Rose Kennedy Greenway

Well the general public should get educated then, not the other way around.
 
Pray tell oh enlightened one, what were your earliest thoughts and interpretations upon seeing it? I'm not asking you to regurgitate what you've been told to think by others but your own thoughts - if you have any. And spare me the "islamofascist terrorists and South American street thugs are people too" schtick.
 
joebos said:
So the image portrays a terrorists because the subject has some sort of cloth wrapped around his head. So, I guess you can also justify the recent shooting in the Sikh temple? They have cloth wrapped around their heads, why they must have been terrorists, too.
Click to expand...

Sikh do not cover their faces only the top of their heads. Gangsters, thugs and terrorists cover their faces so as not to be recognized. My first thought when I saw this mural was that it was one of a terrorist. Post 9/11 it would be natural to assume that. The general population, myself included, had no idea who Os Gemeos were. No idea that street artists wrap shirts around their faces to protect them from the fumes of spray paint. I was at the ICA today and saw the Os Gemeos exhibit. Now I am educated as to who they are, what they are, and what they try to convey. Now I can look at the mural and not see a terrorist but a street artist of Brazil trying to fit into Boston. Viva education!
 
I'm not sure that the materials used are intended to last more than the agreed-upon 18 months. The Greenway Conservancy's idea is to have a succession of temporary murals here.
 
kmp1284 said:
Pray tell oh enlightened one, what were your earliest thoughts and interpretations upon seeing it?
Click to expand...

That we were going to be treated to at least a week or two of bigots jumping all over each other to see who could publicly embarrass themselves more.
 
Justin7 said:
Don't equate one sector of the public with the public as a whole. Caving to ignorance only serves to create more ignorance.
Click to expand...

No problem.... Socrates. The majority of the public sector is completely dumb-down from the last 25 years.

Proof----We keep electing the same political hacks like the Mayor year after year saying...but he is doing a great job.
Our society is just a bunch of SHEEP.
So...... yes if you do not understand the Brazilian Artist's message your first thought is the Mural looks like a terrorist because that is what our govt wants you to be afraid of.
 
^WTF? So the evil trifecta of Menino, Patrick and Obama painted a terrorist mural to keep people in fear?
 
choo said:
^WTF? So the evil trifecta of Menino, Patrick and Obama painted a terrorist mural to keep people in fear?
Click to expand...

Thats not what I said or meant. Have you ever been to the Middle East? Most people in general are NICE. Our govt has put fear into believing that every-body who represents this type of look must be a terrorist. Which is far from reality.
 
TheRifleman said:
Bottom-line the General consensus is that this particular drawing is dis-respectful to the American People.
Click to expand...

I don't think that it's a "general consensus" at all. I think it's a handful of bigoted bottom dwellers that use the comment sections of news sites as outlets for their ignorance.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have enthusiasts who know the artist and their prior works. They're less likely to troll a comment section.

I'd bet that the "general consensus" is somewhere in the middle. For most it's likely just a colorful mural like any other. Harmless. If the general consensus was that it is disrespectful, you'd see far more outcry than just hateful/ignorant remarks in online comment sections.

As for me, I had no idea who Os Gemeos was before I read about the mural. I simply thought it was a colorful addition to the RKG. I wasn't inspired by the art, but I liked it better than the blank wall. I certainly didn't think "terrorist!" In fact, the thought never crossed my mind until I read an article about the hateful comments.
 
briv said:
The parallels between this controversy and the one that arose over the Vietnam-era Corita Kent Boston Gas tank mural are uncanny. Both concern contemporary artworks painted on infrastructural eye-sores. Both were suspected by some detractors of surreptitiously depicting the current boogey man of the day -- this, a Muslim terrorist; the gas tank, communist Ho Chi Minh. Both also won the immediate affection of many and were considered instant icons.

The gas tank artwork survived its controversy to become a cherished city landmark. It had become so cherished that when the tank that wore the original mural was demolished in the 90s, the painting was painstakingly recreated on the adjacent remaining tank.

