Bringing the War Home: Martha Rosler.

Cleaning the Drapes from the Series House Beautiful: Bringing the War Home. Martha Rosler, 1967-72. Pigmented inkjet print (photomontage), printed 2011, 17 5/16 x 23 ¾” (44 x 60.3 cm). MoMA Photography Collection

Martha Rosler's famous photomontages exemplify the active fluidity of signs and signification as they are utilized in the artistic and visual languages present in deconstructionist theory. Rosler’s work derives from a practice of analysis, classification, and appropriation of photographs from the media that impacted America during the Vietnam War. The so-cherished images of the feminine mystique and the contemporary American family home unit, juxtaposed with the ones of war and masculinity, present not just a paradoxical relationship, but a paradigmatic one too. There is no possible fixation or certainty of the viewer on affirming whether the two material and psychological spaces represent the private/public duality of the inner/outer space.  The foreground is openly exposed to the public, while the window in the background presents a new dimensionality. The scenes depicted here represent rejections of two interwoven facets of American culture: the grim and institutionalized entitlements of imperialism and patriarchy. 

The idyllic image of the American housewife, alienated from the real world by the institutions of home, family, marriage, and marketplaces, takes on an aura of horror and despair against the image of the soldiers at war. The apparent contrasting image unveiled by the woman happily vacuum-cleaning the patterned yellow curtains disassembles the warm qualities of the ideal home by bleaching its colorful brightness into the colorless duotones of black and white, serving as a metaphor for the various “oppositional” binaries imposed by structure, fixed systems, and masculine values. The material “advantages” advertised by the masters of consumer products that purport to “improve” the domestic life of suburban housewives through commercial innovations are brilliantly revealed by Rosler to actually be linked to the moral turpitude of global imperialism. The various gadgets and appliances marketed to housewives can also be seen as objects of distraction that, through constant purchase and upgrading, sufficiently occupy the attention and obfuscate the conscience, so as to otherwise prevent a reckoning between the bourgeoisie trappings of the developing suburban United States and the cost paid in lives by the recipients of imperialist US foreign policy. The phallic power of the vacuum cleaner in the hands of the woman contrasted with that of guns in the hands of the men reflects their interconnectedness further. Rosler’s intent here is clear. 

Barthes’ ‘Death of the Author’ not only liberated the demons of the artist aspiring to become God, but also opened up a space for the communion and strengthening of female voices, no longer standing alone. Barbara Kruger’s statement: “Your Body is a Battleground”, extends beyond the boundaries of the flesh. It is also represented in the works of many other feminist artists, including Martha Rosler, Laurie Simmons, and Louis Bougeoius, who also recontextualized and exposed the battles of home, market artifacts, public life, and so on. Through the blurred boundaries of private and public life, as revealed through the unveiling of the house’s window, Rosler breaks up the barriers of the coffin/box and challenges the contingency of binaries posited by structuralism, later countered by deconstructionist theory, exposing the interdependent nature of apparent opposites and the vanishing distinctions between the material and psychic life.

Everything Will Be Taken Away

Everything Will Be Taken Away # 21. Adrian Piper, 2010- 2013. Chalk on vintage black boards (Installation), 120 cm x 250 cm. 56th Venice Biennale, 2015

Adrian Piper’s artwork derives in its entirety from her life experiences and is an embodiment of the paradoxical racial categories assigned to her. From this inner window, her cathartic autobiographical art practice comes forth into the world in a way that is both personal and universally relevant. The piece entitled Everything Will Be Taken Away # 21, is part of a larger body of work entitled ‘Everything’  that started in 2003 in the midst of the artist’s long crisis in a legal battle against her former employer, Wellesley College where she was a philosophy professor. Due to the hostile working environment she was in, and several confrontations with the institution, Piper filed suit, and eventually left the United States after an unfavorable ruling.

