“The struggle to re frame stereotypical images is thus central to an anti-racist, anti-homophobic and feminist politics. But how exactly can this be accomplished visually? I return to the question I posed earlier: is reiterating a stereotype a subversive act or does it merely extend the violence of a crude slur?”
-David Joselit
(p. 303, Theory in Contemporary Art Since 1985)
The function of a stereotype is to flatten a large group of complex people (complex emotionally, physically, etc.) into one generalized “shape.” The complexity still lingers, but only underneath the blanket generality, in the elements that make up the stereotype: the original emotions behind it, against it, and in it, its history and its creators... As artists, we do not just reiterate or perpetuate existing stereotypes; we re-articulate, bash, challenge, and question them.
All art is created because of a need to communicate something important. It is essential for artists to communicate pressing matters: stereotypes, emotions, points of view, fears, for example. While modern art is often criticized for its “flat” optical qualities, this “flatness” is necessary in communicating the subject of stereotypes regarding identity. As previously stated, stereotypes flatten identities; modern art, if appearing to be flat, is most likely just echoing the nature of its subject in a medium that will hopefully intrigue society and make us reconsider buying into stereotypes.
Optical flatness in art, if used properly, can call attention to emotional chaos or freedom (ex. Pollock drip paintings), subtle layers (as in identity in pieces by Pollock or Jasper Johns multi-media), or meanings or reasons for representing something that's three-dimensional two-dimensionally (ex. Hammons, flattening human identity into a stereotype). It may also call attention to psychological flatness, if its subject is superficial; for example, our modern identities, inundated by advertising and pressures to “fit in”, are often created by the sum of social acceptances versus anything from our own human depths. (Of course, this is how stereotypes form, and why many people grow so comfortable with leaning on stereotypes when passing judgment! We do not mind admitting we buy into society's “rules” if we can project the same “rules” onto others and drag them into our boat.)
Thus, because artists create their art based out of a need to communicate something important like stereotypes, and because the function of stereotypes is to flatten, flatness in art does not necessarily flop! A couple of artists that use optical flatness in a startling and overwhelming manner to communicate this subject are David Hammons and Glenn Ligon.
Hammon's “African-American Flag” (2000)1 and “Spade” (1974)2 both communicate issues of race, identity, and stereotypes. “African-American Flag” re-articulates the identity of “traditional” America, and forces us to remember our history and how it should effect our present. It could be aimed at white Americans, reminding us that we are not the only people that make up America, but it could also just be an overlay of Hammon's race over top of the flag: a way for him to show visually how his race fits in America. For most of us, this flag might look “wrong” or “strange;” why this is is something we should reflect on as Americans. “Spade” also exemplifies how stereotypes effect a race of people: how the name “Spade” can affect an African American person. Hammons forces a partial imprint of his face into the graphic of a playing card spade, physically and visually flattening the qualities of his facial features with this medium and contour. It almost becomes a “stamp” of identity: flat visually as well as psychologically, in terms of the stereotype's worth.
Glenn Ligon's “Untitled (I'm Turning Into A Specter Before Your Very Eyes And I'm Going To Haunt You)” (1992)3 and “Untitled (Malcolm X)” (2001)4 also communicate re-articulations of identity, race, and stereotypes using optical flatness. “Untitled (I'm Turning Into A Specter...)” consists of stenciled black letters on a white background, and it also has a fairly clear border. It comes off as flat visually, however its message has incredible depth. It references the contrast of black against white (races) and, by the slowly building word application and the message of the text itself, the idea that stereotypes are like shadows: not completely or always there, yet also still underlying and affecting everything including identity. “Untitled (Malcolm X)” uses flat color on a black and white line drawing to re-state the identity of Malcolm X. In this image, Malcolm X seems to resemble a white man, with rosy cheeks and lips and white on fair hair to compliment his business suit. This piece seems to be saying; “How did America really see this man: by his true identity or by what was projected on him by society?”
No comments:
Post a Comment