In the
sometimes rarified world of art and artists, there has emerged a controversy
that I think serves to illustrate a greater truth, that of artistic freedom and
the power of the artist to illuminate injustice and spur social change.
World-famous artist
Sir Anish Kapoor has acquired the exclusive rights to a type of carbon-based
pigment called Vantablack, “the blackest shade of black ever made,” according
to numerous articles published in
Smithsonian Magazine, the Daily Mail, Artnet News, The Huffington Post, etc.
Without trying to
explain the arcane science behind this pigment (which is actually not exactly
paint, but tiny tubes of carbon that need to be applied wearing a gas mask),
suffice it to say that the substance is so light-absorbing that the human eye
cannot look at it and distinguish the kind of shadows which help the brain to
interpret shapes. The example shown in all the reports is that of a crumpled
piece of tin foil covered with a layer of the pigment. You cannot see any
shapes—the foil appears flat.
Addressing the furor regarding Kapoor’s exclusive rights to Vantablack, artist
Christain Furr commented “This black is like dynamite in the art world. We
should be able to use it. It isn't right that it belongs to one man.”
For a little
art-historical perspective (before we get to the social justice part of this
commentary) artists throughout the centuries have tried to monopolize or be
associated with particular colors.
A blue
pigment made from lapis lazuli, only found in Afghanistan, was highly prized
and exorbitantly priced. Eighteenth
century painters like Joshua Reynolds paid enormous fees to use a deep black
paint called “Titian’s shade.” In 1960 the French artist Yves Klein patented a vibrant
blue called “International Klein Blue,” but did not keep it for his exclusive
use.*
Current
events remind me of an exhibition I held a few years ago. Forbidden Colors asked
artists to consider the use of color both objectively as a way of arousing
certain feelings in both artist and observer, and metaphorically exploring artists’
responses to various forms of censorship or political pressure.
The show
takes its name from a 1980 Israeli law forbidding art of "political
significance," which banned artwork composed of the four colors of the
Palestinian flag: red, green, white and black. Palestinians were arrested for
displaying such artwork. The ban was
lifted after the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993.
The
significance of this ban is enormous. I am often reminded of Picasso’s words,”
Art is not made to decorate rooms. It is an offensive weapon in the defense
against the enemy.” Red, green, white, black. Colors that exist in
the world, independent of human intervention, possessing such power that an
authoritarian government seeks to ban their display! Color possessing such power that the mere
sight of red, green, white, black, could incite riot, rebellion, demands for
justice, hope, despair, nationalism, pride, love.
Great
artists instinctively understand this power. They are willing to pay any price,
make any sacrifice, to be able to penetrate the gaze and touch the soul with a
dab of cerulean blue or the deepest black.
Art is a
strong weapon in the fight for justice, for the rights of patrimony, peace,
freedom.
Art
continues to hold our gaze; it forces us to look, and hopefully, to see.
Colors
cannot be forbidden. My hope is that not
only Anish Kapoor but repressive regimes everywhere will look into that
blackest black and see not the depths of despair but the infinite freedom that
is the birthright of all humanity.
*(For more
on this subject, read Color: A Natural History of the Palette
by Victoria Finlay or
Blue: The History of a Color by Michel Pastoureau.)
No comments:
Post a Comment