 As her professional situation, health, finances, and emotional well-being deteriorated, as commented on by the artist in her travel memoir ‘Escape to Berlin’ , with great disappointment Piper decided to process her emotions by collecting her personal photographic memories of her now “questionable” friendships. She encountered the reality that many of the platonic and professional relationships she had were premised not on genuine affection, but on convenience and calculating self-interest. The photographs used at the first stage of the series were originally taken for the work ‘I am Some Body, The Body of my Friends’ (1995), produced after the artist’s mother passed away and who, from Piper’s words, was her only ‘real friend’. As a result of the new interpretation for the ‘Everything’ series, the same images were transformed into enlarged photocopies in black and white, printed onto ¼” ruled graph paper. 

The faces were erased by wearing away the image and the paper,  and the text ‘Everything will be taken away’  was overprinted in a “dried blood” color; one of the main signatures of Adrian Piper’s work.

I Am Some Body, The Body of My Friends, 1992-1995. Suite of 18 “selfie” photographs, 15 color and 3 black and white, each 12”x 8" (30,5 cm x 23,3 cm). #95003. Photo credit: Galeria Emi Fontana. Collection of the Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin. © APRA Foundation Berlin.

Most of the people depicted in these photographs are the same unresponsive friends that caused great disappointment to the artist during the time of her collapse.

The act of fading away these people's faces along with her own, was a performative act of disconnection and vanished trust. ‘Everything’ unfolded as a spiritual exercise of becoming aware of the disconcerting fact that we stand alone in the world or what she calls “the illusion of community”. The entire series develops from this repetition of the mantra ‘Everything will be taken away’ as a symbolic reminder of the impermanence of life, recalling the Latin cliche’ Memento Mori (‘Remember that you must die’).  

Everything # 5.2, 2004. Plexiglas wall corner insert engraved with gold leaf text, 24 " x 48" (61 cm x 121.9 cm). #08037.2. Photo credit: Andrej Glusgold. Collection of the Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin. © APRA Foundation Berlin.

Many displays have been created from this performance. The deteriorating state of the artist who at the time was fighting cancer while also dealing with the aforementioned legal issues was channeled in the piece analyzed here: Everything Will Be Taken Away # 21.  The relevant significance of this work goes beyond the borders of any particular institution. As the experience embodied within the artist’s life is a testament of the many political/racial issues in America, her participation as a member of this educational institution not just informs, but also relates to those who do not occupy the aristocratic “1%”.

Witches’ Sabbath by Goya

Witches’ Sabbath (Spanish: El Aquelarre). Francisco Goya, 1819 - 1823 Madrid. Oil on mural transferred to canvas, 43 cm x 30 cm (17 in x 12 in). Museo del Prado, Madrid, Spain.

Goya’s ‘Black Paintings’ series includes a total of fourteen frescos that were added to walls in dining and sitting rooms of the Quinta de Sordo (Deaf Man's Villa) where Goya lived at the time. The mural was removed from the property in 1874 and transferred onto canvas painting. Witches Sabbath (El Aquelarre) depicts a group of women and babies gathering around a large goat. The goat’s shape is entirely animal, but it holds an anthropomorphic sitting posture. Its horns are adorned with a crown of green fig leaves, and its limbs are spread open towards the group. 

The goat's upper left limb points towards the only smiling woman looking at the sky with her child in arms, and whose look seems to be the healthiest depicted of all. In contrast, the goat’s bottom left limb points towards the oldest woman; the woman dressed in black is offering a skeleton child to the goat. Next to her in the foreground, the back of a woman with a yellow dress and headscarf covers the entirety of her body and face, while a pair of baby legs are escaping out her coverage. At the end of the row, there are two women. One woman is in a white dress looking towards the youngest woman and behind her rests the skeleton of a dead child. At the end of the circle, to the right side of the goat, an uncanny looking woman with an uncovered torso, holds an awkward posture almost like trying to take something from the other woman’s hands. Right behind her is a stick anchored to the ground holding the little bodies of hanged children. In the background, mountains merge with dreamlike feminine faces under a black sky, flying bats, and an inverted crescent moon. This and other paintings from the ‘Black Paintings’ series have been on view since 1889 after the Baron Emile d’Erlanger acquired “La Quinta” and donated them to the State. Most of the paintings from this series are currently found in the Museo del Prado’s collection in Madrid.

