Lone Star Studios / 107 Lone Star Blvd.  Dec 10, 2011 – 6p-10p (one night only).

No Class: Three Emerging Artists, Post Academia – This show features the art of James Woodard, Nicolas Morales Erick Salazar.  For bio and show info, click here.

Inspire Art / 200 Queen Anne Court.  Dec 8, 2011 – 6p-8p (one night only).

Inspire Holiday Market – Form the event page: “You are invited to Inspire’s Holiday Market Reception Featuring Arts & Crafts Created by Local Artists”  Great gift ideas here for the art lover in your life.  Also an awesome way to show our support for the local arts community.

Radius Center / 106 Auditorium Circle.  Dec 9, 2011 – 5p-930p.

Gabriel Diego Delgado Exhibition – Curated by Joan Grona of Joan Grona Gallery.  Delgado’s work is simply amazing.  Keeping a primarily socio-political focus, his work involves ink illustrations, stencils, graffiti and combinations thereof.  For more info see the Radius Canter site, or the artists website.

High Wire Art Gallery / 326 W. Josephine.  Dec 9, 2011 – 6p-9p.

Kathrine DaLuz Maple exhibit.  9 new pieces of select work from this artist and several other artists.  This event also has pieces which are priced for the gift giving art lovers.  See the High Wire Arts site here.

Anarte Gallery / 7959 Broadway.  Dec 14, 2011 – 6p-9p.

Steven DaLuz “ Watchers” Art Exhibit.  Steven’s amazing encaustics work returns to figurative works in this series.  Some of the proceeds of this event will go to Arts SA.  Music by Harpist Stephanie Nash.  For info on this and other exhibits see the Anarte site.

My Examiner.com feed  -  San Antonio area art and events.

Low World   -  My Personal site.  Short Stories, photography, project updates, stuff…

Voices of Art Magazine   -  an archive of my articles for VOA.

Flickr  -  My photostream, includes works in progress.

Facebook  -  For networking, art, fun and strangeness.

Google+  -  My profile.

LinkedIn  -  Professional profile and networking.

Presidential hopeful Rick Perry, on top of his large cuts to the Commission for the Arts and other important programs from the Texas Budget, has been supporting and pushing for the goals of another group of political activists.  This seems to serve as a bit of foreshadowing to the possible future we may see under President Perry.

GOP Presidential Candidates Participate In Debate In Tampa - Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

The group is Citizens Against Government Waste.  They are the group that brought us this fear-mongering  video about government spending and the impending doom we all face.  The group, whose site describes their aim as being ‘to stop the runaway spending that is bankrupting America’ is one who only comes up in the national discourse when events like the release of the aforementioned video are released. CAGW, otherwise, are only seen and heard from by those who read political news and scour the internet daily looking for such information.

Gov. Perry sent out a letter with the goal of raising funds for the group (available here) and in it he lines up the traditional claims he usually gives us (jobs, jobs, jobs, why Texas is better than California, jobs) as well as a list of the major government programs/funding targets he thinks are within the sights of the CAGW and should be cut.  Among them are the following:

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (education, arts, culture and news)

The National Endowment for the Arts (self explanatory)

The National Endowment for the Humanities (education, art, history, programs and grants)

Now, as a disclaimer, it must be stated that there is plenty of wasteful spending in the government.  There is no argument against this fact.  It must also be said that one cannot support or condemn a group such as this offhand, just for who they support or are endorsed by.  They are a group who push for action on concerns they find important, like it or not.

But, as the title suggests, the problem here is Gov. Perry.  His own spending record has been under fire, as it should be.  If one brings up any particular subject in the political arena, especially money, one must be able to justify his/her position.  An itemized list would be a bit expansive here, but a quick search should be educational.  The focus here, being the arts, is that he again has started blasting the arts spending as being unnecessary, and in need of cutting.  Even though his own platform of previous years has been highly supportive of the arts, and art related programs, as crucial parts of building the economic structures and employment records he cherishes so much.  He now does a complete 180 and shoots those very same projects in the foot.

His local budget concerns, which also shouted down the arts programs, are a mirror to the national level budget cuts he wants to help push.  So, while at least he is consistent in his huge ‘flip flops’, he shows his true colors.  Those interested in the future of local as well as national level arts programs should be wary of Gov. Perry and his ascension.  It may be a huge mistake, choose wisely.

Networking

My Examiner.com feed -  San Antonio area art and events.

Low World -  My Personal site.  Short Stories, photography, project updates, stuff…

Voices of Art Magazine -  an archive of my articles for VOA.

Flickr -  My photostream, includes works in progress.

Facebook -  For networking, art, fun and strangeness.

Google+ -  My profile.

LinkedIn -  Professional profile and networking.

