I've always enjoyed public art, from mosaics in subway stations to murals in parks. It lends spaces a sense of personality, shaped by the people who interact with the architecture around them as much as by the planners and architects who first conceived them. It makes a place look truly inhabited and a structure look alive, more so than a form designed purely for unobtrusive function would otherwise be.
Of course, there's often a more specific message behind public art -- the very nature of the beast lends itself to political and social expression. One might expect that public art in fraught environments would be more message-driven (even though the risk to artists is correspondingly higher). One often forgets that beauty, with no ulterior motive, can be a message in itself:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/90589/an-iranian-artist-is-beautifying-tehran-with-surreal-street-art
I hope this artist continues to create and inspire.
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle East. Show all posts
Saturday, July 12, 2014
Monday, December 30, 2013
NYTimes: (Middle) East Meets West
I recently saw the film "American Hustle" (quite good, I would recommend it), in which there's a con involving an Arab oil magnate in Atlantic City, and I thought of this New York Times article about Middle Eastern investors doing business in the West:
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/12/25/islamic-banks-stuffed-with-cash-explore-partnerships-in-west/?hp
I find the crossroads of disparate cultures fascinating (possibly because I occupy one such intersection myself). There's always a certain contentious power dynamic, no matter how seamless each side wants their dance to be -- it's simply a matter of navigating cultural differences, and where there's difference, there's compromise to be reached.
In the cases mentioned in the above article, it's a matter of Islamic law, which to Westerners accustomed to separation of Church and state, seems antiquated and alien. Of course, considering that American bills still have "In God We Trust" printed on them, we're not 100% secular either. The United States is just a less homogenous society, which means that it's much harder to enshrine any particular religious practice as law without provoking backlash from other religions. In the Middle East, on the other hand, Islamic tenets -- such as the prohibition on interest payments, for example -- are so ingrained in the legal system, in everyone's day-to-day operations, that it would hardly seem out of the ordinary for Islamic companies to request certain religious accommodations as part and parcel of doing business.
Each side tends to think of itself as "normal" and everyone else as "other." That's just how we're wired--it was an evolutionary advantage, to be sure, and we've remained so long after our species abandoned the "small tribes roaming the Serengeti" lifestyle. It's a product of genes ensuring their own survival, methinks, and it has been the root cause of a lot of conflict through the centuries (and even today). But in a world where it is generally acknowledged that outright war between states is undesirable for all states in question (with certain notable exceptions, many of them precipitated by stateless organizations or religious factions), I suppose a lot of that cultural distance gets sublimated into power plays in negotiation (and similar, otherwise constructive enterprises).
I expect we'll see more and more of this in our increasingly globalized world. Today, it's not just governments that engage with each other -- it's entire populations that have to reconcile "us" and "them."
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/12/25/islamic-banks-stuffed-with-cash-explore-partnerships-in-west/?hp
I find the crossroads of disparate cultures fascinating (possibly because I occupy one such intersection myself). There's always a certain contentious power dynamic, no matter how seamless each side wants their dance to be -- it's simply a matter of navigating cultural differences, and where there's difference, there's compromise to be reached.
In the cases mentioned in the above article, it's a matter of Islamic law, which to Westerners accustomed to separation of Church and state, seems antiquated and alien. Of course, considering that American bills still have "In God We Trust" printed on them, we're not 100% secular either. The United States is just a less homogenous society, which means that it's much harder to enshrine any particular religious practice as law without provoking backlash from other religions. In the Middle East, on the other hand, Islamic tenets -- such as the prohibition on interest payments, for example -- are so ingrained in the legal system, in everyone's day-to-day operations, that it would hardly seem out of the ordinary for Islamic companies to request certain religious accommodations as part and parcel of doing business.
