IMMORTAL TECHNIQUE. MAYBE THIS IS ART..

This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..This is art..the best ever listen up..

LISTEN UP!

Chris Ofili | Into the Unknown written by Calvin Tomkins

Into the Unknown
Chris Ofili returns to New York with a major retrospective.

By Calvin Tomkins

Source: New Yorker Magazine | October 6, 2014 Issue

 

   

 

Ofili in Malick Sidibé’s studio, in Mali. Ofili used a Sidibé photograph from 1963 in several works that he made in recent years in Trinidad, where he now lives. Credit Photograph by Malick Sidibé

Chris Ofili paints in a dilapidated white cottage on Lady Chancellor Road, about ten minutes from downtown Port of Spain, in Trinidad. It has three rooms, each large enough to accommodate one or two of the strange, dreamlike paintings he is working on. Aside from taking out the kitchen, Ofili has done nothing to the cottage. Rickety windows on one side are propped open with sticks. No air-conditioner, no screens, no studio assistant. The house clings to a steep hillside, the floor slants downhill, and the floorboards sag and groan. Most of the recent paintings in Ofili’s first major New York retrospective, which opens at the New Museum on October 29th, were done in these rooms.

“I think I just resolved something about this one,” he said, somewhat conspiratorially. It was a morning in June, and we were looking at a dark nine-foot-tall vertical painting called “Lime Bar,” which he had been working on since April. A black man in a frilled white semi-transparent shirt stands behind a bar squeezing limes, and in the foreground a couple in shadow, a man and a woman, sit close together drinking. “When I leave the studio at night, I take a photo of the picture I’m working on,” Ofili continued. “This morning when I woke up, I looked at the photo and thought, I’ll change his shirt.” The barman’s shirt had originally been white, but Ofili had painted it black, to make the figure recede. “It looked ghastly,” he said. “So this morning I decided to make the shirt white again, but the black was still wet, and the paint wasn’t going on the way I wanted. I started to blot it with this”—he picked up an old green T-shirt to demonstrate—“and it left this amazing texture. I got lucky. Until that moment it was all panic and despair, because I thought I was going to lose it.”

That an artist of Chris Ofili’s stature could feel panic and despair over an unfinished painting somehow strains belief. He projects the inner confidence that his physical presence leads you to expect—at forty-five, he is well over six feet tall and powerfully built, and he dresses with casual elegance. Early success in London gave him the freedom to chart his own course in painting, at a time when painting was being dismissed as obsolete. He won the Turner Prize in 1998, when he was thirty, the first black artist to do so. Notoriety arrived a year later, in New York. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s moral and political sensitivities were so outraged by Ofili’s use of elephant dung in his painting of the Virgin Mary that he tried to cut off all municipal funding from the Brooklyn Museum, where it was part of a group exhibition from the Saatchi Collection. Ofili has been reluctant to exhibit his work in New York since then, but he has gone right on producing startlingly original paintings, drawings, prints, and sculptures. Writing about the later paintings in Ofili’s 2010 retrospective at Tate Modern, Adrian Searle, a British critic who has followed his career with particular acumen, found them “uncompromisingly difficult.” “This is dangerous territory,” Searle went on to say. “Rather than living up to his reputation, he is now more concerned to push his art forward.”

Ofili’s art has changed profoundly since he moved from London to Trinidad, in 2005. In his latest paintings, whose fluid colors make me think of Matisse, the forms are elongated and enigmatic. Adjacent to the barman picture, on the side wall, another vertical canvas showed a tall man in a green tailcoat and striped pants, balancing a house of cards on a tray. Sinuous black lines issuing from his mouth turn into thicker, ropy shapes that coalesce into a dark cloud at the lower left of the canvas, where two men are playing cards. The players are about half the size of the man in the tailcoat, although they seem to be on the same plane. “They’re all breathing the same smoke, I think,” Ofili said. I asked about the difference in scale. “Oh, yeah. That really bothered me for a while,” he said. “But I didn’t feel it was my responsibility to change it. In a painting you can do anything, right? I’m making it all up. This thing is too big! But it’s just what it is. Not bad, not good, just too big.”

Ofili loves the moment in a painting’s development when he temporarily loses control. “Painting is a kind of pursuit, a hunt,” he told me, in a later conversation. “I think it’s more interesting when you can corral your subjects, instead of just going right to them. Enjoy and engage with the process—you want to keep going into the unknown, to the point where you don’t think about how long it’s going to take to get there. I’ve become more and more comfortable with the idea that you can construct a narrative and bring someone onstage, and you don’t have to tell them what to do. Once they arrive, they’ve activated their character.”

I asked him about his 2008 painting called “The Healer,” which made a strong impression on me when I saw it at the David Zwirner Gallery, in New York. Its central image, emerging from darkness, is a Gauguin-like deity, with long blue-black hair, who seems to be eating, or perhaps disgorging, a stream of radiant yellow blossoms. Ofili said, “Oh, God. I remember going on and on with that painting, trying to get him to lift off the canvas, almost to float in the room. What this healer does, he consumes light. To remain dark he has to consume light, and he sees light as being these flowers from the poui tree we have here, a tree that sheds its blossoms all at once, overnight. The painting was in the studio for more than a year. It didn’t really come to life in the second room, the painting room, so I moved it to the first room, which is the waiting room. That was like cutting the cord—then it could free itself, and I could see it in a new way. It’s really a Trinidad painting. I mean, they’re all made in Trinidad, but they’re not all Trinidad paintings.” 

Ofili visited Trinidad for the first time in 2000, when he was invited by an international art trust to attend a painting workshop in Port of Spain. He persuaded the sponsors to invite his friend Peter Doig, a Scottish painter who had lived on the island for five years when he was a child. “It wasn’t what I thought it was going to be,” Ofili told me. “There’s no real tourism here—it’s an industrial economy, oil and gas—and there’s a quiet dignity about the way people interact, a bare honesty that takes the airs and graces out of living.” In Trinidad, a former British colony with a polyglot population descended largely from African slaves and South Asian indentured workers, whites make up less than one per cent of the population. Doig told me that on their first night in Port of Spain they went out to get rotis, “a sort of curry wrap, quite delicious, and this guy on the street, a tramp or something, black but not as dark as Chris, said, ‘Hey, darkie, buy me a roti.’ I looked at Chris and we both started laughing. People there talk about color in a way you never hear in London.”

The only paintings they did on that trip were collaborations. Doig, who was becoming known for his paintings of forests and snow scenes in Canada, where he lived for thirteen years when he was growing up, had brought seven rolled-up canvases, which they worked on jointly, “him mocking my work and me mocking his,” as Doig put it. The rest of their three-week trip was spent exploring the island in rental cars and taking hundreds of photographs and videos. Before leaving, Doig bought a piece of land on the island’s north coast, and Ofili decided he, too, would be coming back.