Toe to Toe with the Border Patrol - Still from Video - Lee Basham

Filming down by the river is risky. Don’t do it. Nevertheless, documentary is the best resource we have when it comes to telling the truth about America’s deluded domestic war zone. I’ve been pursuing this endeavor for nine years, so I’ve learned nine ‘rules. Think Zombieland – descriptions of what to expect. Legal disclaimer: These ‘rules’  are merely my own, have no universal application whatsoever, and are based on my personal experience alone; I have no legal standing and offer no guarantees. In short: Don’t film on the Rio. Think Deliverance. But if you feel the need, it’ll go a little like this:

Rules for borderland documentarians:

1. You’re a drug dealer, coyote, or arms smuggler, until proven otherwise. The Border Patrol (BP) knows  that a $4,000 video camera is a tricky disguise. Very clever, that.

 

The first time I got detained, I told them I was making a documentary. They replied “That’s a slick trick,”  and that they didn’t appreciate being lied to. If I didn’t tell them about the drugs, they were going to tow my car to sector command and cut it up with chain saws. “Your cocaine? We’ll find it.” Moral of the story: stick to your story. Gently explain your project. Be good humored and patient, smile. Ask if you can film them. It’s part of the drill.

Entry, July 20th, 2006: Today I’m lucky; the Border Patrol agent who detains me is from McAllen, the town I live in. I tell him about the new Convention Center and he finally believes my ID isn’t fake. I ask if he doesn’t feel silly trying to catch the little kids sneaking over from Mexico to go to school. He says, “Yeah, it’s idiotic, but I love driving that road.”

2. Your kayak, canoe, or other flotation device will drive the BP batty. Think Apocalypse Now.’ You will be swooped down upon by armed helicopters,
closely filming you, while military-style ground forces are on their way. But having a boat is definitely worth it.

 

In Nuevo Laredo local entrepreneurs have discovered that cheap, plastic, kiddy-pools are perfect to ferry contraband across the Rio – the disposable cigarette lighter of smuggling. Abandoned pools line the banks west of town. But the canoe, now, that is probably the worst choice for smuggling: It’s big, turtle slow, expensive, takes two people to easily operate, and you can see everything that’s in there.  Get a canoe.

Kiddypool - Still from Video - Lee Basham

Entry, March 7th, 2011: About the dumbest thing we can do is put a $4,000 video camera in a 10 cent trash bag, toss it into a canoe, and head out on the Rio. So we do it. We leave, eager for the water, wary of the heat. The dashboard radio chatters about Muslim hordes, hordes of Mexicans. It’s AM 710, the best ‘hate radio’ in south Texas. It sets the mood: ‘unreal,’ for Susan. At the river the air is thick, sweet with springtime, the new greenery is luminescent, and the water, crystal clear. We put in and head upstream for the bend where trucks gather on the south side, waiting. As we paddle on, ‘picnickers’ pepper the south shore, lounging on blankets, waiting for darkness. We film, wave, they wave back, stand up, curiously studying us. At sundown, they will walk into the river and cross,  ‘just like taking a bus.’ At the river’s bend there’s the usual colony of vehicles. As we glide by we see a boat tied to shore, where a bunch of young guys surround beer coolers. Two older, serious looking middle-aged men with binoculars stand in the truck beds, glassing the north shore. “Birders, right?” she asks, wide-eyed. “Mebbeso,” I drawl, knowing these are businessmen waiting to move their loads. The cooler-guys race down to the water and dive in, dog-paddling like mad towards our canoe,  laughing and shouting something about “my woman.” Cuanto cuesta? Is that what they’re saying? We pretend not to paddle faster. Around the bend we find another colony. They’re birds, thousands. Swallows. They live in mud-hut cities, and here they cover a south-side dirt cliff and dart freely to the U.S. for grasshoppers to feed their babies.
At sunset everything gets busy. The witching hour. It’s the best time to be on the river. Up on the 30-foot bank of the north shore we see a tight group of silhouettes against the brown-orange sky line. Men and women with suitcases and trunks – Money mules. A dark speedboat appears out of the dim, racing at us. It turns into the bank where the people stand. They leap off the edge, tumble down the steep dirt cliff and struggle onto the boat. It’s amazing. They’re falling, running, and no one says a word. The boat roars, races past, and its wake nearly swamps us. To the south we hear splashing sounds. Like penguins diving into the sea for a meal, here come the replacements.

Now back to the rules:

3. The Border Patrol will find you, quickly.  They may approach for  your ID.  You will cheerfully offer it, if asked.  You will not dig into your pocket without being asked to.  Hands are Bad Things to Law Enforcement.  Hands draw weapons.  Keep your hands in sight. BP may accept or reject your ID.  Be happy with either.

They may cuff you. A little S&M. Enjoy. Don’t worry, ‘What goes on must come off.  You’ll probably be released soon. Again, be patient. Good humored. It’s part of the drill.

4. They will point M-4 assault rifles and 12 gauge combat shotguns at you. You will not act frightened or shocked, but continue in your breezy, chatty way (see rule # 8). You will ask them, “How can I Help?” And you will mean it.