Each side tends to think of itself as "normal" and everyone else as "other." That's just how we're wired--it was an evolutionary advantage, to be sure, and we've remained so long after our species abandoned the "small tribes roaming the Serengeti" lifestyle. It's a product of genes ensuring their own survival, methinks, and it has been the root cause of a lot of conflict through the centuries (and even today). But in a world where it is generally acknowledged that outright war between states is undesirable for all states in question (with certain notable exceptions, many of them precipitated by stateless organizations or religious factions), I suppose a lot of that cultural distance gets sublimated into power plays in negotiation (and similar, otherwise constructive enterprises).
I expect we'll see more and more of this in our increasingly globalized world. Today, it's not just governments that engage with each other -- it's entire populations that have to reconcile "us" and "them."
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Washington Post: Food Truck for Peace
This is such an inspired idea!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/food-truck-will-deliver-message-of-mideast-peace/2013/01/25/b121ea7e-6665-11e2-93e1-475791032daf_story.html?hpid=z1
Throughout human history, the concept of breaking bread has had a powerful hold on our imaginations. Food, and the culture and traditions surrounding it, is one of the original methods of brokering peace. Back in the earliest days of homo sapiens, the acquisition of food was a costly group effort that strengthened the bonds within one's immediate community. In Ancient Greece, offering food and shelter to visitors became an integral part of upholding the honor of one's house. In many cultures, it was considered taboo to bring weaponry to the table, and any harm that befell a guest at one's table brought great dishonor upon the host.
It's time that we brought everyday Jews and Muslims to that table. In the most political city in the melting pot that is America, peace -- or at least understanding and friendship -- might well take root via food.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/food-truck-will-deliver-message-of-mideast-peace/2013/01/25/b121ea7e-6665-11e2-93e1-475791032daf_story.html?hpid=z1
Throughout human history, the concept of breaking bread has had a powerful hold on our imaginations. Food, and the culture and traditions surrounding it, is one of the original methods of brokering peace. Back in the earliest days of homo sapiens, the acquisition of food was a costly group effort that strengthened the bonds within one's immediate community. In Ancient Greece, offering food and shelter to visitors became an integral part of upholding the honor of one's house. In many cultures, it was considered taboo to bring weaponry to the table, and any harm that befell a guest at one's table brought great dishonor upon the host.
It's time that we brought everyday Jews and Muslims to that table. In the most political city in the melting pot that is America, peace -- or at least understanding and friendship -- might well take root via food.
Monday, September 26, 2011
BBC: Saudi Women Gain Right to Vote!
Breaking news from yesterday:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15052030
Tangible fruits of the Arab Spring!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15052030
Tangible fruits of the Arab Spring!
Monday, January 10, 2011
NYTimes: The U.S.S Prius
A very interesting, ingenious mash-up of the sometimes-antagonistic causes of environmentalism and the Iraq war:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/opinion/19friedman.html
It's brilliant, isn't it? It's a perfect argument for reducing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil that appeals to not only the "bleeding-heart, granola-crunching" segment of the American populace (which is often analogous to preaching to the choir), but also to the more conservative, more militarily-minded constituency. Military initiative has historically been one of the greatest catalysts for technological innovation (look at the internet, for example). If the military sticks with this, really pushes it and invests in it, imagine what our carbon footprints might look like in ten years.
It's going to happen, it really is. Yes we can.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/opinion/19friedman.html
It's brilliant, isn't it? It's a perfect argument for reducing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil that appeals to not only the "bleeding-heart, granola-crunching" segment of the American populace (which is often analogous to preaching to the choir), but also to the more conservative, more militarily-minded constituency. Military initiative has historically been one of the greatest catalysts for technological innovation (look at the internet, for example). If the military sticks with this, really pushes it and invests in it, imagine what our carbon footprints might look like in ten years.
It's going to happen, it really is. Yes we can.
Monday, October 4, 2010
NYTimes: A Bible Reference, Hidden in a Computer Virus, Provides Clues to Origins
This sounds like something out of a Dan Brown novel:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/world/middleeast/30worm.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=homepage
The concept of calling cards (in this case, the sort left by a criminal, rather those of a Victorian houseguest) has always both irked and fascinated me. It's a terribly foolhardy move on the part of the hacker -- which is, I suppose the point of hacker bravado -- but also very interesting in that it's a much more sophisticated form of terrorism, specifically the claiming of a criminal act by a certain cause. It's a message and an act of war (well, pseudo-war), all in one.