Liberty Leading the People

Liberty Leading the People. Eugene Delacroix, 1830. Oil on canvas, 260 x 325 cm. Musee du Louvre

Delacroix’s painting was created as a commemoration of the July revolution of 1830 in France. As the focal point, a barefoot/ bare-breasted woman (Liberty) wearing a Phrygian cap lifts the French flag with her right hand and holds a rifle with the left while guiding a crowd of energetic men towards the leading edge of the frame. Dead corpses lying in the foreground and the vestiges of a broken barricade form a kind of pedestal where liberty stands. At her feet, a man looks at her with hopeful devotion, at her left a young boy wearing working clothes raises a pistol, and to her right a bourgeois man stands in front of the rest of the angry crowd.

Delacroix was the leader of the French Romantic school, and a great source of inspiration for the impressionist and symbolist movement. From a very early age, his artistic qualities were quickly recognized and awarded. Delacroix's artistic career was anonymously supported in great part  by Talleyrand, a friend of the family who claimed to be his real father, allowing him to preserve his authentic and exotic creative passions. While taking political stands, his vision was not mediated by patrons. In the case of his most influential painting, Liberty Leading People, the symbolic meaning of the piece goes beyond any nationalistic premise. Even though it has grounds on the actual historical moment, the painter’s interest was not the glorification of this event . The cultural value in this symbolic depiction has its very grounds on freedom. The decision to hide this piece by the French government is a clear sign of its power; for them Liberty Leading People was “too revolutionary”.  

First, it is essential to notice the differences in the social class of the subjects depicted. The bourgeoisie is represented by the one man with a rifle on the right wearing a top hat and a black suit. He is self absorbed in worry and his eyes point to nowhere in the picture frame. Behind him, a man with working clothes raises a sword and his disposition seems far more energetic. The attitude and proximity of these two subjects in Marxist terms is a necessary condition for revolution and the liberation of all people, including the working class. Here, the crowd signifying the proletariat class is totally engaged and outraged. The emancipatory political message of this piece explains the disruption it caused inside of the French government when displayed at the museum’s palace for fear of setting a “bad example”. 

It is also relevant to highlight the closest subject to Liberty crawling at her feet. The very first thing to notice is the use of color on the man’s clothes which depict the tricolor French flag in the exact same order. The red kerchief also represents the working class in relationship to the red Phrygian cap of Liberty which signifies freedom. His helplessness looks up to her with a hopeful attitude. The subject finds in the the only woman depicted the fierce strength and determination that takes to break a barricade towards freedom.

***

    Liberty, also known as Marianne, has a long story of praises and punishments as the National personification of the French Republic. Freedom, equality, fraternity, and reason are some of the qualities attributed to this honorable Goddess since the French Revolution. Coins, postal stamps, and even the official government currency depicted her. The history of Liberty is one of the great personifications of the unending struggles accounted by contemporary feminists still prevailing in our current time. 

The very first depiction of Liberty goes back to Joan of Arc, a heroine/ martyr who helped the liberation of France from the English domination during the Hundred Years’ War. At the age of 19 on May 30, 1431, during the time of the inquisition, she was captured and burned alive by the hands of French betrayers allied with the English. In 1803 she was declared a National symbol by Napoleon Bonaparte and subsequently beatified and canonized.

The youthful Marianne as the goddess of Liberty, also as a representation of female strength, prevailed as the symbol of the new and liberated French People, and the defeat of the old monarchy ruled by kings until the third Republic. But the struggle against patriarchal dominance still prevails today. 