The border isn’t being militarized, it is militarized. You are playing war correspondent. Accept this cheerfully. One plan: Read some of those macho-looking gun magazines they have at the grocery store. Yes, it’s bizarre, even repulsive, but learn about AR-15s, ‘Tactical’ shotguns and semi-automatic pistols. Know what each looks like. The Border Patrol is proud of their ‘Iron’. With a little knowledge, you can correctly compliment their weapons. Ironically, this sets a better tone. The BP are gun nuts. Gun nuts love gun nuts. Play the part.  Speaking of gun nuts: The smugglers are also a friendly lot. As they buzz by in their speedboats or roar by in their trucks, don’t look shocked. Wave, smile, and go on. And definitely don’t let them see you filming them. Leave them alone. They have a job to do.

5. Agents will chase you with vehicles  and  even helicopters. If you see a helicopter, speed up.  Being chased by a helicopter is fun. If it lands in front of your car, you WILL apply brakes fully. You’ll stop for  those flashy lights on their trucks, too.

Photo - Lee Basham

Entry, October 17th, 2010: They chase Jon and me with the helicopter again. We show up in a new vehicle – a jeep – and they freak out. If you really want to have fun, show up in a different vehicle. The blue and white chopper comes over the field at tree-top level and swoops right at our windshield. We spin around and decide to tear down a farm road. Jon is screaming with joy. I’m trying to keep the camera steady. Boom! Another huge bump. The jeep starts sliding sideways. We brake and shudder to a halt.  Jon reaches down and produces a beer can. He cracks it, “Going down in style!” I tell him toss it. He takes a swig and flings it. We gun it, the chopper’s chasing, 50 feet behind us, 20 feet above. Suddenly, the roar is everywhere. It flies right over the top of the jeep! It’s turning. It’s flying backwards! Right in front of the jeep! The speedo says 25 MPH. The pilot is gesturing wildly. He’s pulling farther in front of us, he’s landing on the road! Wow. Dust explodes everywhere. We hit the brakes, bail out cheering, thumbs up to the pilot! Nice! A BP truck is closing fast from behind. The pilot smiles at us, nods, waves and heads back into the sky. We compliment the agents on their Air Force. They calm down and give us the ‘Please be careful’ speech. Nice guys. We’re lucky,  we’ve indulged ourselves, but the video is shaky as hell. We try again at night on black top and it looks better – not as dramatic. The copter won’t come down as close, but the swinging spotlight is beautiful.

6. Agents will watch you from afar, sneak up on you and hide in the bushes, follow you, puzzle over  you. You will not try to avoid or interfere with this.

Yes, that sound over there in the bushes might be friends from the south – check for marijuana scent, Mexico has much more reasonable drug laws than we do. But it’s as likely to be The Man in Green, Mr. BP. Play peak-a-boo if you like, but keep it friendly, never too sneaky or aggressive. Your body armor is your smile. Always wear it.

7. The BP is where the action is. You will watch what they watch. You are Border Patrol Paparazzi.

 

Agents usually break-off their interrogation of you because something’s up, especially at sunset. See where they go, listen for the radio chatter; feel free to follow.

Entry, March 19th, 2011: We’re on the high Roma bluffs. Susan Harbage-Page is cheerful, chatty, amazed at the night view. She wants to drink a beer; I fetch some. I’ve been keeping my eye on the south shore, on the unmoving tiny red dot of a cigarette. He just stands there, cigarette after cigarette. I dub him ‘the smoker.’ The Rifleman up in the BP observation tower to our left is snoring. The long bridge over the river is lit by giant, gorgeous pink lights, hundreds of feet high. They cast amazing pink ellipses on the broad water below. Suddenly, the radio in the tower starts chattering excitedly – that gets my attention. The rifleman snores on. I look down at the river. “Aha!” I whisper to Susan, “Yes! From the south side! Boats! here they come!.”  Two inflatable rafts, stuffed with people and boxes, paddling across the pink pods of light. The camera swings on the tripod. I have them! Susan is hopping up and down. She starts blazing away with her new DSLR. The sight is gorgeous. The first raft reaches the United States. Suddenly there are male shouts from below our cliff. From the north shore, deep blue LED beams slice angrily through the brush, out onto the dark of the water. Women start screaming, we hear big branches breaking, men shouting, a child starts howling in pain, everyone’s panicking, people are running back into the river, the boat is pushing off, the second is turning midstream, people are dragging themselves back on board. The video camera is getting it all. Susan isn’t clicking away anymore. She’s motionless, astonishment on her face. Across the river the smoker doesn’t make a move. Then the red dot vanishes: Maybe tomorrow night, maybe later tonight?

8. Agents like polite, chatty, cooperative and friendly.  They like compliant.  These things keep  them happy.  You want happy machine-gun-carrying agents, not unhappy ones.  You will be all these things.