I like the new vent building mural. I don't think it's supposed to depict a terrorist, but that's really beside the point. I think it's big and bright and playful and inventive and a little strange. It grabs your attention and it's fun to look at and wonder about. In other words, I think it's interesting--the most interesting thing on the Greenway. The only interesting thing on the Greenway.

I hope the Powers That Be reconsider its temporary status and make it permanent (are they really going to power wash it off in a year to restore the wall to its former blank brilliance?). If it survives long enough maybe it too will become a cherished Boston landmark and they'll be painstakingly recreating it on whatever inevitably replaces that vent building somewhere down the line.
Click to expand...

I first want to say after reading that and looking it up. I don't see the parallel. I never knew and I can bet that if I ask most people aware of tanks (so the people who drive pass it or have a view or etc) that all they see is a nicely painted rainbow gas tank. Even looking at it now with the picture, I can't recognize Ho Chi Minh. Ho Chi Minh is obviously intented to be very subtle.

The artwork of the gas tank survive to today is because of the aesthetics of it - the cleanliness, joyful energy, and color of the art rather than the subtle political point. Basically the first thought when people look at the art is its color and energy, thus why it is cherished.

----

Now the new mural, it is colorful and lively like the gas tank. But unlike the gas tank, I think one argue it looks much uglier. Part of the gas tank uncontroversial aesthetics is from pure simplicity and its very hard to for simpleness to look displeasing. The new mural is much more complicated and I have to argue the use of its color choice make it looks ugly.

The gas tank uses simple colors of red, yellow, blue, green, purple stripes. But the new mural uses yellow but as a skin color (the Simpsons choose yellow for their characters, but they choose yellow because it somehow looks aesthetically pleasing on the TV screen with the art style, the mural with the real world background, not so much. The disproportional body with the head, hands, and feet twisted up is creating an eerie feeling - kinda of reminds me of the uncanny valley theory though this one is not fall in that valley.

The other uses of the color for the mural - teal, orange-red, lime-green makes a mural definitely stand out - but not in a good way. It attracts attention by how the disharmonious the colors to each other rather than harmony (and thus attract attention by a pleasing quality instead). The colors are bright and cheery, but colors between each other are not very harmonious.


Thus I raise doubt that the parallel between the Ho Chi Minh Gas Tank Mural and this mural can be view in parallel and "uncanny." For the reasons that the Ho Chi Minh Gas Tank mural have the advantage of subtlety, simplicity, and colorful aesthetics. The gas tank survived aesthetics because people like the aesthetics of it while the political tones faded or unnoticeable.


While my understanding the artist intention was to just put a colorful t-shirt around a head with no political message. But until head wrappings no longer chains with Muslims and then think about how so many terrorist are Muslims, The first thought of the unacquainted view of the mural will be a discomforting political thought. Whether it is "its a mural of a terrorist" or "the headscaft reminds me of terrorist though I know better." The first thought of the unacquainted view of the Ho Chi Minh Mural is "colorful rainbow". That's a big difference. It discomforting - whether the discomfort is terrorist itself or a contradicting thought that no all headscarf (or t-shirt head wrapping) means terrorist.

Artworks can and should be discomforting sometimes. But I don't think the Greenway should be the place to show that type of art. As the objective of the art is to make the Greenway more inviting and pleasurable - not thought provoking through mental discomfort.

And between disharmonious colors, eerie body parts depiction, and the first invoking thought (I think our culture is we highly associate wrapping of the head with the Muslim religion, I think a large proportion does see that and immediately bring that thought up and just saying that just ignorance doesn't mean the discomfort goes away and I don't think the objective of he Greenway is to do that).
 
Regardless of interpretation, I find it troubling that people are forgiving ignorance and advocating censorship...
 
^ I like how it can be seen as provocative and dramatic. Certainly I wouldn't want it permanently, I thing the fact that it is temporary is what allows these unique pieces to be made.

