Artsramble Archive 
Botero’s Abu Ghraib
January 18, 2007
by artsRambler
Back in July, we posed a monthly question about Art and political change and relevancy.And Babies? And Babies. We thought it worth considering again after Columbian artist Fernando Botero's recent show at Marlborough Gallery in New York and the waves it caused.
Abu Ghraib 34
2005 Pencil on paper, 15 3/4 x 11 7/8 in., 40 x 30 cm
After reading accounts from journalists like Seymour Hirsch, Botero was driven to create a body of work about the Abu Ghraib episode, viewing the effects on the victims as opposed to the portrayal of the attackers. (Read Bill Moyers short story on the work) With all due respect to Botero, whom we consider brave and truth-seeking in this work, the only sunami we felt here at Artsramble was while listening to viewers' responses.
In November NPR's Margot Adler produced a report interviewing patrons at the Marlborough show (Artist Botero Turns to Abu Ghraib in New Paintings):
Adler: It may seem amazing but some of the people who come have never heard of Abu Ghraib like these two Students from Suny at Potsdam.
Student 1: I really did'nt know much about the incident. (Adler: Is this the first you've heard of it.) Yeah to be honest, it really was. It leaves me with a lot of curiosity and real anger…sometimes.
Student 2: I also was not aware of all of it. The artwork is so disturbing but you want to keep looking at it.
These students had not heard of Abu Ghraib in any depth if at all in November 2006?
Botero's show ended mid November in New York and then traveled to Europe, with venues in Italy and Spain. No United States Museum responded with any interest in the work, citing its political content. If the two students quoted above are representative of American audiences, it seems to us that worried thoughts about political controversy may be laid contentedly to rest. Yet having said that, we admit that we are being intentionally naive. It is the government that worries the museums, not public controversy. The public is asleep, evidently. We spotlight Fernando Botero (and Marlborough Gallery) in the effort to wake us up.
Abu Ghraib 72
2005 Oil on canvas, 14 1/2 x 11 7/8 in., 37 x 30 cm
Pages: 1 2
[link]
4 Responses to “Botero’s Abu Ghraib”
1. JosephGomez Says:
January 20th, 2007 at 6:58 am e
There are so many threads of concern in the Artsrambler’s short reflection on Fernando Botero’s recent show at the Marlborough Gallery that I don’t quite know where to begin.
1) The students mentioned and their reaction. Most college students seem to have some sense of current events, even if only from John Stewart’s THE DAILY SHOW. One would think that somewhere, in one of their classes at least, there would be a mention of Abu Ghraib. Are these two students an anomaly or a microcosm? Alas, I fear the the ostrich syndrome may be back in style. Will this be an even more frightening version of the 80s “me” generation?
2) The Public’s response to art. Yes, I am pleased that over 212,000 people went to North Carolina Museum of Art to see the Monet show. Monet was a rebel in his time, but, now, oh, so safe to us. There is nothing wrong with that. As Jean Cocteau said, “Art should astonish.” Indeed, great art should make us see beyond the obvious, make us turn ourselves inside out and see the world anew, whether it’s a way of seeing a landscape (Monet) or what is happening in the world around us (Botero). Monet’s world is calm and soothing, and it has a vital place in our lives, but so do Botero’s recent paintings, and perhaps even more so, given the lack of knowledge of the Potsdam students.
3) The central metaphor of Sufism is that humanity is asleep. We essentially go through our lives as sleepwalkers, near blind men grasping only tiny fragments of meaning. As such, according to the Sufis, we must go through a spiritual process of awakening to confront reality. Art serves a similar function. It must awaken us from the mundane, from the frighteningly limited “single vision” of existence so railed against by poet / painter William Blake. Art with any kind of political resonance often attempts to do this by shocking its audience. Goya’s jolting political works were largely rejected by the public and the powers that be in his own time, and now we shake our heads and think how unenlightened they were back then. Yes, but how different is it today with Botero and museums in this country seemingly afraid of a government that relentlessly pushes towards fascism? Wait a minute. This isn’t censorship after all; it is just wise and sensible self-policing.
2. artsRambler Says:
January 20th, 2007 at 7:26 am e
“This isn’t censorship after all; it is just wise and sensible self-policing. ”
Do I detect the slightest bit of irony, my dear Professor?
3. Administrator Says:
January 21st, 2007 at 2:57 pm e
A faithful reader sent us an article from Asheville’s Citizen-Times discussing the political statements of artists shown in Western Carolina.
The art of war: Asheville artists take on the atrocities of aggression by Paul Clark. Take a look:
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770120018
4. Antonio Rivera Says:
January 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pm e
As Jean Renior said, “The terrible thing in life is that everyone has their reasons.”
Terrible things are happening in this world and engaged artist respond, We Should Respond! Botero has!
The dialogue onn the Ramble has at least begun.
The reflection on the nervousness of museums, et al, reflects on a different terrible occurance. And that is the malevence of the Patriot Act and the invasion into our lives by Big Brother, self censorship is every bit equal to censorship by government, after all, if we engage in thinking first what the government thinks we think…we lose ourselves as artist, but more importantly as humans.