In need of radical solutions, the revolutionaries replaced the neutral and conservative depiction of Marianne for a more rebellious, fierce and determined bare-breasted woman, recalling the Greek goddess Athena. This reaction is truly subversive from a feminist viewpoint. When thinking of the enormous volume of religious and ultra-conservative imagery of bourgeois women at the time, we can understand the emancipatory value of this depiction. But this image was not all praise. Even in modern times we could recall the 2012 campaign ‘Free the Nipple’ in New York, which raises awareness about gendered disparities in civil liberties and conventions regarding toplesness. Thinking about the relationship between the French Marianne and the Statue of Liberty in New York, it becomes relevant to ask: what is the liberating power of women? 

Marianne’s breasts were covered on multiple occasions in search of a more conservative depiction. On multiple occasions, such representations, as the one from Delacroix, were qualified as “too revolutionary”. Later on in 1879, the image of the bare-breasted Marianne was uncovered again and reappropriated by workers as a representative of the social and democratic republic. Many other examples account for the inflammatory character of her powerful image in the eyes of male-driven governments. In fact, what once represented the abolition of corruption and shame in the image of Liberty, was now being shamed and denigrated. 

The representation of Marianne, while still being a unifying symbol for the French people during the third republic, was subjected to all kinds of sabotages and misogynistic “ jokes”  by counter-revolutionaries and German militants. Despite the signing of the Cordial Agreement in April 1904 between the United Kingdom and the French Republic being represented by depictions of Marianne and Britannia shaking hands as a sign of peace between both countries, many others sexualized and defamed her visage. John Bull, Wilhelm II, key figures in the event, were drawn alongside Marianne in German and British propaganda, being shown in vulgar scenarios filled with judgemental innuendo.

The right-wing counterpart of the revolution and the xenophobic over masculine power of German militarism both frequently portrayed Marianne as a hysterical, promiscuous woman, suggesting that she was a prostitute. Her image was used to depict the French government and its people as “weak” and “feminine”. The ridicule placed upon the image of this great female heroine mirrors the legacy of the macho culture still prevailing in modern times. Here, it is imperative to re-evaluate these phenomena of the degradation of her visage from the feminist perspective: This splitting of the female character into two oppositional parts, the saint “pure” woman and the prostitute, has been one of the main strategies of patriarchy to keep women away from support networks and imprisoned in restrictive constructs of idealized family units. The very nature of women and our need for unifying these questionable poles, including the one of the powerful and powerless, is expressed in the craving of the modern woman to consume sexualized products such as high heels, beauty products, and sensual clothing, while putting their bodies on display. So, is the fire from Liberty’s torch coming from the punishment and judgment placed by men around women’s public lives? I do not think so. Freud would cleverly attest that the only cause of hysteria was actually the lack of women’s sexual freedom. So, yes, as we probably have experienced, men can also be hysterical.

Liberating the woman’s breast carries deep political and symbolic importance in the feminist perspective. It is not random that the female nipple is still very censored in contemporary society, including social media. Even the milky Madonna, censured from the religious iconography, seems to be subversive, and people still take the sight of a breastfeeding mother as prompt to make derisive comments. This ignores the irony that all people of the world come from a woman’s womb and are nurtured by her breast. Is the double power of female nurturance and sexuality, in fact, what inspires the reactive fear of patriarchal institutions? There are answers for all human struggles for liberation found in the character of Liberty, as Delacroix and many others came to realize very cleverly. The young revolutionary woman with a nurturing breast, wildly free and determined to fight for her people, standing up from the ruins of men’s war and violence, is the answer to freedom. Maybe, in the romantic world of Delacroix Marianne, Britannia and Germannia not only just shake their hands, but embrace each other, honoring their strength to fight in this deadly world created by men.

The procuress by Gerard Van Honthorst.

The procuress, Gerard van Honthorst, 1625. w104 x h71 cm, oil painting, Central Museum

“An old secret fire burns between us, giving sparse light and ample warmth. The primordial fire that conquers every necessity shall burn again, since the night of the world is wide and cold, and the need is great.”

