Kamol Tassananchalee and Thawan Duchanee, both recipients of Thailand’s “National Artist” awards (issued to one artist a year), are showing their work in an exhibit, “Visions of Dharma: Thai Contemporary Art” at Stanford. As the exhibition title suggests, “While their work is firmly rooted in traditional Thai culture and Buddhism, it is decidedly contemporary.” [Inside Bay Area]
As the title suggests, it is hard not to love the ornaments in the show “Cosmophilia: Islamic Art from the David Collection.” But the show is probably equally important for its debunking myths:
Figures - A common misconception about Islamic art maintains that Islam prohibits figural representation, but this section of the exhibition demonstrates that this statement is not true. The Koran certainly bans idolatry, or the worship of images, so pictures are not found in mosques and other religious settings. However, throughout history Muslims in many parts of the world have enjoyed representations of people and animals in their everyday lives and secular art. Sometimes figures are portrayed realistically, but in other cases the figures are more abstract. [Artdaily.org]
An Arts Pastor has visions of a conference “Transforming The Culture: A Vision for the Church and the Arts” in March 2008. It looks like it might be worth following. [Diary of an Arts Pastor]
And finally, it’s not about religious art, but Joel Connelly had me rethinking my writing with his wonderful column, “Sure it’s nice, but sculpture park isn’t all that.” Connelly complaines about New York critics who herald new art in Seattle which invariably claim the art will “a) put our city ‘on the global map’; b) ‘reconnect’ Seattle with its waterfront; or c) ‘transform’ the Emerald City’s identity.” More specifially, “Does our identity really need to be affirmed by a New York critic? At times — the opening of the new downtown library, or this week’s public opening of the Olympic Sculpture Park — it seems so.” It’s tough somtimes to not become that person Connelly condemns for “dreaming of one day being in The New Yorker, but I’m trying. [Seattle Post Intelligencer]
Dr. Joan Haahr is former professor of English and English department head at Yeshiva University, where she taught on King Arthur, Chaucer and Joyce. The picture, with Guiness, is from a Joyce celebration at her house in Riverdale.
MW: What is the relationship between religious art and kitsch?
JH: They are often indistinguishable
MW: What is your favorite example of religious art? Why?
JH: Anything by Giovanni Bellini or Gerard David. Two particular favorites: one in the Musee des Beaux -Arts in Rouen and a tryptich in the church called the “Frari” in Venice). Why? Because I’m not religious (nor a catholic) but they make me feel as if I were. What do I love about them? Their harmony and balance, the feeling of peace they project — it’s hard to say. It has nothing to do with their specific “subject” though. There’s also a wonderful painting by Raffaelo in the Borghese Galleries in Rome, recently restored, called The Deposition which I love (religious, though not as “spiritual” — in fact it’s very much grounded on earth). In general, I’m more inclined towards Caravaggio than Raffaelo or Michelangelo.
MW: How do collectors, curators, critics, and viewers respond to religious art? Are there unique challenges/dangers endemic to creating religious art?
JH: Propaganda. Kitch. Mistaking “message” for art (like thinking “high-minded” verse good poetry)
MW: The recent Danish cartoon incident that dominated the news seems to be part of a trend rather than an isolated incident. Why has religious art been such a divisive force, as opposed to a unifying one?
JH: Are those cartoons art? I thought they were propaganda.
One of Art Info’s “AI Eye: Editors’ Picks of Art for Sale” is a painting from Tim Doud’s “None of My Clothes (Coca Cola)” (2006), pictured, which shows the artist dressed in clothes with logos that he wouldn’t normally wear. In this case, he wears a red shirt with a Hebrew Coke logo. It’s unclear to me whether this is a Jewish/Israeli reference, though the artist does live in Brooklyn. [PJ Fine Art]
The MIAD is showing “Sacred Texts/Contemporary Forms,” an exhibit curated by Leslie Fedorchuk (see her interview). One interesting piece in the show, pictured, is “Root Words: An Alphabetic Exploration,” by Lynne Avadenka and Mohamed Zakariya. The piece includes seven words written in both Hebrew and Arabic (in this case phrases for “man”), all words which sound similar in both languages. The rest of the pieces in the show are well worth considering as well. [Milwaukee JS]
Divisive murals in an Idaho courthouse are causing quite a stir. The images in question depict American Indians being lynched, and some call for them to be censored, while others want them to remain as “a reminder of their treatment by whites who flooded Idaho in search of gold and land.” The line in the article that caught my attention is the viewers’ aesthetic denouncing of the pieces (whether sincere or in an attempt to avoid having to talk about the pieces): “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think the collective judgment is, they’re not the greatest things in the world.” Someone recently used the same argument in response to an article I wrote about Hitler’s art. [AP, via AZcentral]
Daniel S. Brenner, a reconstructionist rabbi, posts his commentaries on Reb Blog. He directs the Center for Multifaith Education at Auburn Theological Seminary in Manhattan.
MW: How would you define religious (or sacred) art—must is it be made by religious artists or can it simply respond to religious experiences or texts?
DB: I can best answer this question by citing Wilfred Cantrell Smith, in his brilliant 1979 work Faith and Belief. He writes in the introduction:
To live religiously is not merely to live in the presence of certain symbols, but to be involved with them or through them in a quite special way – a way that may lead far beyond the symbols and demand the totality of a person’s response, and may affect one’s relation, not only to them but to everything else: to oneself, to one’s neighbour, and to the stars.