So long as they don't start with Bible codes and whatnot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/world/middleeast/30worm.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=homepage
The concept of calling cards (in this case, the sort left by a criminal, rather those of a Victorian houseguest) has always both irked and fascinated me. It's a terribly foolhardy move on the part of the hacker -- which is, I suppose the point of hacker bravado -- but also very interesting in that it's a much more sophisticated form of terrorism, specifically the claiming of a criminal act by a certain cause. It's a message and an act of war (well, pseudo-war), all in one.
So long as they don't start with Bible codes and whatnot.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Italy Travelogue, Part 3: Vatican City
If you're ever in Rome, the Vatican is definitely worth seeing. It'll take a day, at least, but do go. It's chock-full of centuries of artwork and architecture, and not all of it is Catholic; some of the most famous classical sculptures are there. The pièce de résistance, of course, is the Sistine Chapel; disappointingly, but understandably, we were not allowed to photograph it. We did take pictures of lots of other things...
The Vatican Museums are home to some of the greatest artistic treasures in the world. Exhibit A -- Here's the marble of Laocoön and sons being strangled by Athena's sea serpents, the one that Pliny the Elder wrote about (Yes, I took Latin in high school, why do you ask?), one of the most celebrated statues from antiquity:
The story goes, Laocoön was a Trojan priest of Poseidon, who was in Poseidon's bad books because he took a wife and sired children (this is relevant only because his terrible luck and grisly death is sometimes attributed to the god's displeasure). Anyhow, he was one of the few Trojans who suspected that the Trojan horse was a ruse, and proposed that they set it on fire. Athena summoned a pair of giant snakes to strangle him and his sons. The Trojans then assumed that the horse was sacred (and that anyone who dared to harm it would meet a similarly nasty end), and so they brought the horse into Troy. I'm not sure who had it worse, Laocoön or Cassandra.
We also saw Raphael's even more famous The School of Athens:
This is often considered to be not only Raphael's finest piece, but also the very spirit of the Renaissance in painted form. The term itself, "Renaissance", means "rebirth", and the great artists and thinkers of the Renaissance felt a deep intellectual kinship with their Greco-Roman peers. It is only fitting that the spirit of the era is captured as Greek institution.
I had fun squinting up at it and trying to identify all the people in the painting, but I didn't get very far. The two figures in the middle (under the central arch) are Plato and Aristotle, in the red and blue mantles, respectively. Plato is supposed to be modeled on Leonardo da Vinci (and with that beard, I can see the resemblance). Michelangelo is in the middle on the bottom step (purple shirt and red pants, with his elbow on a box, looking bored), as a Greek painter (what else) of some importance. Raphael painted himself in, too, though I didn't find him until we got home. He's in the upper right, where the bottom of the arch meets the top of the pillar, next to the old man in the green cloak (he's wearing red and purple, too).
Fast-forwarding several centuries in art history, we come to Canova's Perseus, who is depicted in the style of the classical hero (read: naked), holding up the head of his slain foe (Medusa). Here he is:
I thought he looked rather familiar, and that's because he is. Canova made another Perseus, which is almost identical, and that one resides in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, so I've seen it before.
Canova's Perseus is one of the few post-Renaissance marbles to be exhibited so prominently in the Vatican Museums, and rightly so. He sculpted Perseus in the tail end of the Baroque era, when everything was excessively embellished (to the point of seeming nauseatingly garish), and manages to capture the hero triumphant, simple and clothed in little besides his own achievement.
The Vatican Museums also house a collection of artifacts of non-European antiquity. They have an excellent Egyptian wing, and also one with Near Eastern art. My sister and I were much amused to find, in the Assyrian section, this piece:
It's Birdman! (My sister is a better bird(wo)man than I am, I know; I have a terrible poker face.)
