
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Mourid
Barghouti @ Tate
Fri,
01/23/2009 - 12:59 — Sophie
I spent
yesterday at the Tate's excellent conference Infrastructure and
Ideas: Contemporary Art in the Middle East. The highlight was a
keynote by Palestinian poet
Mourid Barghouti,
analysing the continuing constrictions of Orientalism and the
neo-con pollution and evacuation of language. Read my transcript on
the
PEN Atlas blog.
In Gallery 9, surrounded by Turner's pictures of naval battles, the
great and good, the provocative and perceptive, of the Middle
Eastern/Arab/Islamic art world gathered for the Tate and Nafas-sponsored
conference,
Infrastructures and Ideas: Contemporary Art in the Middle East
-- not least to discuss the problematic geographical terms and
visualisations of the area. Derek Gregory's keynote talk about
mapping drew attention to the manipulation of national and political
identity in the maps used by the media (for example, maps showing
areas in Baghdad as "targets" versus showing them as populated
neighbourhoods).
The subsequent discussion extends outwards towards the mapping done
by the terms "Middle East," "Arab" and "Islamic," with the panel
concluding that Middle East as a “convenient” term, one with a
heritage but that is problematic. The panel chair David Elliott
describes the speakers moving in their definitions from biopolitical
power to the fuzzy power of culture, “which is very much where we
stand,” which I thought was a somewhat naïve discounting of the
imbrication of biopower and culture, as biopower delimits and
defines culture from large-scale politics (wars, national
boundaries, genocide) through pragmatics (money, publishing,
censorship) to unconscious ideologies and artists’ identities.
The next speaker,
Mourid Barghouti,
addressed *exactly* this imbrication in his superlative discussion
of the impossibility of translation without contextualisation, and
the political pollution of poetic language. The session was
introduced as concerning a complex mesh of ideas around translation:
the act of translating visual arts into descriptive and/or critical
language; the act of linguistic translation; and the processes of
cultural translation, asking "what slips and is lost, what is
enriched by that process."
In his talk, Barghouti started from, encircled, investigated and
dismantled
an essay by Linda Sue Grimes that appeared on Suite101.com on 1
January, 2009. Entitled "Barghouti's 'It's also Fine' But Martyrdom
is Better, the essay reads Barghouti's poem "It's
Also Fine" against itself. While Suite101.com is manifestly not
a recognised literary critical publication, it claims 12 million
readers per month, so articles on the site could, and do, reach many
readers.
Barghouti read the poem
It’s also fine to die in our beds
on a clean pillow
and among our friends.
It’s fine to die, once,
our hands crossed on our chests
empty and pale
with no scratches, no chains, no banners,
and no petitions.
It’s fine to have an undustful death,
no holes in our shirts,
and no evidence in our ribs.
It’s fine to die
with a white pillow, not the pavement, under our cheeks,
our hands resting in those of our loved ones
surrounded by desperate doctors and nurses,
with nothing left but a graceful farewell,
paying no attention to history,
leaving this world as it is,
hoping that, someday, someone else
will change it.
and then the first paragraph of Grimes' essay:
“It’s also Fine” seems to suggest that not all deaths need to be
violent. Barghouti’s poem features four verse paragraphs, each
apparently dramatizing opposition to Islamofascism’s glorification
of violent jihad for the institution of a world-wide caliphate and
the production of martyrs. But the speaker never quite closes the
door on that jihadist impulse.
Grimes' concluding paragraph continues the rhetoric: B
ut then the speaker adds a jab at his own idea and leaves his claims
to be interpreted ironically by the youthful jihadist whose brain
has been carefully laundered by power-grabbing, Islamofascist
madrasa instructors.
This is where Barghouti began his intervention: madrasah, he pointed
out, simply is school in Arabic; it can be used to indicate a school
of ballet, of literature, of mathematics, high school.
From the careful reading - as a poet - of this word, he demonstrated
that Grimes' reading is to her -- and a more generalised --
ignorance of Palestinian and Arab history, and a blindness to the
cultural substance which gives the poem's images meaning. It’s fine
to die in our beds because for generations the Palestinians,
Lebanese, Egyptians and Syrians have struggled to end the occupation
of their lands, the breaking of bones, the demolition of houses and
uprooting of orchards. In such a context, to pass away from age or
illness becomes a kind of privilege.
Barghouti quoted Edward Said's description of Arab literature as
"embargoed literature" in the West (in The Nation in 1990); this
embargo means that Western readers have little access, so Ms Grimes
projects onto the text her own perceptions of Islam and Muslims: to
her, a poem written by a Palesitnian should ineveitably be written
by a jihadist, to a jihadist, glorifying jihad. [See, by contrast,
Guy Mannes-Abbott's
nuanced and contextualised discussion of Barghouti's work, which
appeared on the blog in December].