He came back a dozen times or more during the next few years, and brought his future wife, Roba El-Essawy, a singer and songwriter in a London hip-hop band called Attica Blues. Music has always been a big part of Ofili’s life. When he was nominated for the Turner Prize, he asked Attica Blues to do the background music for the required documentary film on his work. El-Essawy left a vivid impression on him, and two years later, after breaking up with his longtime girlfriend, the German artist Tomma Abts, he called her. They went to the movies on their first date—Ofili told me they saw Spike Lee’s “Jungle Fever,” but El-Essawy insists it was “Summer of Sam.” They got married at the end of 2002. El-Essawy, whose parents are Egyptian, had lived in London all her life, and her warmth, wit, and physical presence are as impressive as Ofili’s. She has degrees in biology and neuroscience. She began teaching reading skills when they moved to Trinidad, and recently she has started writing music again. For a long time, she was “hesitant,” as she put it, about the idea of living there. More than hesitant, Ofili recalls. “She said, ‘I can see why you want this, but it’s not happening.’ But then, one evening, I overheard her talking to a friend about a concert or something that was a few months off, and she said, ‘I’m not sure, because we might be going to Trinidad.’ ” They moved there in 2005, and their two children, a boy and a girl, were born on the island. Amel, the girl, is now seven, and Dalil is four.

Although the Ofilis feel that Trinidad is their home, and they are building two new houses there, both of them designed by the architect David Adjaye, Ofili’s closest friend, they have kept their London house in the East End, which they use in the summer and visit several times throughout the year. (Ofili also has a London studio and a small office to handle his business affairs.) They have a place in Brooklyn, too. They can afford all this real estate because Ofili’s new paintings—the large ones, four or five a year—are priced between four hundred thousand and six hundred thousand dollars apiece, and his dealers, Victoria Miro in London and David Zwirner in New York, have no trouble finding buyers.

Ofili picked me up in his dark-green Land Rover the next morning and we went to see one of the new houses, on a hillside overlooking Port of Spain. It’s a massive three-story concrete-and-glass structure, with large rooms and outdoor passageways. The house was supposed to be Ofili’s dream studio, but somewhere along the way he decided to turn it into a family house. (His joke name for it is Afrovilla.) When it’s finished—Ofili seemed certain that this would be in three months—the place they’ve been living in, beyond the white cottage on Lady Chancellor Road, will become his studio. Leaving the white cottage, cramped as it is, will be difficult for Ofili. When his first car, a 1973 Ford Capri, had to be replaced, he couldn’t bear the thought of anyone else driving it, so he had it crushed. I asked him if this would happen to the white cottage. “Maybe,” he said, laughing.

The next day, we drove for almost an hour to the north coast, climbing much of the way. We stopped to look at the hilltop house that Peter Doig had built in 2005. Doig wasn’t there. Henry Pearson, his Guyanese caretaker, took us through and then came with us in the Land Rover, down the steep, twisting unpaved road (washed out in a few places) that leads to Adjaye’s second building for Ofili, which he calls his beach house, although it’s in a tropical jungle and the beach is a five-hundred-step walk (he’s counted) farther down. The house is made of concrete and local bluestone, and its clear, powerful forms and open perspectives—even more open than they are in the family house—makes it look like a minimalist sculpture. “To build here, you have to see what the land is doing and not fight against it,” Ofili said. He had brought a cooler filled with ice, lemon soda, and fresh limes, which he passed around. The whole family comes here on weekends, often with friends; they cook outdoors and sleep in hammocks. “Daddy, can we leave the house like this, unfinished?” Amel asked recently.

On the way back to town, we stopped at Maracas Beach, the main public bathing area, and had shark sandwiches and soursop ice cream at Vilma’s Bake and Shark stand. As we were leaving, Ofili bought some pomeracs (like a small red pear) from a toothless man on the road, who had recognized the Land Rover and waved him down; they chatted for a while, holding up traffic. We drove back through the mountain village of Paramin, which is known for its “blue devils”—men who paint their faces and bodies blue and intimidate townspeople during carnival week. Ofili gets continuing pleasure from the pace and texture of life here. For the first time, nature became prominent in his life and his work. He goes on long hikes with friends, swims in a waterfall deep in the forest, runs for an hour when he leaves the studio in the late afternoon. “Trinidad is warm and friendly, but it’s quite secretive, and the countryside is very mysterious,” he said. “There’s always more to see, and the more is not like what you’ve seen.” A few years ago, he took over the bartender’s job at the film club that Peter Doig had started in his Port of Spain studio. On film nights, he turned up in a white shirt, a black bow tie, black pants, and a long white apron. “It was a bit like being invisible, but you get to see people differently,” Ofili told me. It also led to the “Lime Bar” painting. 

 

“Chris is the most private person I have ever met,” his wife told me. “I’m pretty sure that to this day most people here don’t know what he does for a living. He’s the man with the green car that looks like an army car.” (In London, he drives a BMW 7 series, the largest made. Before that, and after the Ford Capri, he had a Jaguar XJ.) I asked Ofili if he ever worried about being cut off from the art worlds in London and New York. “I do get mild anxiety,” he said. “Some people say you have to be on the track to be in the race. But I feel that by coming here we created more life options and more mental space. I want the kids to have a wonderful life. And the art stuff piggybacks on life, not the other way round.” I quoted a saying that I’d heard attributed to Fernand Léger: “Either a good life and lousy art or good art and a lousy life.” “Why not both?” Ofili said. “It can all be good.”

May and Michael Ofili left Nigeria in 1965 and settled in Manchester, England, where Chris was born three years later. He was their second child, after Anthony and before Francis and Josephine. Both parents worked for McVitie’s, which has been manufacturing biscuits and sweets since 1830, May for thirty years. When Chris was eleven, his father left the family and moved back to Nigeria. May worked harder after that, putting in as much overtime as she could get, so that all four children could go to college. Chris never saw his father again. “His leaving was not a big shock,” he told me. “It was a deteriorating relationship. He had another family—I got to learn that later—and then he went on to have still another family in Nigeria. It sounds really bad, but I’m comfortable with it. My mother held the family together amazingly, with a lot of dignity and strength, and my uncle Festus”—his father’s brother, who lived nearby and worked for British Telecom—“was always a central part of our lives.” Ofili has visited several African countries, and a recent trip to Mali made him think about going to Nigeria, where he’s never been. Would he try to see his father there? “Part of me says yes and part of me doesn’t know,” he said. “I don’t want to make assumptions from afar.”

The children attended Catholic schools, and both Anthony and Chris were altar boys. “It was a little like being on the football team,” Chris recalls. “We sort of had our own thing, and there were a lot of jokes. When people were taking Communion, we’d go round with metal trays that were supposed to catch any stray drops, and if the recipient was a friend of yours you’d hold the tray against his neck when he said ‘Amen’ so he’d go ‘Aargh’ instead.” Ofili sometimes thought about becoming a priest: “It seemed like a good life, and you were guaranteed a good end.” In secondary school he stopped going to church, and concentrated on getting good grades and playing soccer—he was a left-wing striker on the school team. Art didn’t register in his thinking—he had never been to a museum—but as graduation approached he decided he might like to study furniture design. He was told he should first take a one-year art foundation course, where he would be exposed to many different disciplines. He applied to Tameside College, on the outskirts of Manchester, and was accepted.

