Submission No. 13

John Hull, Pictures From Life's Other Side

Poverty. Scarcity. Hunger. Desperation. Just words. Little black letters on a white background.

Pain. Gasoline. Dirt. Infection.

Still just words.

Sweat. Smell. Blister. Ache. Nope. Still words. Can’t get past or around them to the thing behind them.

Despair. Sacrifice. Misery.

Damn. Oh well.

How do we reconcile our largely insulated lives, surrounded by words, words, words, airy plosives and humming vowels, with the world of actual needs that exists out there?

We live, so many of us, in a bubble of privilege, sustained by luck and 20th century technological breakthroughs and the short-term availability of fossil fuels — and, of course, made possible by other people’s labor. Thank you Chinese and Vietnamese and Malaysians and so many others all around the world, working 16 hour days or longer for nearly nothing!

Of course you want to object… The economy here is struggling! Unemployment remains stubbornly high! People worry about paying bills! Keeping their health insurance! This doesn’t feel like a bubble of privilege! Poverty and pain and misery are present here as well.

But I would bet that most of the people you know, if you have the time to read this, are doing unimaginably well, from the perspective of most of the other people in the world. Don’t get me wrong: I’m not talking about the superrich. I’m just pointing out that most of the people we encounter during the day, with few exceptions, take hot showers in the morning. They dab perfumed shampoo on their hair. They rinse, repeat. They treat themselves to foods they like, calorie-rich drinks, a biscotti just for a treat. They might even regularly pay more for organic, grass-fed beef, antibiotic-free eggs, a really not bad bottle of wine. They almost always wear freshly-laundered clothes. Last year, perhaps, someone you know bought a new car — such a thrill to drive it off the lot!

And most of the world knows… scarcity. Sacrifice. Mud and hunger all day long. Puss coming from that wound. Itching for months.

Still just words. We cannot enter it.

Can we do better if we try without words? Visual artists try to trigger mirror neurons. Photo-journalists take portraits of children in wartime. A filmmaker explores the desperation of a father searching for his stolen bicycle, needed to feed his family. Painters paint prostitutes and drug addicts. But does it work? We may gasp, even hold our heart, feel a rush of… our common humanity. But then we take a well-deserved break at the museum café — aren’t your feet tired? Make sure to order the sweet potato fries! They look way too tasty.

The rich are too often oblivious to the suffering of the poor because the poor are oblivious to the lives of the rich because the rich are oblivious to the suffering of the poor because the poor are… We are simply unable to experience cold on a hot day, and vice versa. We are insulated from one another by the limits of our experience.

The above image depicts a junkyard. A boy carries a mattress that he is presumably salvaging. A yellow truck, turned on its side, glows in the sun and leaks coolant or gasoline. The sky is blue, but the scene is one of decay and desperation. Who would want to carry a filthy mattress away from such a place? What conditions would drive a person to do this? We see another figure in the background — an even younger boy? He is standing on the front grill of a car, perhaps hoping to collect some scrap metal, or a pair of old windshield wipers.

Do we care about the figures in this painting? We feel that we do. We have… a feeling.

But do we really care as we gaze at them? I would suggest that we don’t, not really. (Though, importantly, I am certain that we would care if we stood there in real life.)

Does the artist care about these figures? Barely. (Though, importantly, I am certain that he would care if he stood there in real life… and perhaps did care when he was there once?)

He definitely shows a feel for color. He has balanced the yellows and reds and earth-tones and blues beautifully. There is a great deal of technique on display here. Also a religious imagery hovers over the painting (grrr…): the telephone pole at the center forms a cross, and the boy carrying the mattress is in a Christ-like pose, with his arms extended, his feet coming together, and his head slumped down. We are, I suspect, intended to sense that he is sacrificial in some way — for society, for the Western industrialized world, for the oppressors, for the victims like him, for his family, for his mother and father, something.

But really when we feel that warm, righteous, restless breeze, the feeling that stirs us as we gaze at this picture, we should remember that it is an aesthetic condition. It is not sympathy. If anything, it is self-love. This painting does not provoke us to act. It provokes us to admire, or at the very most, to regret. It is a passive condition that it depicts, and it is a passive condition that it inspires.

Should it do more? This is where it gets tricky. Art can do more: if it is employed as a means of propaganda. Or it can do more by expanding our imagination. These are the two options for changing the world with art. This painting fits squarely in the middle, and I would suggest that it does neither. It is weak propaganda — there is no villain, no sense of outrage, no course of action offered. But it also fails to expand our imagination. We already knew that some poor people search junkyards for salvageable goods. We already knew that they are weighted down by their limited access to resources and opportunities.

So what we have going here is one thing: it is pretty to look at.

This is not meant as a judgment. Seriously. Pretty to look at it is a lot! But we should be clear what this painting does, and not let our vague, nascent sense of self-love confuse us into thinking that our response to this painting proves our concern for our fellow human beings. We feel we care, we want to care… and sometimes we do care! But it is useful to remember that the ways in which we do care are demonstrated in how we act, not in what we find it pleasurable and stirring to see.