— From -Memories, Dreams, Reflections

    The Dutch painter Gerard Van Honthorst, very well known for his lit scenes, symbolizes with this painting the creative fire and erotic life extensively analyzed by Carl Jung’s psychoanalytic theories, and embodied in this artwork by the beauty of the prostitute and her relationship with the other two subjects. First of all, it is important to account for the importance behind the uses of dark scenes and plays of shadows from a psychoanalytic perspective, a formula that made Honthorst very famous and was explored by Jung’s studies. Based on Jungian psychoanalysis, darkness is the very place to kindle the light of meaning, it is the unconscious part of our psyche where dreams and myth are created. By the very act of painting, besides the portrayal of very confined, dark environments, the artist evokes the darkness of consciousness.

    The focal point of this painting resides primarily on the young prostitute who gracefully shines lighted by the candle fire. Even though the silhouette and back of the young man take on special prominence at the foreground of the painting, his body has been placed on the side of the shadow leaving only a few clear details to the sight of the viewer. The Shadow archetype is one of Jung’s most mentioned themes, referring to the unknown aspects of our minds and the more primitive part of ourselves. Also, the shadow is what separates the ego from the real world, which could be related to the fact that the men and the young prostitute do not join their hands but in the meeting of their shadows. Here it is accurate to focus on the feathered hat and the lute, both highly sexual symbols, the latter object possessing a double masculine and feminine character. This instrument has been used as a phallic symbol as much as to symbolize the female body. The Flemish for lute – luit – also  meant vagina, and in Dutch art the instrument is often carried by prostitutes*. So we could infer by this shadow projection on the lute that the craving and desire for union, physical and psychological, still lurks in the unconscious. This trinity of subjects unified at its core by the light of the candle possesses a divine nature. Even the prostitutes are very often depicted in celestial blue garments alluding to the Holy Mary. The personifications of this trinity varies depending on its psychological origin: the father, the son, and the holy ghost are the most known to us based on Christian mythology, and for the case of this triad, the old woman, the begotten son, and the prostitute. The interpretation of this work is vast and complex due to the individual character of the subjects and objects displayed in relationship with each other. 

    As an example, the archetype of the old woman, also known as Hecate in the world of Greek mythology, has been defined in great depth (entire books have been dedicated to this archetype) by contemporary Jungian analysts such as Dr. Clarissa Pinkola Estes, who has described this particular character as ‘the one who stands in between the worlds of rationality and mythos’, ‘The One Who Knows’, and for the case of this artwork between the world of men and the one of divine beauty, pleasure, and creation. The old woman embodies the ageless land of mysteries and creation; she is the one who gives the fire to the initiated, the bridge between the mundane and the sacred, where poetry, dance, stories, and music are some of the instruments that allows us to experience it. Many other psychological symbols of transformation, such as the creative fire, also analyzed by Jungian theories, reveals the complexity of this work and its significance which goes beyond the depiction of a scene. 

-Estés, Clarissa Pinkola. Women Who Run with the Wolves : Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype. New York :Ballantine Books, 1992.

-Jung, C. G. The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Princeton, N.J. :Princeton University Press, 1980.

-Jung, C. G. 1875-1961. 1973. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Pantheon Books.

-Signs and symbols. Fitz Museum. https://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/pharos/collection_pages/northern_pages/76/TXT_BR_SS-76.html 

Die Braut oder Pandora

Die Braut oder Pandora

Artwork Review

Hannah Höch, Pandora, exemplifies from a feminist perspective, and with great eloquence, the proto-structuralist era in Europe starting with Picasso and the cubist movement in 1907, and later on unfolding into Dadaism in the early 20’s. As the pioneer of photo montage, the main exponent of feminist collage, besides her desire to become a painter, this artwork exposes the fragmented reality experienced by many artists during the rise of fascism in Germany. This work accounts for all the essential components of structuralism and poststructuralism: deconstruction, juxtaposition, presence and absence, and a multiplicity of signs with infinite signifiers. 