It's one of many long-standing points of reference for us. She currently attends the same middle school I did, and one of our favorite teachers is the inimitable Ms. Springer, archaeologist and historian extraordinare, who taught us sixth grade history. (She did a wonderful job of it, too; I was immensely surprised to find, in my Ancient Empires course reader, a passage from "Wen-Amon Goes to Phoenicia", which we read in sixth grade.)
Birdman was one of the most memorable characters from our Assyria unit. I still remember taking a field trip to the Met to see him; I thought he was enormous, back then. I spotted him in the Vatican all these years later, and we couldn't resist.
Of course, no trip to the Vatican is complete without a visit to St. Peter's Basilica. The lines were not as terrible as we'd feared (thank goodness!), and the inside was every bit as spectacularly grand as we'd imagined. I made a beeline for Michelangelo's most famous Pietà:
You'll have to click on it to get a closer view, and even then, it's still quite small; I was pressed up against the plexiglas wall, but I was still about a dozen feet away from it. Apparently, some crazy person tried to attack it with a hammer, and ended up chipping off Mary's nose, and so they won't let anyone get anywhere near it anymore. (Something similar happened to the David (who lost a few toes), and so there's a plexiglas shield around him, too.)
One of the first things anyone notices about the work is that Mary looks incredibly young. There's some debate about why this is; we know that Michelangelo made her deliberately so. Some say that it's an indication of her purity and favor with God; others say that she's actually supposed to be a young mother, and that she's holding her baby and having a premonition of her son's fate.
On the subject of Pietàs, I edited the Florence part to include some pictures from the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo that I oddly couldn't find the first time around, so scroll down if you're interested in one of Michelangelo's other Pietàs.
Well, that's Italy. It was a lot of fun (and a historian/erstwhile Latin student's dream). There was plenty we didn't get to see this time around, so I'd definitely want to go back sometime in the future!
The Vatican Museums are home to some of the greatest artistic treasures in the world. Exhibit A -- Here's the marble of Laocoön and sons being strangled by Athena's sea serpents, the one that Pliny the Elder wrote about (Yes, I took Latin in high school, why do you ask?), one of the most celebrated statues from antiquity:
The story goes, Laocoön was a Trojan priest of Poseidon, who was in Poseidon's bad books because he took a wife and sired children (this is relevant only because his terrible luck and grisly death is sometimes attributed to the god's displeasure). Anyhow, he was one of the few Trojans who suspected that the Trojan horse was a ruse, and proposed that they set it on fire. Athena summoned a pair of giant snakes to strangle him and his sons. The Trojans then assumed that the horse was sacred (and that anyone who dared to harm it would meet a similarly nasty end), and so they brought the horse into Troy. I'm not sure who had it worse, Laocoön or Cassandra.
We also saw Raphael's even more famous The School of Athens:
This is often considered to be not only Raphael's finest piece, but also the very spirit of the Renaissance in painted form. The term itself, "Renaissance", means "rebirth", and the great artists and thinkers of the Renaissance felt a deep intellectual kinship with their Greco-Roman peers. It is only fitting that the spirit of the era is captured as Greek institution.
I had fun squinting up at it and trying to identify all the people in the painting, but I didn't get very far. The two figures in the middle (under the central arch) are Plato and Aristotle, in the red and blue mantles, respectively. Plato is supposed to be modeled on Leonardo da Vinci (and with that beard, I can see the resemblance). Michelangelo is in the middle on the bottom step (purple shirt and red pants, with his elbow on a box, looking bored), as a Greek painter (what else) of some importance. Raphael painted himself in, too, though I didn't find him until we got home. He's in the upper right, where the bottom of the arch meets the top of the pillar, next to the old man in the green cloak (he's wearing red and purple, too).
