So I guess I have a question for Molly about the Navajo Rugs. I'm concerned that by referencing them, you are using them as an appropriation. While you're not using the design, necessarily, of Navajo peoples, by describing them as "Navajo rugs", you're walking into appropriation. Why not call them rugs from a culture that has not been on the shit end of the stick, by us? Or are you just interested in weaving?
Good topic for discussion, Does Molly's involvement with preserving and repairing these Navajo rugs effect your thinking about this? Does mollys living and working in New Mexico effect this? What about using pattern and imagery that is traditional Navajo design and meant to represent creation stories? Are there other forms of rugs that would also be applicable to expand the read? Could it just be about weaving or is that not possible? Is there an appropriate way to address these concerns as a maker? There are many artists who refer to a multitude of types of design and objects that span hundreds of years and across a variety of cultures- where is this influence acceptable and where is it not?
ReplyDeleteGood questions, Brian and Raychael. I have been asking myself whether it is ethically, or culturally appropriate to use these patterns. And by using them, what does it mean in my work and in the context of the Southwest? I would agree that it is becoming more about the act of weaving and use of pattern overall, not just from Navajo rugs. However, I cannot ignore that the reference I the for patterns and textiles (and my connection to living here) does become important. And, the fact that I am giving new life to these Navajo rugs for my job, is done in a way that I am using the same techniques they would have done to make them in the first place (and to preserve them for future use).
ReplyDeleteI would like to turn it back to you two, and ask what you think about whether my paintings become a commodity and appropriation of sacred stories and tradition by the use of their designs? Another artist I see that also does this is Philip Taaffe. Some of the imagery in my paintings is from real observation of these patterns, compiled with my sketches from nature. How does this change it to be finding these patterns in person?
your paintings are a commodity.
Deletemaybe you should go to a master weaver on the Navajo reservation and ask them if its ok for you take their ideas?
DeleteBrian- I encourage you to temper your wording in some of your responses--the tone I am reading/picking up on here is aggressive and accusatory and I imagine you are interested in having a conversation about this that is open, (between all sides availible) rather than inflammatory and defensive.
Deletealso- to clarify- my read could be wrong,
Deletethis is the nature of the "online comments" beast. We can talk about it in class!
I think weaving pretty much comes up in most cultures, right?
ReplyDeleteI think it is one thing to reference the designs and use them as part and inspiration to your paintings, and another thing to make rugs woven with Navajo designs. If that is what you are into, I think it is okay to explore it, as long as your intention is not to exploit and you even discuss that in any exhibition of your work.
What interests me is how ornamentation and design crosses cultures and eras. Take for instance, the swastika, which was a Buddhist and Hindu symbol originally, then used by other Asian countries and in Europe (I assume by trade routes that the symbol was adopted by other cultures) before it was even used by Nazi Germany.
great response
Deleteit doesn't matter what your intent is. that's like saying I didn't intend to do it so whatever happens no big deal...that is not taking respondsibility.
Deletethis discussion...i think....what the fuck do I know....is about power dynamics. when white anglo people take everything away from everyone all the time...that is the heart of why appropriation is wrong. just another elvis stealing someones shit and getting almost all the credit for it.
DeleteYes, the problem is about power dynamics-
DeleteAt times, and for some, awareness and intent is enough,
and, sometimes it is not. The issue is certainly not black and white.
I think Molly's paintings were inspired by the designs of the rugs she has been working with at Textival, in addition to being brought up in ABQ. That counts for something. That is an authenticity in its own right. Its not like she is straight taking a symbolic rug and re-painting it.
DeleteThis also brought to mind this funky idea because I didn't eat dinner (i'm hungry) and I wondered if you painted a taco would that be appropriation? because that is a Mexican food and part of Mexican culture...does it not carry the same weight as a symbol of a culture?
ReplyDeleteyou are funny. need tacos now. i think that it would have to do with context but sure why not. this whole topic just goes on and on and on......
Deleteno its not the same thing.
DeleteIt is not he same thing because a taco 🌮 does not hold sacred space, and a Navajo rug does- or can--with the imagery present in the pattern/ and how the weaving is passed down. I can't say I know much about it, except for the information about it passed to me by my Navajo student who uses the rug designs in his paintings- and his grandmother was a weaver. He told me that there are origin stories in the weaving patterns. Another thing to think about is that those rugs are made for commerce and trade with whites as well. And this kind of 🌮 taco is not a traditional taco, but one that evolved for white American tastes?
DeleteThat seems like I may have been setting up someone that a Navajo rug is like a white American taco- not trying to say that ! Not the same thing. Just complex Things to think about.
Deletewow! I didn't realize there were all these comments! awesome!
Deletewow... a freaking taco emoticon... I never!
yes..I know a taco isn't the same thing...but i was thinking along the lines of what defines culture. and I know a taco isn't a sacred symbol (though they are pretty darn sacred when you find a taco cart at 3am and you order some tripe!) I was not trying to belittle, just thinking about where the lines of things end, where the gray areas are.
I think ultimately, it really comes down to respect. I think there is a place for respecting other cultures and I think we need to make that place, though right now everything is a commodity and it doesn't feel like that is possible. brave new world.
I felt bad for Molly on friday because this issue was the first thing that came up in Allison's class during Molly's crit and then for awhile the focus wasn't on her work but on cultural appropriation. I'm afraid this is something that this type of work is going to butt up against over and over for Molly. So how does she as the artist revert the focus back onto the actual painting and the rich history of weaving, instead of the cultural appropriation argument? That is what I'm wondering now. Or is it possible for her to do this? Now that the paintings have their own lives out in the world, does Molly have this control anymore? I wouldn't think so.
ReplyDeleteI think you are right Charis, there is no control once it is out in the world.
DeleteAnd.... this is why And is important.
ReplyDeleteKey word is always and.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think we con only paint flowers, rural landscapes, and self-portraits from this point forward. Oh,,,and portraits of dogs and cats!
ReplyDeleteI never realized how much I use the phrase "I think"...hahaha!
ReplyDelete