There is no need to make use of proper names in this work despite the biographical connections that it has with the artist. Since the rebellious attitude of Höch is evidenced by numerous works exploring gender stereotypes and ethnic differences, along with her particular use of superimpositions, it is accurate to interpret this work as a clever contestation of the institution of marriage.

All signs presented in Pandora are rich in visual polysemy, while some others are more fixated in typical patriarchal stereotypes of women. The replacement of Pandora’s head for one of a baby as a signified- a term which refers to the mental concept of an image in post-structuralist philosophy- for women as childish beings is an example of these fixed connotations in the work greatly inspired by the German concept of ‘New Objectivity’, which aimed to represent the world with philosophical objectivity. The hyperbolized disparity of the bride and her husband, in contrast to the candid and naïve pre-conceptualized ideals around marriage, place this institution on a false pedestal of happiness, and is signified for the banishment of this romantic ideal. We could say in Saussure terms that the superficial signifiers related  to the word ‘marriage’ have been reevaluated and reconstituted from the “original” towards a more “realistic” connotation, or at least objective viewpoint. 

The warm tonality beginning at the top of the frame with light yellow progressively degrades towards the bottom into an opalescent red and brown, overwhelming with energetic brightness the overall scene, like a sweltering heat in the apex of summer. This optimistic happiness of the background is juxtaposed with the man’s expressed mood, which betrays visible signs of depression and hopelessness. The man’s character is also reflected in the grayish tonalities used to depict him. As referenced previously, it would be arbitrary to use proper names to describe the subjects in this piece. While the man’s depiction could possibly appear as a reference to the artist’s former partner, Raoul Haussmann, in an ironic and prescienct coincidence, the figure depicted has an even more uncanny resemblance to the fascist writer and future propaganda leader of Nazi Germany, Joseph Goebbels.

To continue the dissection of this work, and due to the ambiguity of the elements, it is useful to explore each component by its symbolism. Just to give some account of the ‘New Objectivity’ pursued by Höch, and the multifarious potential connotations of this piece, we could take as an example the various circles scattered throughout the frame, representing the arbitrariness of signifiers- the philosophical counterpart of signified that refers to the component of a sign that is literal. Deconstructing the use of this shape by analyzing the most primordial meanings assigned to the image of the circle, such as its reference to divinity or God, reveals a layered meaning in its deployment. This mirrors the old adage: “God is a circle whose center is everywhere but whose circumference is nowhere”. Continuing in this symbolic analysis, the wings depicted along the round shapes share strong connections to the Egyptian Sun God Amun-Ra (notice also the connection to the warm tones of the background), who was depicted as a man with a hawk head and a solar disk traveling through the sky. In the book square, circle, triangle, Bruno Munary refers to an ancient chant from Thebes that says, “Amun-Ra, divine hawk with shining plumage, traces with the spread of his wings a circle on the vault of the skies.” This deity is also related to fear, blood sacrifices and terror of the heart. Many other interpretations of this shape can be developed from a feminist perspective.  A connection can also be made with Cleopatra’s Magic Circle, or more generally all magic circles that have been used to attract good spirits traditionally, sometimes even involving blood sacrifices as in Ancient Greek culture. The marriage ring, the halo and all the perpetual motions of life (also symbolized by the wheel) also derive from the circle. 

All superimpositions displayed by Höch in this piece hold a universal identity that can be infinitely reinterpreted by the viewer. Overall, the inexhaustible wonder that this work awakens, is the very attitude embodied by Pandora’s mythological character, and also, the one of archetypal significance of the girl child. It is Pandora’s eternally childish curiosity that opens up the divine box of mysteries and terrors of the man-made world. There is also a reference to this revelation enlightening the objective realities of the institution of marriage for women as problematic. Strong symbolic references such as the heavily chained heart, teary eye, baby nursing the breast, the snake and the apple, the wheel, and the rose, are all heavily charged with complex meaning, an overarching awareness of the shadowy reality of this institution and a need for a more honest reconstitution and transformation of the traditional signified meanings of marriage.