Fast-forwarding several centuries in art history, we come to Canova's Perseus, who is depicted in the style of the classical hero (read: naked), holding up the head of his slain foe (Medusa). Here he is:
I thought he looked rather familiar, and that's because he is. Canova made another Perseus, which is almost identical, and that one resides in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, so I've seen it before.
Canova's Perseus is one of the few post-Renaissance marbles to be exhibited so prominently in the Vatican Museums, and rightly so. He sculpted Perseus in the tail end of the Baroque era, when everything was excessively embellished (to the point of seeming nauseatingly garish), and manages to capture the hero triumphant, simple and clothed in little besides his own achievement.
The Vatican Museums also house a collection of artifacts of non-European antiquity. They have an excellent Egyptian wing, and also one with Near Eastern art. My sister and I were much amused to find, in the Assyrian section, this piece:
It's Birdman! (My sister is a better bird(wo)man than I am, I know; I have a terrible poker face.)
It's one of many long-standing points of reference for us. She currently attends the same middle school I did, and one of our favorite teachers is the inimitable Ms. Springer, archaeologist and historian extraordinare, who taught us sixth grade history. (She did a wonderful job of it, too; I was immensely surprised to find, in my Ancient Empires course reader, a passage from "Wen-Amon Goes to Phoenicia", which we read in sixth grade.)
Birdman was one of the most memorable characters from our Assyria unit. I still remember taking a field trip to the Met to see him; I thought he was enormous, back then. I spotted him in the Vatican all these years later, and we couldn't resist.
Of course, no trip to the Vatican is complete without a visit to St. Peter's Basilica. The lines were not as terrible as we'd feared (thank goodness!), and the inside was every bit as spectacularly grand as we'd imagined. I made a beeline for Michelangelo's most famous Pietà:
You'll have to click on it to get a closer view, and even then, it's still quite small; I was pressed up against the plexiglas wall, but I was still about a dozen feet away from it. Apparently, some crazy person tried to attack it with a hammer, and ended up chipping off Mary's nose, and so they won't let anyone get anywhere near it anymore. (Something similar happened to the David (who lost a few toes), and so there's a plexiglas shield around him, too.)
One of the first things anyone notices about the work is that Mary looks incredibly young. There's some debate about why this is; we know that Michelangelo made her deliberately so. Some say that it's an indication of her purity and favor with God; others say that she's actually supposed to be a young mother, and that she's holding her baby and having a premonition of her son's fate.
On the subject of Pietàs, I edited the Florence part to include some pictures from the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo that I oddly couldn't find the first time around, so scroll down if you're interested in one of Michelangelo's other Pietàs.
Well, that's Italy. It was a lot of fun (and a historian/erstwhile Latin student's dream). There was plenty we didn't get to see this time around, so I'd definitely want to go back sometime in the future!
Thursday, August 26, 2010
NYTimes: Islam and the Two Americas
A very interesting Opinions piece on the precarious position of Islam in America:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/opinion/16douthat.html
It makes a very good point. America is a land of immigrants, but only to a point. We are an Anglo-normative nation, a Judeo-Christian society that prints "In God we trust" on our currency and proclaims "one nation, under God" in our pledge. Whosoever believes in a different god, or even (in this case) the same God by a different name in a different book, sometimes isn't quite American enough.
We profess to be a nation of religious freedom and cultural acceptance. We profess to have left behind our very embarrassing history of discrimination. We profess to welcome those of all colors and creeds. But in reality, with the World Trade Center mosque controversy and other instances of skittish xenophobia on the part of the white Judeo-Christian majority, we have a long ways to go towards those ideals.
At the same time, those same immigrants, being now a part of America, must also contribute to the growth process. The parties facing the steepest opposition must needs contribute the most. It is not fair, but it is necessary. It reminds me of the differences between the strategies of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X; while there is no denying that blacks should have had the same rights and freedoms as other Americans, the relevant legislation was achieved through nonviolent, costly, and arduous means. African-Americans should not have needed to do that -- they ought to have enjoyed the same rights as anyone else -- but it was necessary. Malcolm X, for all his agitation and righteous indignation, which were justified, did not achieve nearly the results that King did.
