Weirdness at work

[kellinator]

Necessary background information: There's a new art display at the library, photos of the weirdness that is the South. I think it's weird and wonderful. I've been meaning to LJ about some of the pieces I really like. But that will come later.

One of the photos is of a cemetery in rural South Georgia. Most prominent are two monuments which are facing away from us, two statues of a man and a woman sitting in chairs. The photograph is titled "Keeping Watch." To me, it speaks powerfully of the Southern tension over the past.

About an hour ago I found the framed photograph face-down on a table.

I assumed it had fallen off and someone had just picked it up. I called it to the attention of Will (my boss, for those of you joining us in progress) and wondered if the nail was loose, etc. Will called my attention to the Confederate flag visible on one of the graves.

...Now, I am a bleeding-heart liberal and am by no means a fan of the Stars and Bars. I don't think the Confederate flag has any place over state capitols. But I also don't think acknowledging the fact that it exists, and is important to people, is a declaration of support for it.

If you don't like the art, if it offends you, raise a dialogue over it. Don't just try and take it away because you don't agree with it. That's not going to win any people to your point of view.

We hung it back up for the time being. I'm anxious to see what happens next. If anyone calls me a racist, I WILL go through the roof.

...It just feels really weird to me to be in a spot where I'm not the one screaming against the flag.

Comments

[sujata.livejournal.com]

Quite a thought-provoking post!

It's a tricky subject, at best, is Art. We've evolved enough to understand that it can convey a message, and that it need not always be beautiful.

But how do you distinguish between the conveyance of a message, and propaganda? How can you be sure of the distinction between a simple presentation of something as-is, and ugliness that is offered in the guise of art but is intended merely to offend?

I am reminded of the late Mapplethorpe(sp?) and the controversial work that made him a household name, Piss Christ. I vividly recall the uproar over the very notion of putting a crucifix, a symbol that is holy to millions of people throughout the world, into a bottle of urine and calling it Art. I also vividly recall seeing a photograph of the actual object: Jesus suffering on his cross, bathed in an almost magical-looking ocean of gentle gold. Seen as itself, it was truly beautiful.

I don't consider myself a Christian. Yet I was moved by that object of art.

There's no actual point I'm trying to make, here. It's just the best comparison I can think of. :-)

[elvis-christ.livejournal.com]

Piss Christ was Andres Serrano, fyi...

[sujata.livejournal.com]

Enh, so my memory for names isn't perfect. *shrug* :-D

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

I love that work. I saw it one time on a slide and was completely blown away by its beauty.

[sujata.livejournal.com]

I've wondered, ever since then, how many of the works and artists cited as examples of the NEA funding "garbage" and/or "anti-Christian propaganda" are being grossly (and maybe even deliberately) misrepresented. I guess if I was trying to make a point, without realizing it at the time, it was probably something about how important it is to think for oneself, instead of reflexively believing whatever one is told by somebody who may have an unstated agenda. I've certainly never been able to listen to someone dis the NEA, since then, without wondering if that person has actually seen the works and artists they're dissing! :-O