-Grosenick, Uta. Women Artist. Madrid: Taschen, 2005

-Munary, Bruno. Circle, Square, Triangle. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2015.

-Krauss, Rosalind. In the Name of Picasso. The MIT Press 16 (1981): 5-22. Accessed May 7, 2020

Pretend not to Know What You Know

ARTIST Adrian Piper, American, born 1948

MEDIUM Gelatin silver photographs with silkscreened text

DATES 1990

DIMENSIONS overall: 43 7/8 x 98 in. (111.4 x 248.9 cm) A 44 1/16" x 22 1/8" x 1 7/8" B 44 1/8" x 35 1/16" x 1 7/8" C 44 1/8" x 31 5/8" x 1 7/8" (show scale)

COLLECTIONS Photography

CREDIT LINE Purchased with funds given by the Daniel and Joanna S. Rose Fund

RIGHTS STATEMENT © Adrian Piper

This paper analyzes the work title ‘Pretend.not to know. What you know’ by the artist Adrian Piper. The triptych piece depicts three mothers of different ethnicities and their children. Starting at the center of the piece, a studio portrait of a Caucasian woman hugging her child while happily looking towards the viewer. On the left side, an African mother, frowning and looking away from the camera, holds her child who, as the mother, shows obvious signs of malnutrition. On the right side, an Asian woman and her child sit on a pile of wood and robes while looking towards the right side of the frame, covering her and her child’s head with a scarf. A text written in red letters at the bottom of every picture, divided in three sections from left to right reads: pretend - not to know- what you know.

One of the most obvious references of this piece is the iconic representation of ‘The Madonna and the Child”. This title often refers to the image of the Virgin Mary and the child Jesus. As part of the Roman Catholic tradition and the Orthodox Church, this depiction has its roots in European culture and religious beliefs at its core. Piper’s deliberate placement of the proud Caucasian woman at the center of the piece reflects on her privilege. Based on the entirety of Piper’s work, it is fair to account this piece as a commentary on race and politics. 

Sassoferrato / 'madonna And Child', 17th Century, Italian School. Child Jesus. Virgin Mary. is a painting by Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato -1609-1685- which was uploaded on March 29th, 2019.

Even though this depiction of the Madonna (which means “my lady” in Italian), has crossed all cultures around the world, and her physical features vary according to the ethnicity of her followers, the white-skinned virgin is the most advertised and popular of all. It also might be important to notice the fact that this is the only posed photograph-  further on in this paper, I will reflect on the concept of ‘the harmful mother’ or ‘intensive mothering’ based on the mother’s gesture. This woman probably visited the photographer’s studio with the pretense of preserving an idealized image of her and her child. This brings to mind the dilemma of the pose, and reflections on image-repertoire and tableaux vivants referenced in the famous philosophical essay on photography ‘The Camera Lucida’ by Roland Barthes. As the author states:

““...It [the photograph] completely de-realizes the human world of conflicts and desires, under cover of illustrating it. What characterizes the so-called advanced societies is that they today consume images and no longer, like those of the past, beliefs; they are therefore more liberal, less fanatical, but also more “false” (less “authentic”)””

— Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections On Photography. 1st American ed. New York: Hill and Wang, 1981.

Based on this report new meanings emerge from Piper’s artwork. In contrast to the other two images on each side, the Caucasian woman hugs her child from behind in a very protective manner, and both, the woman and her child look straight at the camera. One of the focal points when thinking of contemporary patriarchal motherhood is the presumption that mothering is inherent to all women, and the caring of the child, an exclusive responsibility of the biological mother. This type of mothering develops into the best called “intensive mothering”. The institution of motherhood has created arbitrary methods for the “appropriate” caring of the child based on its ideologies. As the feminist Sharon Hayes marks: these methods ‘are constructed as child-centered, expert-guided, emotionally absorbing, labor- intensive and financially expensive’. So, maybe what Piper means, when including the red text over the image ‘not to know’, is precisely our ignorance of our lost wisdom on the true nature of motherhood.