Yes, you will. No lawyer boy, OK? Not here, not now.

9. The agents will not harm you. Their concern is legitimate, their admonishments to ‘be careful,’ sincere. You will express your gratitude. You will be sincere. If at any time you get a bad feeling, you will leave. You will leave now.

Entry, April 10th, 2011: It’s blazing hot. We’re deep in the thicket, at the edge of a dune over-looking the river. Last week a van on the south-side panicked when we popped up over the dune. Jon had his telephoto. When they saw it they started running in all directions, freaked out, tossing all the product back in the van; they high tailed it out of there. I feel strangely nervous. Not comfortable. Something’s off. My eyes keep turning to the right. But I can name no reason. From the left a sweat-covered Agent suddenly appears in a cowboy hat. The Agent says somebody is sneaking up on us. I, the lone agent, and my friend, scan the brush intensely. We hear hushed, angry voices. On the right, there’s a metallic clicking sound? The agent looks at us, we look at him, and we all decide we need to leave. Immediately.

While I have the gravest reservations about the Federal policies the BP enforce, I suspect, along with a bit of luck and trust in the self, they’re the only reason I’m around to write this. If you need to film on the Rio, do it, there’s truth there, and the truth is, hey, it’s a lot of fun. But try to keep these rules in mind. And good luck. See you down by the river.

Borderlife, focusing on art and life at the river’s edge, is now in post-production. Our documentary is about the militarized border and how people adapt to it and subvert it. It’s the story of human creativity amid the economic, political and existential struggle created by the Department of Homeland Security’s response to the US/Mexican border.

Lee Basham is a professor of Philosophy at South Texas College, and an Independent cinematographer. His film, Joined at the River, received high recognition; the Omar Vasquez Case documentary is currently in production.

The staff and volunteers at VOA have really put together a great set of informative, provocative, creative and in depth reviews and articles for the PAM issue, so it is not an issue you should miss.

• Blue Star Arts Complex
• Liberty Bar
• Art Inc.
• Twin Sisters
• SAMA (San Antonio Museum of Art)
• Witte Museum
• Herwecks Art Supply (Downtown San Antonio)
• REM Gallery
• The Bonham Exchange
• Bihl Haus Arts
• Bismark Studios
• The San Antonio School for Inquiry and Creativity
• G Gallery
• Station Museum
• Redbud Gallery
• Art Car Museum
• Audley Society Gallery

This list will be updated daily, as even more issues of the magazine are being sent out as I type this!  So check back soon, get yours before they are all gone!

Click here for a pdf download of the issue!  Read it, print it…share it!  Also, check out the archives page for a few old issues for available for pdf download.

The PAM Edition of VOA is filled to the brim with articles regarding any of the key political talking points and hot topic issues we all face on a daily basis, and a few that you probably didn’t even know you faced at all.

Businesses and galleries who are interested in getting a stack of issues for your establishment, please feel free to contact me (Allen Keckonen) at one of the below listed sites!

My Examiner.com feed -  San Antonio area art and events.

Low World -  My Personal site.  Short Stories, photography, project updates, stuff…

Voices of Art Magazine -  an archive of my articles for VOA.

Flickr -  My photostream, includes works in progress.

Facebook -  For networking, art, fun and strangeness.

Google+ -  My profile.

LinkedIn -  Professional profile and networking.

In Gary’s Sweeney’s Take a Chance, presented at Three Walls Art  Space, the artist has recycled local political signs, cutting out and arranging the pictures of the candidates.  In smaller signage, written in cut vinyl, are the lyrics of the 1978 ABBA song Take a Chance on Me. The song plays endlessly in the background, its lyrics are repeated across the gallery’s walls in an assortment of fonts made for Word.

With repetition, the political signage has its formula laid bare. Blue backgrounds. White serif letters. Most likely,  a star somewhere. A photo of a blandly attractive person. The signs may seem like nothing more than banal popular culture, but it’s also our current debased version of democracy. Though an empty pop song and uninspired political signs might seem harmless enough, what’s really going on is the work of a machine whose purpose is to limit your options. It’s a coercion to force a choice between pre-selected choices you would not have picked in the first place  – like the same fifteen songs that are on the radio. Sure, I’ll passively accept an ABBA song on the Classic Oldies station’s choice the same way I passively accept the whoever the Democrats select as the candidate.

I  was surprised when I saw the artist use the face of a candidate that I actually did the design for. I liked the candidate and wanted to produce work that was well designed,  instead of the other generally bad work. Although as soon as she won the primary, the campaign’s graphics were turned over to the political party’s machine to look more like what was being produced by everyone else with design as formulaic as an insipid pop song.

