So. Well. Chris, the below-mentioned soil engineer (an environmentalist, but nothing to to with the Global Greens Congress) took me for a walk in Sao Paolo, because he knows his way around.
It was a city like any other city, although also completely unlike any other city, since every city is different from every other city, as indeed, every place different from every other place. I have a deep rooted aversion to cities generally, but I did like some of the architecture in SP; some of the towers look as if they have been designed by and for human beings.
The pavements are sh*te. Lovely mosaic cobbles, but falling to bits, and cobbles not replaced after pipe laying operations.
The trees are lovely, good natured and quiet, as indeed they are worldwide, but all different sorts, mainly unrecognisable, some with epiphytes, (didn't know that cheeseplants were epiphytes). Only ones I recognised were a few London Planes.
We made it to a park with art exhibitions. One was modern Japanese. I loved an environment room with flowers and little tables and chairs set out (little people size). Freya would love it. Flowers as art...hmm, revolutionary. Some of the flowers needed a bit of TLC though.
The other art stuff was interesting. One was a video of a girl in pink doing pink vomit. Not sure about that really. Definitely not up there with the Night Watch.
We had lunch and then visited the Afro-Brazil expo, which was much more the business. Huge cultural impact, historic artefacts, a blast from the past (I got v excited over woodworking tools and got told off. NO TOCAR is not some green slogan, it means don't touch).
There was a slave ship framework there, and a moving projection about slavery. Chris told me that we Brits were the first to get rid of slavery (yes I know it has not fully gone away yet), so a lifetime of campaigning by the anti-slavery movement ("The end of civilisation as we know it if you get rid of slaves") paid off. Lets see, human sacrifice stopped in the 9th century BC, slavery stopped in the 18-19th century; maybe militarism is next...
Bought a toothbrush.
Drank some Brazilian herb tea. Not sure about this.
Any Green Party members reading this - you are not paying for this day of cultural recreation. I am mainly self funding.
Must prepare for tomorrow. Thanks for reading.
Showing posts with label Art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Art. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Friday, September 21, 2007
Viks' Roundabout Dog
On June 11, 2007, Vilks was invited to participate in an art exhibition on the theme "The Dog in Art" (Swedish: Hunden i konsten) that was to be held in the small town of Tällerud in Värmland. Vilks submitted three pen and ink drawings on A4 paper depicting the Islamic prophet Muhammad as a roundabout dog. (Wikipedia) Controversy has followed.
This controversy is a kind of Koan - a putting together of two mutually irreconcilable principles. We in the West regard freedom of expression as inviolable, while Muslims regard the image of the Prophet as sacred. it is the irresistable force meeting the immovable object. Who gives way?
There is no answer that can satisfy both sides at this point in time. In years to come, Muslims will absorb a more Western approach, tolerating the views of others, accepting that not everyone believes as they do, and accepting that living in Western societies, they have to live with provocationists like Viks.
Meanwhile, Viks' action is probably setting back the day that Muslims learn to be tolerant. He is almost certainly strengthening the attitudes and influence of hard line Islamists, and weakening the position of Muslims who are learning to relax. This is not to say that Viks should not have done what he did, because in the same way, to say this would simply provoke him to do it again in spades.
What we can say is that if we value toleration, perhaps we should try to tolerate the sensitivities of Muslims with regard to the image of the Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him and upon all the world including provocationist artists).
This controversy is a kind of Koan - a putting together of two mutually irreconcilable principles. We in the West regard freedom of expression as inviolable, while Muslims regard the image of the Prophet as sacred. it is the irresistable force meeting the immovable object. Who gives way?
There is no answer that can satisfy both sides at this point in time. In years to come, Muslims will absorb a more Western approach, tolerating the views of others, accepting that not everyone believes as they do, and accepting that living in Western societies, they have to live with provocationists like Viks.
Meanwhile, Viks' action is probably setting back the day that Muslims learn to be tolerant. He is almost certainly strengthening the attitudes and influence of hard line Islamists, and weakening the position of Muslims who are learning to relax. This is not to say that Viks should not have done what he did, because in the same way, to say this would simply provoke him to do it again in spades.
What we can say is that if we value toleration, perhaps we should try to tolerate the sensitivities of Muslims with regard to the image of the Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him and upon all the world including provocationist artists).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)