Barghouti then asked whether a work of art face down the mentality
created by the media and dominant culture in Europe and the West, as
those who don’t know the history and the colonial wound would not
get to know them from a translated poem and a novel. When we read
European literature translated into Arabic, we do it through the
knowledge eof Euro civilisation, fed to us through university
curricula and Coca-Cola. In Europe what is missing more than the
nuances of the language, or the translator’s lack of command of the
target language, is the absence of translated books of Arab history
and the Arabic canon.
He suggested that the revision of an outlook that refuses
non-Western thought and literature its hearing unless it conforms to
Western norms, is the necessary preliminary to begin to receive
translation. Translation from Arabic into English is in real trouble
for several reasons, the most significant of which comes from
outside the field of translation: victimisation of Arabis in media
by stereotypes and generalisations, demonisation or romantic and
Orientalist glorification. So it's naïve, Barghouti said, to expect
a novel or collection of poems translated from Arabic to find public
or publisher; "the small exceptions do not change the chilling
facts."
"I often think there are whole groups who face the traumatic
experience of a blocked scream," he said, of this enforced silencing
by the dominant culture. He concluded that
Literature-with-a-capital-L controls the diversity of literatures,
because of the Western concept of universality that no Western
writer questions; African, Asian, Arab writers are epect to become
universal through translation which is extended as a badge, a prize.
Western culture is the main obstacle to intercultural dialogue with
non Western cultures, with the idea of translation is all about.
Salah Hassan, the panel chair, commented that Barghouti's talk
highlighted that translation always involves two cultures and two
languages; but it’s always the West and the rest. But he pointed out
that many of the conference speakers work between cultures and cross
borders, and he asked the panelists to reflect on being caught in
this bind as cultural brokers.
Negar Azimi, the editor of
Bidoun, described the genesis of the magazine in 2004, in
response to interesting expression happening in Arab capitals, that
needed a repository for debate and critique. She described the
"paranoia and sensitivity about representing the Middle East, which
cuts across our editorial roles as cultural brokers." Bidoun's
solution is to publish a mandate in the front, which, Azimi
commented, "sounds like UN document, a humanitarian gesture." Four
years later, Bidoun has evolved in line with the art scene, towards
more sophisticated discussions, in which there’s less essentialism.
She remarked that:
Translation to me implies there’s a problem in communication, need
for mediators. We’ve always felt that responsibility – there wasn’t
a Bidoun, although there have been many exciting magazines in middle
East. But we’re losing that mandate, want to rearticulate our
relationship to the Middle East.
Other magazines have been founded since Bidoun (Canvas,
Brown Book, good cultural supplements in Arabic newspapers) –
taken pressure of us to be privileged cultural arbiters, but they
are still working with a diverse range of writers around the world
to translate and connect East and West.
Gerhard Haupt, the editor of
Universes in Universe agreed that translation was a practice of
mediation, and said he started his site because in 1997 the internet
was dominated byEnglish language, UScentric culture. UinU extended
its project with an online magazine project,
Nafas, to represent and support what Haupt referred to as the
“so-called Islamic world,” after 9/11. They saw it as a tool to
destroy preconceptions, and to represent the diversity of individual
artists. Making the site multilingual has been very difficult
practically and technically, but in 2006, they launched an Arabic
version, and at that moment, the magazine became a tool in
classrooms in Arab world, reaching a much broader audience. Haupt
recently presented Nafas in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore, where
the cultural translation was between (in his words) “East and more
East.” The communication took place through images, which
proverbially say more than words for intercultural understanding, so
that it would be possible to destroy conception of homogenous
Islamic world by collating images from different countries.
Art historian
Nada Shabout had
problems with the historical proverb that images are worth a
thousand words. Actually, they’re problematic and very constructed.
In the art world, there’s the same problem Mourid talked about – the
contextualisation is completely lacking.
As an example, she pointed to the Western journalists who "stumbled
upon Iraqi contemporary art," in 2003, and wrote "that the
oppression of Saddam forced artists into abstraction." In 2006, they
discovered a surrealist artist who was sanctioned by Saddam but
produced figurative works, but had no idea how to approach this
because as far as the West is concerned Iraq is arrested in
modernism. Shabout also pointed out that curators, art historians
and scholars are not really talking to each other, so research is
not being collated, and that a more thorough discussion of
methodologies is needed. She described her own struggle to see
outside or beyong her Western training, conditioned by Orientalism
or neo-Orientalism.