“We had two weeks of everything at Tameside,” he said. “There was a painting teacher, Bill Clark, who had a completely different approach from the others. At the start of the class, he’d have all of us lie down and meditate, listen to our thoughts. The other guys were teaching technique. If you’re going to make a print, this is the way you do it.” Clark liked to confuse his students by telling them to divide what they were working on into four parts, chuck three of them away, and enlarge the scale of the piece remaining. “Chris not only embraced this—he took it on, as though he understood what I was trying to do,” Clark told me. “Of course, he came with a completely clean slate. I didn’t have to delete past experience, which is what I’m doing with most of my teaching. What comes over with Chris is sheer intelligence.” Ofili found Clark’s teaching immensely liberating. In art, he realized, there was no right and wrong. Halfway through the foundation year, he decided to specialize in painting.

He started with portraits and self-portraits. Although the first oil painting he sold was a portrait of Bill Clark’s wife and child—Clark bought it—most of his paintings were of himself or of imaginary characters, usually black figures. At the end of the year, he enrolled in a three-year course at the Chelsea College of Arts, in London. His mother didn’t see how he could make a living as an artist, so he told her that he would eventually study design. (His older brother, Anthony, studied history in college and found a good job with an insurance firm. Francis, his younger brother, runs a children’s clothing shop and designs Web sites, and Josephine left her job with the National Health Service to stay home and raise her four children.) “I knew I didn’t want to study design and that I wanted to carry on painting,” Ofili said. “Luckily, it didn’t cost anything, because in those days it was all supported by the state.” In his first year, one of his self-portraits won a prize at a student exhibition in Manchester. His work was heavily influenced by Jean-Michel Basquiat, America’s black wunderkind, whose grafitti-style primitivism surfaces in some of Ofili’s student portraits; he also looked closely at Georg Baselitz, Philip Guston, and George Condo.

Peter Doig was doing graduate work at the Chelsea College of Arts when Ofili was an undergraduate, and they soon became friends. “I’m nine years older than him, but I never felt like his mentor,” Doig told me. 

 “Chris always seemed the older one. I don’t think he ever lacked self-confidence, in his work or in himself.” Their paintings had certain similarities, such as the tendency to combine figurative and abstract elements, but they didn’t influence each other, and their careers have had different trajectories: recognition came earlier for Ofili, but in the past few years Doig’s work has brought much higher prices at auction—seventeen million dollars in 2014 versus Ofili’s current auction record of two million eight hundred thousand. Neither of them felt any connection to the Young British Artists (or Y.B.A.s), who started getting a lot of attention in 1988. To Ofili, the Y.B.A.s’ talent for self-promotion and their use of non-art materials—such as Damien Hirst’s tiger shark in formaldehyde and Tracey Emin’s “Everyone I Have Ever Slept With 1963-1995,” a tent emblazoned with names—seemed unrelated to what he was doing. Elephant dung, coated with resin and incorporated into an oil painting, was an art material to Ofili. 

Ofili graduated from Chelsea in 1991, and in September he entered the Royal College of Art, where he studied for a master’s degree and experimented with larger paintings. The rules there were less flexible than they had been at Chelsea, though, and he was eager for new experiences. That summer, he attended a three-week international art workshop in Zimbabwe, and then spent three more weeks travelling around the country. Although he finds it insulting when people assume he was “connecting with his roots,” he did feel an internal resonance. “It was my first time in Africa. I was twenty-three. I’d go on these little safaris on horseback.” One of the safaris was to Matobo National Park, where he saw prehistoric cave paintings. He was particularly struck by a cave wall, six feet high and about twenty feet long, covered entirely with red and yellow dots. “To me, it looked like markmaking that would have taken an eternity,” he said. “It made me think about time—making art in relation to time.” He saw a lot of animals, but no elephants—a drought had dried up their watering places. He did see elephant droppings, and was impressed by their size and their round shape. “I brought some of them home in my suitcase, in a cardboard box, along with my clothes,” he said.

 

 

 

Ofili’s “Lime Bar” and, at right, “House of Cards,” new works in his Trinidad studio. Chris Ofili, “Lime Bar” (2014) / Courtesy David Zwirner

In the fall of 1992, he got a one-year exchange scholarship to an art school in Berlin, where the atmosphere was much freer and livelier than in London. “They allowed twenty-four-hour access to the school, and there was a night club in a bombed-out basement in Potsdamer Platz with amazing hip-hop music,” he said. “Music was the battery, fully charged. I wanted to paint things that would feel like that music.” Ofili had been experimenting with the elephant dung he had brought back in his suitcase, gluing pieces of it to paintings. He turned three jumbo droppings into “Shitheads,” one of them accessorized with his own cut-off dreadlocks and a set of baby teeth. (When he ran out of the Zimbabwe product, he arranged for a renewable supply from the London Zoo.) At a street fair in Berlin, he spread a Laura Ashley fabric on the sidewalk and placed several dung balls on it, without explanation. (A little later, he heard that in 1983 the African-American artist David Hammons had offered snowballs for sale on the street; to his chagrin, he also learned that Hammons had used elephant dung in his art.) Ofili said, “People would look at the dung, look at me, and ask what it was. I actually sold some, which was hilarious.” Later that spring, he did the same thing on Brick Lane, in London’s East End, where a number of people assumed he must have been selling drugs. He posted stickers around town reading “Elephant Shit,” and placed an ad with the same words (and nothing else) in a new British art magazine called frieze. These activities drew scant attention, but then a respected art writer, Stuart Morgan, who had seen Ofili’s work when he came to the Royal College as a visiting critic, put him in a three-artist group show he was organizing at the Cubitt Gallery, in 1993. Morgan followed up a year later with a longish article about him in frieze, called “The Elephant Man.” “That article was a big deal,” Ofili said. “It set me off from other young artists and gave me my first taste of a type of fame, which I didn’t know how to handle. It left me with a slight feeling of guilt.”

Ofili graduated from the Royal College in 1993. He found a studio space in Fulham, where a group of former students had rented the unused second floor of a gas-company building. He had a part-time job with an off-license wine-and-liquor store on weekends, and once or twice a month he earned serious money de-installing commercial exhibitions at night—tearing down and carting away temporary walls and partitions. Since visiting Zimbabwe, his paintings had become more abstract. “Painting with Shit on it,” which had been in Stuart Morgan’s show, was a maze of interlocking concentric circles composed of meticulously painted dots, hundreds of them, with an explosion of black paint and elephant dung near the center. Instead of hanging on the wall, the canvas rested on two highly varnished dung balls on the floor—a practice Ofili followed with all his paintings for the next decade. Peter Doig swapped one of his own pictures for one of Ofili’s dung paintings, which he still owns.