I guess it all boils down to a bit of common sense: while it is certainly within one's rights to say needlessly provocative things (to a point; see "Shouting 'Fire!' in a Crowded Theater"), it's often not beneficial to one's cause to say them (and this is a reality, no matter how one assigns the blame). What would you rather do, freely exercise your rights, or advance your cause by watching your mouth a little more carefully? The former is a Constitutionally protected right, but, in light of an unfortunate reality, it's also very selfish.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/opinion/16douthat.html
It makes a very good point. America is a land of immigrants, but only to a point. We are an Anglo-normative nation, a Judeo-Christian society that prints "In God we trust" on our currency and proclaims "one nation, under God" in our pledge. Whosoever believes in a different god, or even (in this case) the same God by a different name in a different book, sometimes isn't quite American enough.
We profess to be a nation of religious freedom and cultural acceptance. We profess to have left behind our very embarrassing history of discrimination. We profess to welcome those of all colors and creeds. But in reality, with the World Trade Center mosque controversy and other instances of skittish xenophobia on the part of the white Judeo-Christian majority, we have a long ways to go towards those ideals.
At the same time, those same immigrants, being now a part of America, must also contribute to the growth process. The parties facing the steepest opposition must needs contribute the most. It is not fair, but it is necessary. It reminds me of the differences between the strategies of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X; while there is no denying that blacks should have had the same rights and freedoms as other Americans, the relevant legislation was achieved through nonviolent, costly, and arduous means. African-Americans should not have needed to do that -- they ought to have enjoyed the same rights as anyone else -- but it was necessary. Malcolm X, for all his agitation and righteous indignation, which were justified, did not achieve nearly the results that King did.
I guess it all boils down to a bit of common sense: while it is certainly within one's rights to say needlessly provocative things (to a point; see "Shouting 'Fire!' in a Crowded Theater"), it's often not beneficial to one's cause to say them (and this is a reality, no matter how one assigns the blame). What would you rather do, freely exercise your rights, or advance your cause by watching your mouth a little more carefully? The former is a Constitutionally protected right, but, in light of an unfortunate reality, it's also very selfish.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Al Jazeera: Amnesty Report Slams Global Abuses
The usual culprits, of course: China, Russia, and the US. It's always those who aren't terribly concerned about repercussions in the international arena -- the US is no exception:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2010/05/2010527164537464311.html
It's so hard to be an optimist, sometimes.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2010/05/2010527164537464311.html
It's so hard to be an optimist, sometimes.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
NYTimes: Unlikely Tutor Giving Military Afghan Advice
This is wonderful. It's extremely promising. For once, someone's getting something right in the Middle East:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/world/asia/18tea.html?ref=books
Greg Mortenson, of Three Cups of Tea fame, is a great person to have onboard with regard to Afghan strategy. He's someone -- and probably one of the only Americans on the ground -- who's not only concerned with America winning the war, but with the ordinary people of the area winning the war. Here is a man who can advocate for them, for these people whose cause few others would step up to champion, who commands enough respect in America to make a difference for these people where they themselves cannot. I'm glad he's there, and I'm glad the military (and especially the military wives who pushed for him) is listening to him.
Incidentally, one of our imprints publishes Three Cups of Tea. I already read it, or I would have snagged a copy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/world/asia/18tea.html?ref=books
Greg Mortenson, of Three Cups of Tea fame, is a great person to have onboard with regard to Afghan strategy. He's someone -- and probably one of the only Americans on the ground -- who's not only concerned with America winning the war, but with the ordinary people of the area winning the war. Here is a man who can advocate for them, for these people whose cause few others would step up to champion, who commands enough respect in America to make a difference for these people where they themselves cannot. I'm glad he's there, and I'm glad the military (and especially the military wives who pushed for him) is listening to him.
Incidentally, one of our imprints publishes Three Cups of Tea. I already read it, or I would have snagged a copy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)