Sweeney is a master of re-appropriation. His most well-known works are public art, in the main parking lot of the San Antonio Museum of Art and at the Denver and San Antonio airports. In these pieces, 20th century lettering and signage are chopped up and reassembled and collaged.  Those pieces work because the scale of the signage and outdoor lettering work for large public spaces. Though the boldness and flatness of the pieces gave the space something of a closed  feeling, the size of the gallery space works fine for both these pieces and the message. The viewer walks in and takes in the color, text and sound experience in the small area for about the length of the song and it works.  I think at a public level, however, at the same scale in the outdoor environment  that  the source elements are designed for, it would be something more than what’s on the walls of the gallery. Free the signs, Gary.

Just down the hall from Sweeney in the Cactus Bra art space is Sabra Booth’s short film Slick. The animation is a retelling of the BP oil disaster. Booth finger-paints with oil and petroleum jelly. This way of painting, along with her stop-motion animation technique makes for a very visceral experience. Small finger marks rapidly push greasy, dark material in complex patterns. Hapless shrimp are couched in these complex gooey marks as they ooze material from their shiny bodies. The animation follows the animal’s journey from the ocean to the dinner table.  Clean graphic cutouts of a nuclear family sit around a dinner table, devouring the greasy seafood. The end of the animation promises another segment from this series. On opposite walls, Booth displays the props and actors that she used in her animation, along with elements from what looks to be the next monster movie chapter. They function best as DVD extras for a gallery show. They may not be fully realized pieces, but instead are an interesting look at what went into the making of the animation. Film and video can often be a sealed product, so it was interesting for the artist to open up her process to the audience.
With old techniques such as the stop-motion animation, finger-painting, and cut paper,  Sabra’s work has a deliberate down-and-dirty DIY appeal. It felt like a lot of whimsical ‘80s independent  animation, like Tom Tom Club’s Genius of Love or something more experimental out of MTV’s Liquid Television. Like Sweeney’s room, the piece is well-scaled to its small gallery space. The film is quick and graphic and people steadily cycled through the gallery, watching the film in its entirety. I have to say, I appreciate work that’s timed to a reasonable viewing time. When I uncomfortably give up on an interminable art video, all I feel from the piece is ashamed that I didn’t have the attention span to appreciate an artist’s 25 minute visual poem.  Slick is part editorial cartoon, part complex play of visceral gooey patterns,  and part fun animated funk.

Robert B Gonzales graduated from UT Austin with degrees in Philosophy and Art History. He is a critic, graphic and fine artist from San Antonio.

I have never really cared much for politics in art. Why? It’s mostly because who profess political art are typically more interested in the message over the medium – and it suffers. The majority of my political art experiences in Texas – local shows, write-ups, and conversations, always seem to gravitate towards clichés of social justices or f#*k corporate America for ruining the world or placing guilt on those who victimized XYZ, to the decadence of the rich suburban American. It’s a crowd that’s comfortable in a rambling outrage about something that Bush did and rarely ever converses, but is more inclined to broadcast. Most of the art endeavors had a proclamation to educate all the ignorant masses of consumer yahoos and idiots in our society. Their targets are the kinds of people who would shop at Wal-Mart, or you would see driving an F-350, or suspect for voting Republican. Or maybe it’s just the artist’s parents.

Condoleeza Rice Playing the Piano by George Zupp

Over the years, I have been drawn into reading and watching politics like a soap opera. But when I read Paul Valadez’ article (Where are the right wing political artists?) and Freeman’s editorial outcry as to why artists aren’t marching in the streets and making art about this urgent time of crisis, I get this feeling that a lot radicals befuddled by their certainty that this is the end of the world and why aren’t you, the morally superior disenfranchised-youthful-budding artists doing anything about it, that something is a bit off here. This frustration about the lack of interest about what’s really going on in America is a motivational problem I might shed some light on: Who’s at play and who isn’t.