Bahraini artist Anas Al-Shaikh countered with pragmatic concerns
from the other direction: not the development of an Arabic critical
language, but the lack of access to the vast majority of writing
about art that is not translated into Arabic. What is translated
reached little consensus: there are 7 different terms for
"installation art," for example. Artists in Bahrain lack the
contextualisation and concepts for what they want to achieve. Bidoun,
which is only published in English, sells very few copies in
Bahrain. This blocks communication and discussion in international
contexts. In response to a later question, Azimi announced that
Bidoun is about to publish its first Arabic issue, with articles
translated into Arabic and commissioned in Arabic and Farsi. But she
commented that it had taken three years to build a group of artists
and writers whose thinking was in line with the magazine. Her
comments supported Al-Shaikh's counter to Shabout's claim, as he
suggested that more artists engage with modernism than contemporary
art, because they can appreciate and contextualise it.
Barghouti remarked that issues such as the translation of terms are
not "technical, everything is part of the formation of knowledge."
He went on to illustrate this powerfully:
The pollution of political language in modern times has reached a
level that the name of movements, peoples or countries are polluted.
You say for instance war, and you should use just murder. What
happened in Gaza is not war, it’s murder. The F16s are moving as if
they are Air France or Swissair, unchallenged. No-one would imagine
to acquire anti-aircraft missiles; you can’t smuggle it or even
think about having it. We have reached a moment in verbal abuse that
an honest writer or critic or journalist would really have to
rethink language to restore the freshness of political vocabulary.
When the fourth-most armed country on earth is destroying buildings
day and night, and people are speaking of victory, of winning and
losing... And then they will tell you about the “vicious circle of
violence.” A circle has no beginning. The most repeated expression
in the Middle East conflict is this: this never tells you who
started what when, as if people in Ramallah went to Germany or
France or the Ukraine to kill the Jews. Such mis-usages can never be
technical inaccuracy. Without trying to restore the accuracy of
language that you are using as artists and critics, you are getting
nowhere with the common understanding that supposedly comes of
globalisation – it’s achieving its opposite: war, discrimination,
lack of movement, lack of freedom, a killing field. The images are
polluted, the words are polluted.
Hassan pointed out that neo-con language, in its perversions, has
shaped the art world. Bush's “you are with us, or with the
terrorists,” created the categories of good Muslims and bad Muslims;
with museums and galleries becoming interested in presenting good
Muslims through art, as part of universal humanist mission, creating
certain expectations - like an emphasis on women artists. Some
artists are complicit in the process, he said, partly because they
don’t have the access and want it, but also because they reproduce
the images from Arabian Nights that are part of continuation of
Orientalist fantasies.
Haupt rejected the idea of the "good Muslim" as a false criterion
imposed by Western thought; he argued that holding up the West as
arbiter of taste omitted to recognise that modernist and
contemporary art from the West had often been misunderstood and
maltreated in Western galleries.Shabout pointed out that it took the
Tate to arrange the conference; the West remains the power whether
we like it or not. The West's obsessions - such as veiling -
therefore dictate what art accedes to the global market, which has
nothing to do with what appears in local galleries, but it does
create a dichotomy. She also dismissed as expedient all rhetoric
about art as bridging the gap between cultures, despite the goodwill
that wanted to use art to try to humanise the people of Iraq. For
Shabout, this still comes from a superior position taken by
curators.
A question from the floor asked Shabout if she was interested in
creating a terminology to replace the one she was rejecting. She
replied that she was, and is, but by historicising the production
and reception of Arab art rather than coining a term. The second
questioner from the floor wondered whether too much interpretation
had been foisted onto Middle Eastern art by Western arbiters using
the artworks as "communication." Shabout agreed that too much
interpretation actively deprived the viewer from looking, because
the framework of the political discourse turned the artwork into an
object for political communication only.
Nervously (because public speaking always makes me nervous), I asked
whether a poem or novel or artwork could prompt its reader or
viewer, through its artistry, cut through received images from the
media and prompt research into its context? Perhaps due to my
nervousness, the chair thought I was asking whether a novel *should*
be working to counter media stereotypes and educate its reader.
Barghouti, understandably, responded that:
A novel should be a pleasant work to read, and if this is translated
into a better understanding this is a plus. First of all, it has to
be good. If this is achieved, anything else is open to the formation
of the reader. If you want to reach, write an article or give a
speech, don’t write a novel.
It was a necessary comment, a delayed response in a way to Hassan's
point about the expectations created by Western publishers and
exhibitors looking to use art to meet certain criteria and needs, in
response to funders and media interests, rather than researching and
contextualising aesthetic practices. That contextualisation is, of
course, part of the remit of the Atlas, a way of offering the
individual reader a different place to discover literature that
moves and excites them than the homogenous and expedient critical
discourse of the day.
|