For Rich, the patriarchal institution of motherhood is located at the same level of rape, prostitution, and slavery. Her meticulous research clearly exposes how it is in maternity that women are transfigured and enslaved. When following these lines, attention is called to the other two mothers depicted in this artwork. Starting on the right side with the Asian mother and text ‘what we know’, the focus lies purely on the procedures of the institution in this region well known as one of the apex of political control over women’s bodies. Since it is not possible to clearly define the origins of the woman in the picture, only assumptions can be made. In relation to the other two images, it is possible to infer that this photograph could be part of the collection of memories of the Vietnam war.  Continuing in this line of thought, it is accurate to suggest that the suffering of the African and Asian woman facilitates the happiness of the Caucasian family in this case. On the other hand, ‘The One-Child Policy’ and the radical reproductive politics implemented in the early 1980’s in China come to mind. Notice the gesture of the mother protecting her child with a head scarf, while her look seemingly connects with the unaware mother at the center as if she is attempting to scare her.

As we go on in this dissection, it becomes more and more evident the violent and almost evil bonds reinforced in the bloody text connecting the three mothers: the ways of mothering, their myths and ideologies, the social order or class/race system, war and slavery. The one history that men and women can account equally is the fact that we all come from a mother’s womb. So, when speaking of the deviation of history, Africa is the very first place I am drawn to.

The Black Madonna Of Czestochowa is a painting by Irek Szelag which was uploaded on April 26th, 2013.

It is not random the fact that the Black Madonna of Częstochowa has a scar on her face, and her look is way more opaque than the one of the light skinned one. The relationship between the gaze of the African mother and her child and the Częstochowa’s Lady is astounding. This painting has its origins in Jerusalem. In 326, it was discovered by St. Helena, who brought it back to Constantinople to be presented to Constantine the Great,  and later on to Częstochowa as a possession of the Polish Kingdom. Also known as the ‘Hodegetria’ or ‘She Who Points the Way’, the history of this icon, currently resting in Poland, where it is also called ‘Our Lady of Sorrows’, goes beyond the metaphor. Her image was badly injured in 1430 by Hussite raiders and later on corrected by medieval restores. It is essential to note that part of their solution was to repaint the original image and to modify her original features, such as her nose, which was given a more aquiline or ‘European’ look. 

The African American tradition differs from the patriarchal ideologies on mothering in the West despite their radical political connections. Unlike its Western counterpart, mothering is understood as the core of the African culture. Their focus is on empowerment, protection, preservation, and resistance especially in the face of racism. An important distinction to highlight is the concept of ‘Community Mothering’ or ‘Other-Mothering’ as a part of a survival strategy and the preservation of the essential values that Mothering represents for the African Culture. Black women are aware of the responsibility of the child’s life and caring as part of a whole and the issues and consequences broad to the community by overcharging with the child’s responsibility to a single mother. White American mothers know the truth of ‘other-mothers’ very well. It is fair to say that a deeply political relationship connects black slave mothers with white families in America, and that many of the upper-middle class children in racist America had developed forbidden feelings with black slave mothers as part of their extended family network. Should we ‘pretend’? Situated on the left side, black motherhood in Piper’s triptych is a symbol of power and dignity. The mother’s resistance despite the brutalities of domination, racial divisiveness, apartheid and dehumanization while preserving the love for her children and responsibility for their nurturance is pure social activism.

Motherhood is one of the keystones of social control across cultures. Not even the most privileged women can escape this reality. Patriarchy still insists in the obliteration of the female body and its powers as a tool for socio-political and economic control. The idealization of the mother’s image lying underneath the docility of the Madonna is confronted in Adrian Piper’s artwork with the strength embodied by the African Mother on the left side, who despite the many injuries caused by the calamities of racism, never quits her dignity and love for her children and the children of her community. Adrian Piper, a female artist who herself experienced the violence of racist America, makes these three Madonnas an icon for all mothers pressured to conform to an unattainable ideal of motherhood across cultures, a red alert to this destructive divisiveness.