 
So let’s start with something that the readers of this magazine know about: the business of art and its culture. Back when I was in grad school over at UTSA, one of my Profs was going off about Bush and the Republican agenda. I told this Prof, “Did you know that about a third of grads (studio, at that particular time) are conservative Christian types?” The Prof was about to bust out laughing, “No way could somebody get this far with this type of education and be that messed up.” In Valadez’s article, in the wisdom of his investigative mindset he might have failed to realize that if you consider yourself a ‘conservative/right wing’ artist, you have no place in the contemporary setting (i.e. this whole magazine or exhibition spaces); your message is not welcome here. Thus, Paul has deduced that there are no right wing artists out there that are original enough to show or be seen, or he would have known about them by now. So lets talk about the art culture for a sec. If you even think you’re a conservative/right wing person or God forbid – a Tea Party person – you basically shut the f#*k up, cause you don’t want your ‘art career’  being tanked by these loud mouths spreading rumors about how bigoted, hateful, and stupid you are. And they are out there picking fights – they would love to pen you as a symbol of oppression, and your art as evil! Hisss! Hissss! Evil! Believe me, I know, try just it for fun. Hell, even as entertainment, some people never shut up and you get this feeling you have been outed as the witch in the holy monastery of art.
Paul needs to understand without creating a mental pathology as to why right-wingers have few original ideas or artists, and that most of the world views art as decoration, and that’s it. Contemporary art is about itself, it’s a society that talks about society, but is also a society that is removed from society, but feels it understands society, sort of. If anything, I would say conservative art is akin to posters or nostalgia of the past. Political cartoons aren’t art in their books. Art is a Remington or a Kinkade; it’s something they also might see in a coffee table art book about the old masters. The magazine Southwest Art has conservatives in it,  I’ll bet, as does the magazine American Artist. Do you think anybody in the ‘real’ world of populace America gives a f#*k about what goes on inside this magazine, or any random party/art/space spread around Texas? Left wing political art made by artists – aimed at artists for their crowd – seems opportunistic because it’s like singing to the choir; it’s easy, and who would want to disagree? There is the thrill that it might be shocking to some, but how far does that go when the exhibit is down in thirty days? So for me, political art made here in this zone has to do more with reaffirmations to the readers, mainly the fifty-plus top art professors/intellectuals/artists who would read this magazine, about the current fashion ability of any of these hot topics in politics that might trigger a commentary or art exhibit as to why America is going down the toilet and who are the good guys and bad (mainly the bad), which draws me back to: “What is political art to a crowd who agrees with you already?”  If anything, politics are very complicated unless you want to make propaganda to clear it up. Ambiguity, especially in politics, starts with understanding the legal matters at hand, continues with events that trigger political positioning – why they happen and how we come to understand them. My outlook has become more like a lawyer as I get older and less of a rebel rouser idealist. I don’t see why people don’t raise more questions like this, instead of exhausting themselves over the same issues again and again.

 
Contemporary art in a political scene should be less about advocating a side and more about creating problems in my book. Politics of  The Daily Show strive at a satire that would shy away from being labeled strictly liberal or left wing, because they do not want to be typecast to restrict the flow of their message. The ambiguity in a political art piece or a political statement, without being so obvious, should provoke both left and right somehow, and quite possibly evolve the issues and discourse beyond that of the exchange of a routine speaking point. Let’s face the fact, if I were to make political art here in this zone (i.e. exhibition spaces/art crowds), whom would I want to question or inform? The conservative Republican readers and viewers? LOL.

 
Maybe I can feel it or resolve it here in Freeman’s angst to motivate the youth, who might already know that the lines have been drawn for quite some time to a strict picture of black and white. Call it complacent, or cowardice, to not rise to the calling, but my father’s devils are not my own. A tradition of iconography has been established here that has lost its meaning beyond that of a good t-shirt design and a movie stereotype. Maybe that’s where political art should belong, but I would suggest that mixed messages are more interesting and might inspire somebody to say, “To hell with both sides of the debate, I can’t tell the difference any more,” and to evolve a new sensibility in politics and art.

George Zupp is a contemporary artist living in Texas.

Last December, the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C., removed a video titled Fire in My Belly by the late performance artist David Wojnarowicz.  It was part of a larger exhibit titled Hide/Seek: Differences and Desire in American Portraiture, that explored, through art, issues of gender identity in American history.  The four minute video included an eleven second segment that shows ants crawling on a crucifix.
The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and other far-right groups attacked the video as sacrilegious.  It didn’t take long for House Speaker, John Boehner, and Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, to bash the work, which led the Smithsonian to pull the video.

Cantor called it an “outrageous use of taxpayer money and an obvious attempt to offend Christians during the Christmas season.”
Emboldened by their November election successes, Religious Right activists and their political allies are now on the prowl for ‘obscene’ or ‘blasphemous’ art, especially in tax-funded museums, writes Rob Boston, senior policy analyst for Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The message being sent by the Radical Religious Right is clear: if we don’t like your artwork, we want it gone.  If it doesn’t fit their religious/political agenda, their ‘moral values,’ then it must be removed or destroyed.  This isn’t simply censorship.  This is what theocracy looks like.
For artists this is a wakeup call.  Along with academics, unions, immigrants, minorities (both racial and religious), women, the non-religious, and gay, lesbian, and transgender people, and ‘liberals,’ artists will be the first ones persecuted if the Religious Right and their allies take control of the government.  Failure to defend our First Amendment rights against this unceasing onslaught by radical religious and political factions is tantamount to sacrificing the artistic/creative spirit in this country.  And don’t kid yourself,  that is exactly what the radical right wants to do.
In an editorial written for the May issue of Church & State magazine, Jason Childs, founder and director of the Center for Progress in Alabama, sounds an ominous warning.

“I was a Liberty University-trained evangelical pastor,” (founded by television preacher Jerry Falwell, Liberty University pushes an evangelical Christian agenda), Childs explains.  “I was sure that I was right and that every other person not of my faith was going to burn in hell forever.  I was taught that we as Christians should take this nation back, only to find out later that we never had it to begin with. . . I want you to know that the fundamentalist political movement is the beginning of a cultural revolution that will take our nation to a very dark place.  You have to understand that this has been methodically planned and is being carried out with utmost vigilance.  In accordance with their worldview, my old friends do not in the least care about what you think.  They are against democracy, and they are seeking to end the rule of the majority in our great country. . . The far right, under the control of fundamentalists, is declaring an all out war on human progress.”