Figuration returned two years later, in the paintings that Ofili produced in the mid-nineties. Brash, funny, and bursting with energy, a mixture of bad-ass subject matter and virtuoso craftsmanship, they show a young artist coming into exuberant possession of an original voice. Against abstract backgrounds of spiralling dot patterns in glowing colors, the painted or collaged images (often cut from black porn magazines) are drawn from sources that range from art history and the Bible to black popular culture of the preceding three decades. “Satan” and “7 Bitches Tossing their Pussies before the Divine Dung,” both dated 1995, took a hip-hop approach to William Blake, whose luminous watercolors, including “Satan in his Original Glory” and “The Four and Twenty Elders Casting their Crowns before the Divine Throne,” Ofili had spent many hours studying at the Tate. The two versions of “Afrodizzia” (1996), in which dozens of cut-out photographs of black faces (Miles Davis, Diana Ross, James Brown, Cassius Clay) float in a sea of subtly shifting colors, pay homage to the renaissance of black creativity that Ofili believes hip-hop helped to create. His heroes at the time included Notorious B.I.G., Snoop Dogg, L’il Kim, and Wu-Tang Clan. “It was like revisiting the idea of black power in the seventies, but through a more celebratory lens—not fighting for power but celebrating a newfound power,” he said. As he told an interviewer in 2010, “A lot of black art that came before was set up to critique the system. I thought that was boring . . . I wanted to be sincere and outrageous and friendly and rude and experimental and conventional.”

Ofili had started a series of small watercolor drawings of stylized, exotically clothed black women and black men that he called “Afromuses”—painted in ten or fifteen minutes every morning, as a sort of warm-up exercise—and another series of abstract black-and-white pencil drawings of linked black heads under Afros. (Years later, Thelma Golden, the director of the Studio Museum in Harlem, caught a glimpse of the “Afromuses” when she was interviewing Ofili in his London studio and persuaded him to let her show a hundred and eighty-one of them at her museum.) By 1995, he was selling enough work to quit his other jobs. He had joined Victoria Miro’s gallery in London, and shortly before his first one-man show there, in 1996, Gavin Brown, a British-born artist and dealer, gave him his first solo show in New York. “One of the brighter points of light in the starry London art scene is Chris Ofili . . . whose paintings are at once suave, obnoxious, and naïve, on purpose,” Roberta Smith wrote in her Times review of the show. That same year, the Walker Art Center, in Minneapolis, included him in its “ ‘Brilliant!’ New Art from London” survey. That show was a mixed blessing, because it made people link him with the Y.B.A.s. Nobody in London or New York was making art like Ofili’s. “It was all mine, and it was the greatest feeling,” he told me. “This was the music I liked, this was the work I was doing, and it was all tied in.”

 

Toward the end of 1996, Ofili had to find a new studio space, and he moved to a much rougher neighborhood, in Kings Cross, near the railroad station. “There was a parking lot next door, and at night I could look out the window and see street prostitution linked with drugs, pimps getting paid off, people sleeping in doorways,” he said. His new surroundings were reflected in “Foxy Roxy,” “Blossom,” “She,” “Pimpin’ ain’t easy,” and other big (eight-by-six-foot), loud, sexy paintings that played with the stereotypes of black street life. He was “kind of jokin’ around” with the way black pimps and their “hos” were treated in gangsta rap, as he said—the central image in “Pimpin’ ain’t easy” is a tower in the shape of an upright phallus, with eyes, nose, and a sappy grin. Many of these works appeared in the first big show of Ofili’s work, which opened at the Southampton City Art Gallery in 1998, moved to the Serpentine Gallery, in London, and went on to the Whitworth Art Gallery, at the University of Manchester. The critical reaction was profuse and generally positive. Paintings like “Pimpin’ ain’t easy” were “too erudite, too funny, too seductive for any kind of single-minded reading,” Adrian Searle advised in the Guardian, a warning that eluded the Times’ reliably outrageable Waldemar Januszczak. He called the work “sexist, crude, misjudged . . . Madonna-bashing, woman-denigrating, posturing, pretentious, dumb paintings.” After watching several American “blaxploitation” films from the seventies at B.F.I. Southbank, Ofili introduced his own black action antihero, Captain Shit, whose swashbuckling he chronicled in half a dozen paintings. “He didn’t have much power,” Ofili explained, laughing. “He could make the space around him glow—that was his power.”

The survey show earned him a nomination for the Turner Prize. The other nominees that year were Tacita Dean, Sam Taylor-Wood, and Cathy de Monchaux, each of whom was asked to present work for the Turner Prize exhibition at the Tate. Ofili decided to come up with an image that would resonate beyond the art world. “No Woman, No Cry”—the title comes from a Bob Marley anthem—is a portrait of a black woman named Doreen Lawrence, whose teen-age son, Stephen, had been stabbed to death in South London while waiting for a bus. “It was an issue that was still bubbling, bubbling,” he said. “This kid had been killed by white racists. The police had fucked up the investigation, and the image that stuck in my mind was not just his mother but sorrow—deep sorrow for someone who will never come back.” He painted the mother in profile, weeping large tears, with a tiny image of Stephen inside each of them. “I nailed it with that one,” he said, very quietly. “I remember finishing the painting and covering it up, because it was just too strong.”

Ofili’s solo show was still open in Manchester when he found out he’d won the Turner Prize. “They had record attendance at the Whitworth Art Gallery the day after,” he said. The gallery staff found his family’s number in the phone book and called his mother, and that, he said, “gave me the license to not have to study design.” Winning the prize brought him national attention and twenty thousand pounds, which went into the town house that he and David Adjaye were renovating in London’s East End. Adjaye, the son of a Ghanaian diplomat, had studied architecture at the Royal College when Ofili was there. They reconnected one day in 1997, when Adjaye saw Ofili driving his lime-green Ford Capri on Brick Lane. (The car had been rusting away in a parking lot behind Ofili’s studio in Fulham; he fell in love with it—his uncle Festus used to have a yellow one—tracked down the owner, bought it, restored it, and taught himself to drive, right there in the lot.) Adjaye had just opened an architectural office in the East End, a long-distressed area that was starting to revive, and Ofili, who had bought a derelict house nearby on Fashion Street, took him to see it. Adjaye became Ofili’s architect that day. “It wasn’t like having a client,” Adjaye told me. “It was this fantastic dialogue, a kind of sharing”—and it developed into a lasting friendship. Ofili was the best man at Adjaye’s wedding, this year, at St. Paul’s Cathedral, and the two figures sitting together in the “Lime Bar” painting are Adjaye and his bride, Ashley Shaw-Scott. The Fashion Street house, with a magnificent studio in back, was finished in 1999, and it became a refuge from the media storm that broke later that year over Ofili’s painting “The Holy Virgin Mary.”

The picture had set off no alarm bells when the exhibition it was in, called “Sensation,” appeared at the Royal Academy in London, and then at the Hamburger Bahnhof, in Berlin. Ofili, the former altar boy, has said that the painting was an attempt to deal with his own childhood questions about race and virgin mothers—“a hip-hop version of the story.” His Africanized Virgin’s exposed right breast is made of lacquered elephant dung, and her robed, beautifully painted form is surrounded by what look like flying angels until you realize that they are female buttocks cut from porn magazines. Sixteen days before “Sensation” opened at its next stop, the Brooklyn Museum, the Daily News headlined a story about the museum’s “Gallery of Horror,” and described the Virgin as being “splattered with elephant dung.” Other papers, including the Times, picked up the story. Mayor Giuliani, a Catholic, ignoring multiple invitations to view the painting, issued a statement calling it “sick stuff,” cut off city funds to the museum, and demanded it be removed from the show. (The museum’s funds were eventually restored, following an out-of-court settlement.) The media circus lasted for more than a week, and Ofili, who had stayed in London, stopped answering the telephone. Tasha Amini, his first (and last) studio assistant, tried to protect him from reporters and photographers who came to the door, but, as he remembers, “this was a massive thing coming at you at high speed. It changed everything, messed everything up. I just had to shut down, go inwards. I decided to do fewer exhibitions and no interviews. Luckily, I was making paintings, so I had something to focus on.”