Advertisements

About Tom Clyde

The best place to learn about me is to read my riffs. What could be more revealing? Cheeky, maybe, but true enough.

3 comments

  1. Your read of a struggling boy (looks older than a boy to me, but let’s say he’s a boy) moving a dirty old mattress for no comfortable purpose is so plausible. I wonder, though, what if this is a painting of a different sort of character, say, an artist grabbing junk to build an installation? He has to use his own body to do it, if he let his assistants help, he wouldn’t be able to take the full measure of the materials.

    On the face of it, I think it’s unlikely. Knowing the work of the painter who made it, there’s a strong argument for accepting what’s on the surface, what’s self evident: a picture of struggle, of a junk yard and the downtrodden. And, yet, so much in art is self-portraiture, however oblique. (Emma Bovary, c’est moi, or something like that.) Is the artist on the _outside_ looking in, strictly an observer, organizing color and beauty? Or could this be a self-portrait — maybe of a man filled with self-pity: look at what I have to carry, and how and where…yet an artist filled with self-pity, carrying the burdens of his oddball trade, implies at least the chance of self-mockery, irony. At least the chance.

  2. Diana

    “The rich are oblivious to the suffering of the poor because the poor are oblivious to the lives of the rich.” This is not true. Like all oppressed people, people in poverty must conform to the norms of those in power–the rich–and are actually quite intimate with their lives: they clean your toilet, pick up your trash, take care of your children, wear your cast-off clothes, open your door, ask for spare change, and remain invisible to you the whole time. The ignorance that the rich have of the poor is a privilege that is not afforded to the poor, who must navigate the world of the rich. Your sentence implies that the poor are responsible for the rich being oblivious to their lives, “the rich are oblivious… BECAUSE the poor are oblivious….” No, the rich are oblivious because they do not have to take the poor into consideration. The rich are oblivious because the poor have no power. The rich are oblivious because poor people do not matter to them, and because our social construction allows rich people to ignore and dismiss them, the way that you have dismissed this painting.

    I can imagine several different interpretations of this painting that are not nearly so bleak or heavy-handed. Perhaps this man is not salvaging the mattress, but depositing it. Perhaps he works in the junk yard and is simply moving it from one place to another, and the boy behind him works there, too, and is taking a break in the sun. Perhaps a friend gave him a mattress, but not a boxspring, so rather than buying one, he resourcefully found one at the junkyard. Perhaps he is an artist and is salvaging the boxspring for the wood in its frame. Perhaps the junkyard is a place full of discarded treasures, i.e. Noah Purifoy: http://noahpurifoy.com/joshua_tree/joshua_tree.html

    There is no excuse for limited experience, or limited empathy. It is not difficult to learn about the experiences of those less fortunate than you if you choose to do so.

    • You have misunderstood this riff, I think. It is about how art can fail — how this painting, I thought, failed in a certain respect (though succeeded in others). How a work of art sometimes conforms to preconceived ideas and general appeals to sympathy — and does not inspire or provoke or expand our imaginations. This riff is also about the limits of cognition. It is not about whether rich people or poor people, speaking generally, know each other better. It is certainly not about a contest as to whether you are, or I am, better at feeling empathy. (Ready? Go!)

      The kind of righteous indignation you share in your comment (“no excuse for limited experience”!) is available to all of us, and is sometimes useful, and sometimes distracting… But that’s not what was being explored here.

      When I wrote that “the rich are oblivious to the suffering of the poor because the poor are oblivious to the lives of the rich,” of course I am not making an assertion that all rich people and all poor people have no idea of the minutia of the life of someone else not in their shoes. Some — on both sides! — do. And I am not saying, bizarrely, that the poor are somehow responsible for the rich being oblivious… The point (perhaps not so well expressed?) is we are all trapped by our insularity. The rich are this way because the poor are this way because the rich are this way because we are all this way, limited to our mediated experience of the world, hampered by our cognitive biases, our brain bugs. We need people, friends, art, to jolt us out, expand us, shock us, teach us, change us. This painting, in the riffer’s experience, did not do this.

      There are, it is true, many different possible explanations for what this person is doing (a man? I thought he looked young, but I’m happy to call him a man — certainly I meant no disrespect, as I feel no disrespect towards him). He may be a Martian in a human costume, investigating our trash, or our sleeping apparati, in order to report back to Galaxy 10. Not sure why those speculations are so important. I thought he was depicted as a martyr, and the painting was implying desperation or at the very least, drudgery.

      The fact is, it is easy to attack. It creates loops of disputation. But what do YOU feel from the painting? Or perhaps the point of your comment was to say what you felt when you read my riff? Apparently, your feeling was very righteous and disgusted at the dismissal of the poor by the riffer, who, apparently, has someone pick up his trash and doesn’t even bother to care? Right.

      Actually, I find that art is one means we have of increasing our ability to care. That’s why I think we should be honest about whether a given work succeeds in that or not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: