Comments on: Botero

Botero

Holly — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:39:42 -0800

Fernando Botero, the Colombian artist best-known for his odd and cute depictions of fleshy men and women, has just opened an exhibition in Rome featuring his own interpretations of the Abu Ghraib abuses. Expect to be shocked all over again - which is apparently exactly what he wants. (Link in Spanish).

By: infini

infini — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:53:44 -0800

more horrifying than the photographs. thank you for the link.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:05:05 -0800

stunning.

By: jonson

jonson — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:21:09 -0800

All the more shocking since it comes from an artist whose images have always made me smile, and have never carried (to my eyes) a hint of malice. Weird that he would choose to take this course of action, artistically.

By: mr.marx

mr.marx — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:28:32 -0800

wow. thanks for the link. wow.

By: ori

ori — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:42:47 -0800

not that surprising, considering he would copy goyas as a student. regardless, i think there is something vile about appropriating the suffering of those who were (and possibly continue to be) brutalized. this is not his story to tell. i see here nothing but the selfsame endlessly reproduced photos, which themselves have become media clichés and now stand as little more than generic expressions of US brutality, translated into an even more cartoonish, vacuous dimensions. if there is a way to restore a genuine human dimension of suffering to these scenes, he is not the person to do it, and this is not the way it is to be done.

By: longsleeves

longsleeves — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:44:39 -0800

Thanks for this link. It makes me furious all over again. By the way, volunteer torturer Lynndie England wore the first maternity combat camoflage I have seen.

By: ori

ori — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:44:55 -0800

and jonson, i think you should look a little closer. his images were always extremely menacing beneath the surface [man with a dog, 1989]

By: tsarfan

tsarfan — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:49:31 -0800

terrific link! thanks!

By: HyperBlue

HyperBlue — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:56:35 -0800

orl, this is a story for anyone/everyone to tell and/or document by whatever method is most effective. Botero's images are extremely effective. [ditto infini]

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:57:10 -0800

regardless, i think there is something vile about appropriating the suffering of those who were (and possibly continue to be) brutalized. this is not his story to tell. What the fuck? I have no idea what you mean by that. If he is outraged by the idea of what happened, then he has every right to try to communicate that outrage. Is Steven Spielberg profiting from the holocaust by making Shindler's List? In this thread and the one about insomnia_lj's photos we get self-righteous people complaining about the motives of the person creating or distributing the images, rather then what the images convey. I think the images were good at convening emotion, if you don't think so, that's fine. but I don't see how it's possible to criticize him for simply trying, unless you wish they would just go away.

By: fungible

fungible — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:16:53 -0800

He's a great artist with a wonderful style, and this is a political action worth taking for him. Still, I can't help but think: It looks like they're torturing Cabbage Patch kids.

By: HTuttle

HTuttle — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:37:45 -0800

Those were pretty funny. Nothing like hopping on the band wagon.

By: andrew cooke

andrew cooke — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:52:13 -0800

seems like artists can still do something, even if it's only poking small people into making stupid comments.

By: lazymonster

lazymonster — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:57:59 -0800

I've not been a big fan of his (with the exception of a few amusing sculptures), but I think these are pretty powerful. I understand how it might seem distasteful and these are fairly literal, but some people have a very hard time looking at photographs or video footage, they just shut them out. Sometimes this is exactly what it takes to get those people engaged. I think the Spielberg comparison is spot on.

By: cookie-k

cookie-k — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:34:55 -0800

"...unless you wish they would just go away." Bingo.

By: undule

undule — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:46:36 -0800

It is a little odd he'd be so outraged at the US abuses -- he's Columbian for chrissakes. Lord knows nothing outrageous has ever happened there . . . That said, interesting work. It's simultaneously banal, cute and vaguely disturbing/profitable. Is Steven Spielberg profiting from the holocaust by making Shindler's List? Is this a trick quesiton? Yes, he is profiting from the Holocaust, obviously. The film made money, right?

By: nervousfritz

nervousfritz — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:48:45 -0800

G's US! Get it? What are these people praying to? Frickin UFOs? Keep up the good work.

By: Steve_at_Linnwood

Steve_at_Linnwood — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:03:35 -0800

All this 'outrage' must be great for business.

By: vacapinta

vacapinta — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:09:23 -0800

It is a little odd he'd be so outraged at the US abuses -- he's Columbian for chrissakes. Lord knows nothing outrageous has ever happened there . . . This is addressed in the link. My translations: Q: Why did you decide to paint this series regarding the events of Abu Ghraib? A: Because of the ire I and the entire world felt regarding this crime, committed by the nation which had presented itself as a model of compassion, justice and civilization. Q: When you were creating these works did you feel any connection between [these events and the violence in Colombia]? A: No. The situations are entirely distinct. The violence in Colombia almost always is the product of ignorance, lack of education and social injustice. The events at Abu Ghraib, however, was a crime commited by the greatest military organization of the world which had willfuly decided to disregard the tenets of the Geneva Convention regarding the treatment of prisoners. That said, artistically, I've always thought of Botero as a hack. This seems like an attempt to put himself back in the spotlight.

By: ori

ori — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:47:00 -0800

Q: Why did you decide to paint this series regarding the events of Abu Ghraib? A: Because of the ire I and the entire world felt regarding this crime, committed by the nation which had presented itself as a model of compassion, justice and civilization. everyone tortures, kids, and iran also presents itself as the vanguard of morality. but botero is not drawing zahra kazemi anytime soon. he is riding the ripples of a cultural cliche. it's hard to say what qualifies a person to tell a story -- it is not neccessarily a shared ethno-religious identity with the victims (i think w.g. sebald's book austerlitz is a superb example). probably it is a certain painful comprehension of the anguish of others -- either through personal association or a more tenuous, metaphoric, but no less legitimate association. i don't think he understands the hurt and shame this causes to the islamic world, or the horror this is causing to the concentious in the west. i think he's just replicating the pop culture OMGWTF! reaction. and inflating the girth. not much more. fwiw, i also find schiendler's list problematic on many, many levels.

By: ori

ori — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:49:46 -0800

even still, it's not hard to understand why a jew still feels the ripples of the holocaust. the connection is a bit more tenuous when we talk petit-bourgeois latin american artists with genteel european education painting about the US/Islamic world rift. what, did he really feel betrayed by abu gharib? i'd bet money he wasn't a fan of US foreign policy way beforehand.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:51:11 -0800

"All this 'outrage' must be great for business." I bet it really is. Still the 'outrage' seems warranted. " I've always thought of Botero as a hack" Sort of like Thomas Kinkade filtered through Gabriel García Márquez?

By: signal

signal — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:59:06 -0800

He's not Columbian, he's Colombian. If your going to display your ignorance, please do it with more aplomb.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:07:09 -0800

delmoi writes "In this thread and the one about insomnia_lj's photos we get self-righteous people complaining about the motives of the person creating or distributing the images, rather then what the images convey. " This is 2005. Americans would rather shoot the messenger than hear the news.

By: TimothyMason

TimothyMason — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:26:05 -0800

Whether you have the right to tell a story or not depends on whether you tell it well. It is pointless to ask the story-teller why they did not tell another story. Look to the one they told. Did Botero tell this story well enough to earn the right to tell it? It is difficult to make a judgement when all we see is a set of jpgs. One would have to go to the exhibition. But from what we do see, it appears that Botero places his work within a long tradition in Xian and post Xian art of the depiction of suffering and torture. This is something which such photographs of Abu Ghraib as I have seen do not appear to do.

By: Joybooth

Joybooth — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:30:44 -0800

I think he's bringing the images of Abu Ghraib to the Colombians who haven't seen the pics (but how many can their be?) and cashing in his chips with an unpredicted change to his grotesque style. God! I hate his stuff.

By: orthogonality

orthogonality — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:38:02 -0800

jonson writes "All the more shocking since it comes from an artist whose images have always made me smile, and have never carried (to my eyes) a hint of malice. Weird that he would choose to take this course of action, artistically." "Now is the time for all good men...."

By: TimothyMason

TimothyMason — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 02:41:32 -0800

Hate his stuff? Well ... I always seem to see him alongside Paula Rego, and he certainly suffers by the comparison. But why hate?

By: fire&wings

fire&wings — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 03:10:00 -0800

Wow, those are exceptional paintings, they immediately remind me of Jean Fouqet. I have never even heard of this guy before, great post.

By: marxchivist

marxchivist — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 04:25:55 -0800

All this 'outrage' must be great for business. But not as good for business as Bush's war in Iraq has been to Cheney and his friends at Haliburton.

By: effwerd

effwerd — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 05:38:06 -0800

Are there any other rules of artistic inspiration and qualifications to produce art that we should know about, ori?

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:57:15 -0800

By: Jody Tresidder

Jody Tresidder — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:16:06 -0800

So ori joins Susan Sontag as the other person who bought into the deadly preciousness of Sebald's "Austerlitz"? (No problems with the theme - but oh the excruciatingly mannered writing and structure.)

By: djlerman

djlerman — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 12:46:55 -0800

One point that I think is being missed is that not all news outlets or mass media would present the original pictures. These definitely will be picked up and displayed in more places. So less people will be able to plead ignorance of what was happening.