During the next two years, holed up in his new studio, Ofili completed the most ambitious series of paintings he had done to date. It started with a painting of a long-tailed rhesus monkey holding a cup, or chalice, an image he borrowed from a 1957 Andy Warhol collage that he found in a book. (The psychiatrist and art collector César Reyes, who owns work by both Ofili and Peter Doig, had recently taken Ofili to an island off the coast of Puerto Rico that was populated entirely by rhesus monkeys, and this experience had “just stayed in my mind,” Ofili said.) One monkey painting led to another, and then to a third, each with a single dominant color but permeated by many other colors in the lushly decorative backgrounds. Ofili kept going, and eventually there were thirteen paintings. “I really cannot remember at what point the monkeys became representations of elements of the Last Supper,” Ofili told an interviewer. When I asked him whether the religious theme had been in his mind all along, though, he said, “Absolutely—but calling it ‘The Last Supper’ would have kind of closed it down.”

He didn’t expect the paintings to stay together as a single work—“Who would want to buy thirteen paintings on the same theme?” he said—but he wanted them to be shown together, and he and David Adjaye spent several weeks transforming a room on the second floor of Victoria Miro’s new gallery into a chapel-like environment. The installation, which opened in June, 2002, as part of a larger Ofili exhibition, was called “The Upper Room,” after the room in Jerusalem where the disciples gathered for the Last Supper. Ofili had said he wanted to slow down the viewing experience, and he succeeded. Viewers waited in long lines to climb a steep flight of stairs, then groped their way down a narrow corridor before coming into a dramatically lit oblong space with six gorgeous paintings on each side and a larger gold one at the end. The walls, the ceiling, and the floor were clad in walnut veneer, which gave off an aromatic scent. Spotlights on each painting spilled pools of reflected color on the floor. 

Sir Nicholas Serota, the Tate’s director, saw the show and began lining up support on his board to acquire it, intact. Miro had already accepted reserves on several of the paintings, but she was able to persuade the buyers to release them, and the Tate eventually paid six hundred thousand pounds for the complete ensemble, which it puts on view periodically. Serota had to defend the purchase against conflict-of-interest charges, because Ofili was one of the Tate’s artist-trustees; the museum had previously bought works by sitting artist-trustees, however, and “The Upper Room,” Serota felt, was too important to lose.

Ofili and Adjaye worked together a year later, in Venice, on the installation of a new series of large red-green-and-black paintings that Ofili had done for the British pavilion at the 2003 Biennale. The subject was an idealized narrative of a man and woman in an African Eden, a paradise of tropical foliage and romantic ardor. The germ of this idea came from an image on the paper triangle of a dry cleaner’s hanger, but the real sources were Trinidad and Ofili’s feelings for Roba El-Essawy. Limiting himself to three colors was a nod to Marcus Garvey’s pan-African flag, in which red symbolizes the blood of martyrs, black the color of their skin, and green the land of Africa. Adjaye’s installation turned the classical proportions of the British pavilion into a fever dream of color and light. Some spectators during the Biennale’s opening week, which coincided with the worst heat wave in Venetian memory, found it overwhelming. What few people realized at the time was that Ofili, at the pinnacle of his early success, was striking out in new directions. The Venice paintings were the last to include or rest on elephant dung and the last to use exfoliating patterns of colored dots. He had already stopped mining popular culture for his subject matter, and for two years after his Venice show he stopped making oil paintings—like many artists in search of a new aesthetic, he could experiment more freely with drawings and watercolors. His art was changing radically, but the full extent of the changes did not emerge for three years.

“I felt ready for the change to happen, and I knew it was happening inside me,” he said, straining to be clear. “It’s hard to go away from something that’s very enjoyable, and a domain where I felt supremely confident. Before, I was focussing on high impact, and what I wanted to find was a way of working that was less complex and maybe less visible.” He found it in Trinidad. On his many visits to the island, he had been fascinated by its haunted landscape and mysterious light—especially the slow transition from day into night, an extended period when forms are still visible but their shapes become indistinct. Trying to capture that experience in paint opened up a whole new way of working. “I felt I was tapping into a process of looking that was slower,” he said.

Alone in the white cottage in Trinidad, he began experimenting with blue, a color he had always shied away from, because of its tendency to dominate other colors. “I’d seen the blue devils, and the power of dark blue, and I realized it was more than a color—it had a strength other than color strength,” he said. When he was still living in London, he had done a number of blue-and-silver paintings, the “Blue Rider” series, which he showed at Berlin Contemporary Fine Arts in 2005. In Trinidad, he began a new series of darker-blue paintings. “I had found that if you put silver underneath blue, the blue sits back, like night, or glows like moonlight,” he told me. He began building up the blue in darker and darker layers, with shadings of purple, indigo, and black. The images in the blue paintings are from his imagination, from the Bible, and from life in Trinidad. Two parang musicians are on a bridge in “Iscariot Blues,” seemingly oblivious of a hanged man nearby. “After Judas tried to give away the thirty pieces of silver and hung himself, nobody wanted to cut him down,” Ofili explained. “I made the association because of what appeared to me a sort of nonchalance about death here. When somebody dies in a car accident, the body is not immediately covered up by the medics, as it would be in the U.S. or the U.K. People just carry on with their daily life.”

A few of the blue paintings are so dark that you have to look for some time before the forms emerge. Other paintings, done in that period and later, are full of color, with sinuous semi-abstract human forms flowing into each other and into nature. A photograph taken in 1963 by the great Malian photographer Malick Sidibé, whose work Ofili had seen in a book, recurs in seven Ofili paintings, in many drawings, and in a sculptural frieze he’s carved into a wall of his new family house. It shows a young couple dancing, bodies separate but heads nearly touching. The photograph is called “Christmas Eve,” and Ofili found out that the couple were brother and sister. In his painting “Douen’s Dance,” their heads touch. “Douens here are spirits of children who died before they were baptized, so they never get to move on,” he said.