Why?
Organizations and leaders representing this religio-political crusade seek to impose a fundamentalist Christian viewpoint on all Americans through government action.  Artists need to clearly understand this threat to their creative well-being, their freedom of speech, and their freedom of expression.
The Founders of our country were brilliant men.  The First Amendment to the Constitution is very clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The Constitution was intentionally created as a secular document.  It contains no mention of a god, or Christianity, or Jesus Christ.  The only place religion is mentioned in the Constitution is in Article VI, which prohibits ‘religious tests’ for public office and in the First Amendment, which bars laws “respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  If you listen to the Falwells and other Religious Right leaders of this country, you would believe just the opposite: the Constitution was a Christian document.
The Founders did not create a secular government because they disliked religion.  Many Founders were religious themselves.  They created a secular government because they had seen the dangers of church-state unions not only in Europe but right here in the colonies.  Many colonies had provisions limiting public office to ‘Trinitarian Protestants’ and other laws to prop up the religious sentiments of the politically powerful.  Some colonies taxed citizens to support officially established churches whether they were members or not. Dissenters faced imprisonment, torture, and even death.
If First Amendment rights are abridged or restricted, artists would be the first to suffer.  That harm would come in the form of government censorship; what would or would not be ‘acceptable’ art.

The Founders did not want government meddling in religious affairs nor religion meddling in government affairs.  By separating church from state, for the first time in human history, the Founders created a government which protected freedom of conscience.   This is why art has flourished in the United States.  Artists are able to express their ‘vision’ without the interference of government or religion. Yet, the Radical Religious Right wants none of it.
Our First Amendment rights are under assault.  The Relig ious Right believes that the United States was founded as a Christian nation and that laws should enforce the doctrines, values, and standards of their version of Christianity.  They are absolutely wrong.  Their actions would lead to oppression, persecutions, and human rights abuse.

Artists need to be aware of the catastrophic consequences that a Radical Religious Right takeover of our government would entail.
What happened at the National Portrait Gallery’s Hide/Seek exhibit was a warning shot.  Artists need to be extremely vigilant when it comes to First Amendment issues regarding separation of church and state.  The threats are real.  The Religious Right is not fooling around.  Individual liberties are at the heart of what it means to be an American.  These are at stake.

Eric Lane

Eric Lane is the President of the San Antonio Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and Board President of Bihl Haus Arts.  He can be reached at eflane@swbell.net.

Weiwei Exhibit

Artistic Energy in Service to the State
Much of what we revere about our artistic heritage was created in service to centers of political power often to compel fear and foreboding for its enemies and servitude and adherence to a central authority by its population.  Scanning a panorama of architectural monuments over a 5,000 year period reveals many prominent examples. The common thread along this path is the vast human energy and creativity that was harnessed in service to the state or religious entity.  The artists and builders, however, were largely anonymous.
One ancient site of particular interest is the Parthenon, built in 447 BC in Athens, Greece. It has come to be regarded as one of the most beautiful buildings in the western tradition and is located in the place that inspired our concept of democracy.
Architecture, even in the modern world, remains a primary method of projecting political aspirations and agendas. The astonishing Bilbao Museum has as its intention to bring new economic life to the rebellious and poor Basque region in Spain, not to mention to enhance the aspirations of the Guggenheim Museum in New York. The Bird’s Nest Stadium, created by Swiss architects Herzog and de Meuron for the Olympics, was vital in helping China to proclaim to the world that it has ascended as one of the worlds great powers.

WeiWei detail

Cultural Patrimony and Hegemony in the Modern World
After thousands of years of rising and falling centralized cultures controlled by an elite and often hereditary few, a vastly more complex social order emerged in the late 15th century. Collecting works of art (often remnants of ancient cultures) or the commissioning of works of art from competing, but established, artists and their workshops became the expected norm for the new upper classes. Artists began to come out of the clouds of anonymity and although few achieved the status of the very upper classes, many stood above the average person and a few came close to being politically powerful in their own right. Peter Paul Rubens is the artist best known as a master statesman who helped broker agreements and treaties among governments while at the same time successfully cultivating a wide range of patrons. Artists in this period essentially owed their living to being politically astute and finding a patron in the church, the government or with a wealthy merchant.
In Britain, for the upper classes, an educational tour of the European continent was considered vital, and bringing home great masterpieces and relics of ancient Greece and Rome was pursued vigorously. One of the most interesting such acquisitions occurred when Thomas Bruce, Seventh Earl of Elgin, British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire received permission to remove sculptures from the Parthenon in Athens. This was received with some controversy in England, but ultimately, the British government purchased these works in 1816 and placed them in the British museum where they remain to this day. Underlying this acquisition was a sense that the contemporary Greeks of the time were poor descendents of the greatly admired and highly cultured ancient Greeks. Lord Elgin felt it was logical to bring these works back to Britain where they would be understood, appreciated, and properly taken care of.