Now, I am not much on 'high' art in general, but am a fan of well done street art. I think the best art, particularly street art, is provocative and forces you to confront your biases.

The fact that people look and say it looks like a terrorist-why? because it looks muslim- is important. Because there is nothing wrong if people looked and said it looked like a muslim. It's the terrorist first association that is important for people to think about and discuss. Because a muslim didn't shoot up a temple in Wisconsin, a movie theater in Colorado, and a Congresswoman in Arizona. Crazy people did, and they are true terrorists.

For the Brazilian artists, this association wasn't even their intention. I wonder if they thought of it when doing it in America? and what they think of it?
 
TheRifleman said:
Thats not what I said or meant. Have you ever been to the Middle East? Most people in general are NICE. Our govt has put fear into believing that every-body who represents this type of look must be a terrorist. Which is far from reality.
Click to expand...

I think that's more media than the government.
 
kmp1284 said:
Pray tell oh enlightened one, what were your earliest thoughts and interpretations upon seeing it? I'm not asking you to regurgitate what you've been told to think by others but your own thoughts - if you have any. And spare me the "islamofascist terrorists and South American street thugs are people too" schtick.
Click to expand...

My first thought looking at it is that it resembles a head wrap and yes, unfortunately I associated with Muslims. However, unlike the "general public," the next thought I had was, oh some people are definitely going to complain about it resembling a Muslim person. I had no problem with the mural if it was associated with any religion or ethnicity because it really doesn't matter. However, I knew that there will be ignorant folks who will misinterpret the mural and say it looks like a terrorist.
 
choo said:
For the Brazilian artists, this association wasn't even their intention. I wonder if they thought of it when doing it in America? and what they think of it?
Click to expand...

As others have pointed out, this is not the first time they have used this motif. Do you really think they have never considered that this pushes the "terrorist" button in many western minds (Brazilians know all about terrorists, urban anarchists, etc--I hear they even have internet down there :))?? The conflation of those menacing notions with a kid in pajamas or playing dress-up is almost certainly not accidental. I'm not saying I know what it means (assuming it has a meaning), but these guys are not naive. That conflation and the projection of our own anxieties (and our politically correct fear of our anxieties and biases) onto this image is one way of thinking about this.
 
KentXie said:
My first thought looking at it is that it resembles a head wrap and yes, unfortunately I associated with Muslims.
Click to expand...

Why is that unfortunate? If they'd drawn a guy in a kilt I would have associated it with a Scottish person. I don't think anyone needs to feel bad about that. Have we gotten so PC that we can't associate a picture that looks vaguely like someone wearing a hijab with the second largest religion in the world that counts among it's traditional clothing, wait for it... wait for it... the hijab.

It's only when people make the jump to "terrorist" that it becomes offensive IMO.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
Why is that unfortunate? If they'd drawn a guy in a kilt I would have associated it with a Scottish person. I don't think anyone needs to feel bad about that. Have we gotten so PC that we can't associate a picture that looks vaguely like someone wearing a hijab with the second largest religion in the world that counts among it's traditional clothing, wait for it... wait for it... the hijab.

It's only when people make the jump to "terrorist" that it becomes offensive IMO.
Click to expand...

Because other religion such as the Sikhs wear head wraps. The fact that the only thing I can associate it is Muslim is unfortuante.

If you take me back pre 9/11, I would have associated it with characters from Alladin as well.
 
KentXie said:
Because other religion such as the Sikhs wear head wraps. The fact that the only thing I can associate it is Muslim is unfortuante.
Click to expand...

There's 25,000,000 Sikhs in the world. There's 1,600,000,000 Muslims. I don't think there's any reason to feel bad.
 
This whole thing makes me want the next mural to actually depict someone wearing a hijab, just so that the haters can be lectured on how they make their fellow citizens who do so feel.

Because it hurts them way more than it hurts you, and way more legitimately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top