His first sculptures were cast in 2005, a pair of squatting figures, male and female, under whose bared posteriors lie neat coils of excrement. They are based on the folk-art caganers (defecators) in Catalonian Nativity scenes, which he had seen on a trip to Barcelona when he was at the Royal College. Two monumental Annunciations came next. After going to a Fra Angelico exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum in 2006, Ofili made the clay model for a seven-foot bronze sculpture in which the Virgin has thrown herself so violently against the black-winged angel that her feet have pierced his thighs; in a second version, the two of them appear to be copulating. Ofili’s eroticizing of religious themes brought out the Giuliani in some viewers. When the two Annunciations and other Ofili sculptures were shown at Zwirner in 2007, they struck one critic as “hideous” and another as “so over the top it feels fatuous,” but Ofili brushes this sort of thing aside. To him, the sculptures represent another kind of “experimentation and discovery” in his work, a way to “be out in the open ocean—which is better than an aquarium or, worse still, a fishbowl.” No sculptures were included in his 2010 retrospective at the Tate, because Ofili and the Tate curators had decided to focus exclusively on his paintings. When “Night and Day,” his exhibition at the New Museum, goes on view this month, it will include several sculptures, along with a selection of other recent works, a floor devoted to his first decade, and a specially constructed space for nine of the blue paintings, only a few of which have been exhibited in this country. “The blue paintings will challenge your expectations about Ofili,” Massimiliano Gioni, the museum’s artistic director and chief curator, said last month. “There’s no trace of the carnivalesque element that’s so strong in his nineties work. You can really get lost in them.” 

Ofili brought his family to New York in mid-July. He had to make some decisions with Gioni about the hanging of his show, which will occupy the whole museum. Amel took dance classes at the Joffrey Ballet School, and Dalil went to a sports camp at Chelsea Piers. They stayed for nearly three weeks before going on to London, where Ofili was doing the costumes for a new dance by the Royal Ballet. Four years earlier, the Royal Ballet had commissioned him to paint the set and design the costumes for a ballet called “Diana and Actaeon,” part of a hugely ambitious production based on three Titian paintings that deal with Ovid’s telling of the Diana myth. The new dance, whose protagonist is a combination of Prometheus and Agni, an Indian god, opened the first weekend in September, and before each of its three performances Ofili was given two hours to paint his designs directly on the dancers—on their leotards and their bodies.

Before he left for London, I suggested he meet me at the Museum of Modern Art to see the Gauguin print show. Ofili admitted that he doesn’t think about Gauguin very much, but he liked the “sense of imperfection” in the woodcuts that Gauguin printed himself. Compared with the beauty and finish of his paintings, “the prints are more like open letters,” he said. “There’s sound in them, the sound of fire, or of water, but not the impression of people speaking.” Ofili was struck by the parallels between Gauguin’s Tahiti and Trinidad, especially the “nonvisible energies” of the night scenes. He found it hard to look at Gauguin’s ceramic sculpture of a savage goddess killing a wolf cub. “I think the night spirits are more playful in Trinidad,” he said. “They’re mischievous rather than menacing.”

The museum was also showing a new body of work by Jasper Johns, which interested him much more than the Gauguins. It was a small show, called “Regrets”—two paintings, ten drawings, and two prints, all of which had come out of a creased and damaged photograph of Lucian Freud, sitting on a bed and clutching his forehead. The photograph had belonged to Francis Bacon. Johns had seen it reproduced in a Christie’s auction catalogue, and what he did with it electrified Ofili. He moved from one image to another, his eyes shining with excitement. “The initial impulse is quite simple, like a heartbeat, and then it becomes . . . symphonic,” he said. “What’s wonderful is that you get glimpses of how he works. You can see all of Jasper Johns here.” After walking through the show a second time, he said, “Last night, I wasn’t sure I needed to go to the Gauguin—I didn’t tell you I had already seen it—but this is the reason why. This is just chilling.” He kept talking about it in the taxi afterward. He said, “Gauguin is like a drug-infused sleep, a tortured dream with wonderful moments. But you don’t get a full night’s sleep with Jasper. You’re never settled. He’s certainly one of the great painters. This is what museums are for, right?” I’ve known Johns since the nineteen-sixties, and a few days later my wife and I took Ofili to his house in Connecticut. Both artists seemed to welcome the meeting. Johns, at eighty-four, is more genial than he was thirty years ago, when he used to fend off questions with other questions, such as “Why do you ask that?” After lunch, Johns took us to a converted barn on his property that he uses as a private gallery for his own work and works by other artists. In the main room were paintings, prints, and drawings by Johns from various periods: new works related to the “Regrets” series; three or four older paintings, including one from his flagstone series; two drawings of kitsch hula dancers, from a bandanna that someone had given him; several images in various media of a man slumped on a bench with his head turned to the wall. Ofili told Johns he thought the last seemed related to the Freud photograph, and Johns said, “I do, too.” None of us spoke much, but at one point I saw Ofili go over to Johns and say something that made Johns throw back his head and laugh. In the car returning to New York, I asked him what that was about. “I said, ‘You’re a happy man,’ ” Ofili replied. “He said he didn’t know what I meant, but he knew exactly. I’m really happy for him. His work is so full of life. He’s like a bloodhound that’s got the scent, and just goes for it. He’s in heaven right now—and he’s sharing the joy of it.”

Dr Yosef Ben Jochannan ~ Black Man Wake Up!!!

Interesting Speech by Dr. John Henrik Clarke.

This man to me is far more important than Dr. Martin Luther King and places Africa at the Centre of the World.



Africa never had a word for prison or orphanage or old people's home...come on. We must listen  up!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/When.../dp/0226771997/ref=sr_1_1..

Article about Lagos Art by Tajudeen Sowole

New Order...How 'Colourists' project fresh canvas By Tajudeen Sowole

Source: African Arts with Taj

As modern and contemporary arts compete for space on the vibrant Lagos art landscape, a possible return of similar factors that energised art appreciation in the 1980s through early 1990s may just be returning.





From the New Order exhibition, Toni Okijeni’s Festival.

Art connoisseurs and other enthusiasts could start experiencing this much when the group exhibition titled New Order opens tomorrow, ending September 30, 2014 at Terra Kulture, Victoria Island, Lagos. Olu Ajayi, Sam Ovraiti, Toni Okujeni and Pita Ohiwerei are the artists of New Order. They hoped to use the exhibition in spurring a new phase for Nigerian art. Three of the artists, Ajayi, Ovraiti and Okujeni are among those that were christened "Colourists" in the 1980s for adding a new texture of colour to Lagos art. Ohiwerei and other artists of like minds later joined the trend.

Prior to the emergence of these artists and others who were trained at Auchi Polytechnic, Edo State, the canvas of Lagos art scene, and perhaps by extension, the rest of Nigeria was not – in the argument of a section of observers and critics - as diverse. The Colourists, so suggest critics, brought more "vibrant colour" onto the canvas. In fact, the Auchi art school seemed to have stressed its identity of producing artists of 'vibrant' application of collours via the influence that Ajayi, Ovraiti, Edwin Debebs, Ikoro Emmanuel, Ekpeni Emmanuel, Okujeni, Osazuwa Osagie, Ben Osaghae, Ohiwerei, Lessor Jonathan, Alex Nwokolo and others had welded over the Nigerian art scene.

However, the 1980s/90s art is different from the 21st century's visual arts space being redefined by the energy of contemporary art. Within the scope of the dynamics that has thrown up new and non-traditional medium, appropriating and conceptualising of art, the artists of the New Order hope to strengthen their modernists’ identity.