Religious art is that which is produced by those who are “involved” with the symbols or those works of art that are not produced by involvement with those symbols but in some way serve as such symbols.
MW: What is the relationship between religious art and kitsch?
DB: Kitsch is in the eye of the beholder. When I was a rabbi in Bordentown, NJ, I led services surrounded by the ornamental plaster works of the town’s long dead Jewish dentist. He had constructed massive bronzed replicas of the ten commandments and Rodin-inspired Moses statues. When he made these works, I sense that he was expressing his connection to his faith and his desire to create works of beauty and dignity. Many older members of our community revered them. But to me, they were the very definition of kitsch. I think that kitsch is a by-product of a market driven economy where fashion is overly-valued. That which is out of fashion, and attempts to literally mirror religious objects or symbols, is often that which we term as religious kitsch.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Rabbi Daniel Brenner’
If only those who hold Iran to be a place of hate, tyranny, anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism could see an exhibit that is one of the most promising models for peace. Nothing like this happens in the Jewish or Christian world, and for that Iran deserves our applause and thanks.
The winners of the World Award of Monotheistic Religions exhibition have been announced, and Iconia has an inquiry out to the powers that be in search of a catalog and some answers.
In the mean time, here’s what you need to know about the awards, which “were designed on the assumption of the basic unity of religious faiths in the worship of God and the rejection of the demon of pride and oppression as well as the ideal of bringing about a moral and just society inspired by the teachings of prophets”:
The 1st Prize ($15,000) winner, Elham Mahootchi’s (Iran) piece shows a black background speckled with yellow dots that seem to orbit a yellow circle in the center. The poster creates a solar system of sorts, which at first seems orderly, but upon further consideration is quite a tense space with circles and lines competing to dominate the system.
Second Prize ($10k) winner, Shervin Faridnejad (Iran) constructed a poster which combines a Christian-looking angel with a Buddhist one. Mid-flight, the Chinese angel offers a gift to the Christian, and both figures are set on a pure white background with Arabic script.
Special Prize ($1k) winner Olexandr Mikula (Ukrain) opted for a simple and elegant commentary on racial acceptance in a piece (pictured above) that shows clasped black and white hands, forming a heart in the middle and the words ‘God is Love.’
But it is 3rd Prize ($5k) winner Michal Jandura (Poland) who steals the show. His piece (pictured) depicts three interlocking books, set to a background that repeats “THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD” over and over, one marked with a cross, one with a star of David and one with a crescent. The piece suggests not only are all three religions comprised of people of the book, but indeed our narratives are all intertwined. Only together can our stories unfold. This piece alone would make the whole show worthwhile.
The Tehran contest is arguably one of the most promising signs of a potential model for peace, with its emphasis on creating, feeling and interpreting — all terms in a universal vocabulary upon which Jew, Christian and Muslim alike can agree.
In his introduction to the ceremonies, the competition secretary Mohammad Mahdi Asgarpour spoke of the dangers of modernity for religious experience:
Contemporary world is characterized by a vast difference with the past and this has resulted from the fantastic expansion of science and technology, and the resultant demystification has led to a replacement of simple reverence for the past with critical dialectics.
Despite these dangers, Asgarpour maintained “the teachings of the prophets have retained their originality and pertinence,” but sadly, things were often lost in translation.
No doubt the words of prophets received different interpretations during the various periods of history. At times, wise interpretations brought about union and concord among religions, while at other times short-sighted interpretations, motivated by personal interests, bred discord. This is of course a negation of the unified source of all religions.
The question now is what duty faces man who is in need of the spirituality offered by the prophets?
This speech takes a lot of guts (see the entire thing here), especially part of the conclusion:
Emphasizing the points of divergence among monotheistic religions will not lead to the elevation of man. The correct path is to seek common features among religions, and to join our forces for a better understanding of the world. And the language of art provides the best means for the creation of such an atmosphere.
The World Award of Monotheistic Religions has been created on the basis of such ideas.
If I’d been there, I’d have been clapping my hands off, and I simply have nothing to add to that speech. Ebrahim Haghighi (who was also on the selection committee), also gave a great talk about the responsibility of the government and the municipality in cultivating an artistic community.
My only criticism is that although it can do wonders for the three major monotheistic faiths so desperately in need of common ground, restricting the religious experience to only the monotheistic religions alienates other faiths and art traditions. Hopefully this competition will prove part of a larger movement. For now, it is a mere baby step.
Sacha Baron Cohen won a Golden Globe best actor award for his new film, but it came at the cost of coming out of character to admit: “the point of that is to show that all prejudice is ridiculous.” [Telegraph, UK]
Some paintings were stolen from a church in Southbury, Conn., which should be a lesson to other vulnerable religious institutions. Church officials at first believed someone else had taken the painting to re-hang them. If religious art is to be taken seriously, religious institutions must lead the way by securing their own collections. [Wtnh]
Blogcritics Magazine’s Cristofer Gross has panned Jason Robert Brown’s new play “13,” about a “geek” trying to attract the in-crowd to his bar mitzvah. I covered Brown’s “Last Five Years” at the Baltimore Chronicle, and it surprises me that someone could call his music “stuck a generation back,” and mean it about Brown as anything but a compliment. [Blogcritics Magazine]