By: ori

ori — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 12:56:38 -0800

Are there any other rules of artistic inspiration and qualifications to produce art that we should know about, ori? posted by effwerd at 5:38 AM PST on June 22 [!] wait, are you suggesting that an artist who has appropriated an overtly political issue as his theme, and defends this choice of theme on political grounds (see above), should be held impervious to political suspicions? ars longa and all that but the artist (specifically this artist) does not exist in a vacuum, channelling the the spirit of the muses into abstract geomtries.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:24:44 -0800

an artist who has appropriated an overtly political issue as his theme ... see Guernica.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:26:02 -0800

"Initial reaction to the painting is overwhelmingly critical. The German fair guide calls Guernica "a hodgepodge of body parts that any four-year-old could have painted." It dismisses the mural as the dream of a madman. Even the Soviets, who had sided with the Spanish government against Franco, react coolly. They favor more overt imagery, believing that only more realistic art can have political or social consequence. Yet Picasso's tour de force would become one of this century's most unsettling indictments of war." [source]

By: ori

ori — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:28:15 -0800

i also don't think it is necessary to locate my criticism on a biographical level. the paintings themselves are, as TimothyMason points out, after the tradition of christian art meant to evoke pity for and reverence toward the suffering of martyrized saints. since the overwhelming majority of abu gharib prisoners are muslim, their torture carries different moral overtones, especially ones of shame and humiliation. i don't want to presume to speak for the victims of the torture and their communities, but i'd be curious to hear what they think. what with all the talk of an american crusade, something tells me they wouldn't be so grateful for having the unique humiliation this causes in the muslim world paved over with overtly christian representation. i think botero's art serves the needs of self-righteous westerners more than it honors the suffering of the victims.

By: ori

ori — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:34:27 -0800

ericb, if you can't differenciate between works of art like picasso's guernica and botero's cheap political opportunism, i don't know that i could convince you of anything.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:39:03 -0800

That's your position - "botero's cheap political opportunism." But, hey, maybe I'm just not as intelligent and cultured as you to understand what "art" really is.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:52:11 -0800

Hmmm…let me see if there are any parallels. Pablo Picasso “generally avoid[ed] politics - and disdain[ed] overtly political art.” “On April 27th, 1937, unprecedented atrocities are perpetrated on behalf of Franco against the civilian population of a little Basque village in northern Spain….Guernica burns for three days. Sixteen hundred civilians are killed or wounded.” “By May 1st, news of the massacre at Guernica reaches Paris….Picasso is stunned by the stark black and white photographs. Appalled and enraged, Picasso rushes through the crowded streets to his studio, where he quickly sketches the first images for the mural he will call Guernica. His search for inspiration is over.” [source] ------------------------------------------------------- “Botero has taken his sharpest departure yet from his normally placid scenes of chubby people and other still life paintings and sculptures….He told The Associated Press that he became so upset by prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison that he felt compelled to produce works that would graphically depict it.” ‘No one would have ever remembered the horrors of Guernica if not for the painting,’ said Botero, referring to Pablo Picasso's masterpiece ‘Guernica,’ which depicts the aerial bombardment of civilians during the Spanish Civil War. [source] ------------------------------------------------------- Two artists, each not known for using their art for political statements. Each views photographs of the atrocities of war and uses their outrage as inspiration to communicate their reactions to these events in their artistic expression. The latter artist even compares his efforts to those of the former in an Associated Press interview.

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:56:39 -0800

It is a little odd he'd be so outraged at the US abuses -- he's Columbian [sic] for chrissakes. Lord knows nothing outrageous has ever happened there . . . BTW - "This is not the first time that Botero has depicted violence. About six years ago, he began painting scenes of bloodshed in Colombia. One such canvas, on display in a Medellin museum, shows Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar being killed by police during a rooftop shootout. Last year, Botero held an exhibition in Bogota about Colombia's 40-year-old guerrilla conflict." [source]

By: ericb

ericb — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:30:35 -0800

It is a little odd he'd be so outraged at the US abuses... Oh, that's right ... only citizens of the U.S. are entitled to be outraged - at least us "liburals" who have a twisted view of things.

By: effwerd

effwerd — Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:33:04 -0800

wait, are you suggesting that an artist who has appropriated an overtly political issue as his theme, and defends this choice of theme on political grounds (see above), should be held impervious to political suspicions? I have no problem with being suspicious of his motives. It's when you delve into saying he isn't qualified to make such an artistic political statement or take issue with his source of inspiration. I would think, as an artist, he is qualified to make whatever political statement he'd like through his art. And where he finds his inspiration is up to him.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:45:14 -0800

this is not his story to tell. The tragedy in all of this, seeing the comments in this thread, is that art reflecting this war is so rare. I don't quite understand the reasons, but in my ideal world people would have been snarky about this tread because it was "another war art post" rather than "what a cheap political opportunist hack." When we look at where we are and how powerless we feel, we must ask how loud the chorus actually is...