Despite an unprecedented increase in appreciation of Nigerian art in the last six to seven years, the walls of galleries and contents of some sections of the art scenes appear static; laced with repetitive themes and copying as well as subconscious transfer of old styles and techniques from masters to young artists with diminishing creativity. But the 'Colourists' who take a chunk of credit and praises - perhaps knocks too - for the state of a largely conservative art scene in Nigeria are set to inject what they believe would pass as new face. More importantly, its quite cheering that at least, the need to open up the regimented art house and modulate the tone of Nigerian art is coming from a section of those who dominate the third/fourth generation the country's modernists.

"After 30 years, we are coming together to re-present the state of our art,"


Ovraiti told select guests during a preview of New Order. He went memory lane to the 19th century period of impressionism, comparing the challenges of the pioneers to the emergence of Nigeria's Colourists. Three decades after, they are revisiting the art scene "to reinstate freedom, purity and quality in the result that shows in our art."

Ajayi was more precise: "New Order is about separating art from picture making." And having received the knocks of critics for being repetitive in their themes, the Colorrists, other artists they have inspired over the past two decades and their followers need to surrender to the reality of change, so suggested the argument of Ajayi. "It's also about self-expression and getting out of the regimented art scene of doing the same thing all over." Being the promoters of impasto and creative application of colour in the Nigerian art scene, "we now want to move beyond this," Okujeni added.

The dynamics of Nigerian art scene in the last two decades or more has excavated quite a number of groups such as professional bodies as well as movements. And the New Order artists appear like another movement in the making. “It’s a consciousness, not a movement,” Ajayi clarified.

Reviewing the past two decades of the Nigerian art, Ovraiti noted that “New truths have been revealed and more colourists have also emerged.” However, it does appear that the line between the modern and contemporary Nigerian art is blurring. For example, all of a sudden the word 'conceptual' which the visual arts world has arrogated to a particular kind of art outside the Renaissance and modernists or Fine Arts terrains is suddenly appearing across the board. Refusing to be shut out of the confined contemporary definition, the New Order artists disclosed that the works for the show are "conceptual." This appears like a total confrontation against the tide of contemporaneity, isn't it? "Art does not have to be performance, installation or some masquerades now known as art to be conceptual." Ovraiti argued. Indeed, in common and ordinary usage, it could be argued that most creative works across the Arts - visual arts, music, film, theatre- are conceptual, anyway. But it takes what looks like the threat of contemporary art or "fad" for other artists of regular and traditional expression in Fine Arts to challenge the confinement of conceptualism to contemporary medium such as installation and performance art.

In the work of Ohiwerei, the change, from repetitive to wider themes and textures is glaring. His works such as Dance Spirit, Chibok Unending Storyand Market though appear familiar, the texture and contents are not exactly his usual.

For Ovraiti and Ajayi, traditions and identity are hard to be swept away so soon, so suggest their works that have traces of fresh breath within the context of conceptuality. In fact, Ovraiti warned that the past cannot be frozen so soon as much as a new dawn is crucial. “This exhibition could witness some recurrent themes. The driving force for looking back if we did is to revisit a previous result from our current level of enlightenment and awareness. After all, artists draw from their inside, foresight and insight. Looking at hindsight sometimes enables a new result.”

And if medium of expression and usage of materials are the key characteristics of contemporary or conceptual art, Okujeni imbibes such in Festival, a mixed media basically rendered in buttons to achieve what looks like pointillism.

Ovraiti has applied his art to outside the art exhibition circle, mostly in the workshops and mentorship sections of art development. In fact, he is currently the director at Nigeria’s most consistent yearly art gathering, the Harmattan Workshop.

Ajayi: has more than 28 years professional experience, and was recently given a Fellow, Society of Nigerian Artist. He is a founding member and Trustee of the Guild of Professional Fine Artist. His bio states in parts: Ajayi’s metaphoric vocabulary is also deeply rooted in the body, his ultimate vehicle in expressing life’s dualities. His sensuous colors, sweeping strokes and narrative content place the human figure on a grand scare, while the dramatic cropping of figures and forms emphasizes the immediacy of the paint. Ajayi has also achieved recognition for his remarkable watercolors in grey scare executed in a broad gestural technique.

In 1993, Ajayi was listed in Who is Who in Art in Nigeria published by the Smithsonian Institute and Libraries. In 2004 he won the best Alumnus Award of Auchi Polytechnic

Okujeni, a former art illustrator at the defunct Guardian Express magazine has been a full time studio artist in the past 25 years. Having taken his art across Africa, he is currently seen as the face of Nigerian art in Senegal.

Okujeni’s past exhibitions included His past exhibitions included Nigerian contemporary cartoons United State Information Center, Lagos 1986;Treasure House Salon- 1989; Treasure house exhibition- 1989; Exhibition of art, Shell Club Warri- 1991; two-men show Leventis Foundation Centre- 1992; Colour masters, Didi museum, Lagos- 1993; The way we are- NiconNoga Abuja- 1994; Impastoes something special gallery Lagos - 1995; Valley of decision- National Museum- 1996; Ecole de Dakar exhibition- GalerieYassine 1998; One man show- GalerieYassine 199; Assilah Forum Exhibition- Morocco- 1998; Exhibition of painting- Polo Club Lagos 1999; and Three man show National Musuem, Onikan, Lagos 2012.


Based in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S., Ohiwerei has experimented in a quite a number of techniques and came up with series such as scratchee. His bio states that he has had solo exhibitions across Europe, Africa and U.S “where he has won numerous awards.

Article by Cyrus Bozorgmehr | Global Thinker

 

Alphabets – Dualism and Digitality – The Encoding of Experience

Source: Synchronicity and Subculture

Thoughts on the alphabet’s role in shaping human perception and the evolution of society

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"
John 1.1

Language and the written word are a defining foundation of society. Communication led to collaboration which led to productivity which led to invention which led to knowledge which perhaps one day will lead to wisdom. We would be lost without the written word; it lies at the core of what it is to be human and yet we scarcely stop to question the patterns, the effects and the meanings behind the orgy of words poured out into the stratosphere.

 The written word evolved through two distinct strains, both of which sought to frame communicative verbal language in the most logical terms. These roughly break down into conceptual and mathematical. The conceptual uses ‘onomatopoeic’ images such as hieroglyphics and Chinese style characters to convey meaning and concepts in their entirety while the mathematical invented an entirely artificial code, or alphabet. This series of abstract symbols could be used as ingredients in a wider formula of digital language where the order of the code equated to its meaning.

 

We in the West are immersed in the mathematical, and use letters to construct words on a daily basis without even considering that we are using algebra to express human action and human emotion. That it works as communication and documentation is indisputable, but if we probe deeper into the ramifications of representing reality through pure mathematics, we begin to uncover some intriguing questions.
Most of us will be familiar with the ‘Left Brain, Right Brain’ dichotomy where the left hemisphere of the brain is responsible for linear reasoning, mathematical structure and the evolution of ‘logical function’ while the right hemisphere is associated with intuition, spirituality, imagery and holistic perception. This conflicted unity is represented throughout cultural history through symbolism like yin and yang, Gaia and Jupiter; male and female. And while no individual can operate purely on one side of the brain, individuals and whole cultures can be defined through which of the hemispheres is dominant – at least metaphorically.
The right brain is usually symbolised by female iconography, for example Mother Earth, while the left brain is almost inevitably manifested in masculinity, male gods and patriarchal societies. There came a point in social history when a tendency toward the holistic, female infused society was usurped by the brutal patriarchy that most of our blood stained history chronicles. Within that conquest of the female by the male, the matriarchal by the patriarchal, the right brain by the left brain, we find the development of the formulaic alphabet playing a subversive role.

 

There is a compelling argument to be made that as language moved from imagery representing concept to an abstract formula super imposed on reality, the analytical, ‘male’ element of consciousness and culture began its ascendancy. The alphabet’s linear code broke the connection between representation and reality and saw a critical schism take root between mankind and an intuitive understanding of nature and the world around him.
As the linear alphabet began to take hold, humanity effectively began an evolutionary process where brain function and the nervous system were shaped by rationalism. Humans use different neural pathways and different areas of the brain to interpret pictograms than they do the alphabet. The dominance of one leads to a self fulfilling prophecy as those pathways come increasingly to the fore in both the understanding and communication of reality. The methods we use to define the world around us actively shape our perception.
Developing societies began to retreat behind a self generated patriarchal construct of reality where language and writing became a purely human code with no discernible reference to the world it was describing.

 

Holistic, ‘feminine’ forms of expression and figurative methods of representation were ousted by the literal and the formulaic. The advent of the written alphabet saw a new generation of male deities sweep across the ancient world wreaking havoc in their wake and slowly eroding the right, the role and the respect of the female, both in their human and in their conceptual form. The very nature of the code’s complexities excluded almost all from literacy, as people could no longer look at a character on the wall and understand what it described by its appearance alone.
Thus, a closed elite of the literate was created, and as the great religions began to establish themselves, it rapidly became apparent that only such institutions could afford to educate their own scribes in the alphabet, while the average peasant was bound to the land for food, and the landowner interested only in warmongering and profit.
Slowly but surely, the patriarchal religions developed a monopoly on literacy, and consequently on truth. If you were an illiterate peasant, ‘truth’ and ‘God’s Word’ would only ever be communicated through the filter of an all too human member of the clergy. Such extraordinary power embodied in fallible men and powerful institutions inevitably led to extraordinary abuses.

 

Many of us have wondered how on earth the scriptures – be they Bible, Koran or Torah were warped into such oppressive instruments of patriarchy. There’s very little Jesus or Mohammed said that most of us would disagree with – even taking into account the context of contemporary custom. So many institutionalized positions of religion are directly at odds with the original scriptures – and one of the principle reasons is that for well over a thousand years, the power structure had an unfettered ability to manufacture truth without fear of question – as literacy was a fortified sacristy. For centuries in Europe, translating the Bible into the vernacular and out of Latin was deemed heresy, punishable by death, and the Reformation, for all its homicidal zeal, was rooted in the injustice of Catholicism’s strongarm monopoly on truth.
Thus reading, writing and thereby truth remained firmly in the hands of a masculine cabal that taught only the strictest adherence to the approved word and had a disturbing propensity toward slaughtering those whose spirits tended toward the holistic or the feminine. Even the Virgin Mary who is represented and worshipped again and again in Christian iconography is stripped of all feminine qualities and reduced to a chaste vehicle for a male god. Mary Magdalene is only accepted in mainstream Christianity once she has truly repented of her sexuality, and the cults that sprang up worshipping her in her own right were swiftly put to the doctrinal sword. The Cathars, who in 12th Century France developed a far more feminine and gnostic version of Christianity that traced its roots back to the dualism of pagan Mithraism, were the first Christians a formal crusade was sent against, lest their dangerously non conformist world view leak into a wider dialogue.
Even when the visual arts began their ascent into propagandist glory during the Early Renaissance, they used an inflexible language of composition and colour, reducing painting to a linear formula that artists had to work subtly and subversively to infuse with any true depth. In the Islamic world where figurative art had been put to the patriarchal sword of the Hadiths, the alphabet itself became a visual art as calligraphy sanctified the the written word alongside geometry in the pantheon of sacred beauty. Our thought processes themselves, even at their most subconscious, are so often framed in the abstract formulas that the patriarchal alphabet imposed on intuitive reality.

 

None of this is to question the sublime lyrical beauty of the written word or its ability to sing delicate nuance or tumultuous emotion. One cannot discount the finite nature of the pictogram and the multiplicity of meaning bestowed by multiples of 26. These are merely thoughts on evolutionary consciousness and how alphabets shaped human history and social characteristics. It is arguable that on a subliminal level, charting reality in our own code rather than in nature’s symbols has slowly detached us from the rhythms of the natural world.
It is however an interesting contribution to questions concerning patriarchy and the historical role of women in society. If one accepts the dualism that underpins almost all archetype, it is more than clear that male and female have long been in imbalance. It goes deeper than issues like the status of women and into behavioral patterns and systems of perception – pathways in our brain that interpret reality through imperceptible prisms.

There are myriad channels in our history that evolutionary currents flowed through, and while the development of the alphabet was but one, while religions and beliefs and social norms may come and go, writing is so inexorably bound up with our human experience that it is impossible to analyse its impact without that analysis passing through the prism of its own subject. Now there’s a fucking irony ;-)
 
 

IMAGES BY – EL MAC AND RETNA 

BLACK AND RED CALLIGRAPHY – SHAHRZAD GHAFFARI

CHURCH IMAGE – TREY RATCLIFF

CALIGRAFFITI – EL SEED

FINAL IMAGE – RETNA

The Vitruvian Man And Da Vinci’s Merkaba

Source: UTAOT BLOG


The Vitruvian Man is a famous drawing by Leonardo da Vinci made in 1490. The drawing reflecting the uses of proportions and symmetry of the human body as a symbol of perfection and harmony. It is an expression of the re-discovery of the mathematical proportions of the human body in the 15th century and is one of the known art works of the Italian Renaissance.

The drawing  made from ink and watercolor. His size : 34.3 cm -24.5 cm in length and width. He is now part of the collection of the Academy Gallery (Gallerie dell’Accademia) in Venice. It describes the shape of a naked man in two modes placed on top of each other, with his hands outstretched to the side, the figure simultaneously surrounded by a circle and a square. The drawing and text often called “canon relationship”.

pinterest.com

One can describe the human body as a tool used by the harmonious action between the high and low chakras and combining them. Beautifully realized that Leonardo da Vinci, when placed the human body in Star of David (try to imagine a human figure, head, and hands and feet slices in a pattern Star of David). Human nature, then, is to combine the spiritual world the material world. Know how to find a higher purpose and insights in every daily action, but also know to express spiritual messages that he receives in a physical way. We live in a world where the only possible connection between the physical and spiritual world and our essence in this life is to create the connection. On the one hand not only be spiritual and yet was not only physical, but the ability to live everyday with the information that we do receive in a spiritual essence.
Hexagram from 1492 drawing by Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519)

This is the most famous version of his painting, The Vitruvian Man (c. 1485) Accademia, Venice, which has pentagram instead Hexagram. The accompanying text by Leonardo da Vinci is written in mirror writing.

davincicat09.blogspot.com