Joe Bova

The Art Spirit and the Democratization of Art
In the 17th century the little nation of Holland won its independence from Spain and soon became one of the wealthiest countries in the world with wealth shared more widely across its population than anywhere else. Their modest, but elegantly furnished homes, were soon filled with intimate paintings that, although often possessing underlying religious and moral messages, depicted and celebrated their possessions and scenes of everyday life.
In the emerging modern world, artists became more defiant of conventions and reflected upon the changing conditions of the world. Art for its own sake came to be an idea in its own right. The Impressionists discarded the old standards and created a kind of vibrant painting that remains the most in demand in terms of the contemporary market place and museum exhibitions. Post Impressionists such as Vincent Van Gough brought a deeply personal rebellious sense of what artistic pursuit was about and helped to create the stereotype of the artist as an impoverished and misunderstood rebel. During WWI, a group of artists who called themselves Dadaists challenged all previous conventions regarding the purpose of art and concept of beauty, forever shattering aesthetic traditions and helping set in motion what many see as the incomprehensible nature of modern art.

Elgin

The Government as Curator
The Tate Modern Museum in London is owned by the British government and is located in a former electric power plant. On the exterior there is a prominent sign that states “enjoy great art for free.” It attracts millions of visitors annually, many of whom are perplexed and baffled by the art and others, often quite young, who are mesmerized and deeply engaged in the exhibits. It is one of the ‘must see’ sites of London. This free museum seems to capitalize quite nicely on its essential hip-ness through the sale of objects in its gift shop.
On a recent visit to the Tate Modern, I had the opportunity to view the installation Sunflower Seeds by Chinese artist Ai Weiwei. Mr. Weiwei played a significant role in the planning of Bird Nest Stadium in Beijing. Recently, the Chinese government destroyed Mr. Weiwei’s studio and, after warning him he would pay a price for his criticism of the government, he was abducted by the government and ‘disappeared.’ The Sunflower installation at the Tate occupies a space about as large as a football field and is comprised of one hundred million handcrafted ceramic sunflower seeds. Mr. Weiwei’s work incorporates multiple meanings drawn from his cultural background.  Sunflower seeds are a common street snack in China, that to him, represent human compassion, closure and friendship, among other things. The replica seeds were produced in the city of Jingdezhen, which is famous for its fine porcelain china.  The vast population of China is almost incomprehensible and this work seems to give some sense of the magnitude and overwhelming scale of its humanity. One desperately would like to pick up and examine even one of the individually made seeds, but that, of course, is not allowed. This over powering installation eloquently raises questions about our humanity and the relationship of the Chinese government to its people. It was his more direct written and verbal criticisms that caused his ‘disappearance.’ The art world, artists, and governments around the world are dismayed that this has happened. It has created an atmosphere of fear, foreboding, anger, and concern among all institutions that deal with China and particularly those that exhibit Chinese art. Most likely because of an international outcry Mr. Weiwei has been released, but still faces criminal charges and severe constraints.
In the United States our way of funding the arts is unique in the world. Most other nations support the arts with direct government funding and through bureaucracies headed by ministers who are government appointees. Only 13% of funding in America comes from government sources, and the beleaguered National Endowment for the Arts provides only 1% of that support.
There is, however, an enormous power exercised by government entities over the arts in an indirect way in our country. Government funding has helped stimulate private and business support through its power to legitimize art institutions. A strange paradox of the American political system is that this approach to funding essentially reinforces and parallels conservative political thinking. With such a tiny public investment, the free market is at play. It is easy to find most conservative politicians supportive of the tax deductibility of gifts to non-profits, but in the current democratic administration, there exists a conflicting desire to limit or curtail tax deductibility of such gifts. On the conservative side there is a belief that contemporary artists and museums often promote ideas that run contrary to public values and that in such cases public funding is not appropriate. The slightest hint of disrespect towards religion or challenge to military action, war, or apparent support of what some consider abhorrent behavior, such as being gay, can create an outcry. The very recent controversy over the Hide/Seek: Difference in American Portraiture exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery of the Smithsonian Institution has caused substantial debate in the art world. The Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution G. Wayne Clough decided to remove a video from the show by gay artist David Wojnarowicz. He did this because Republican politicians and conservative critics felt that the artist’s depiction of a crucifix crawling with ants was anti-Christian. The highly regarded Mr. Clough made what he thought to be a wise and pragmatic decision in order to protect the already challenged and delicate funding position of the Smithsonian, which is highly dependent upon Congress. The art world and museum directors weighed in heavily and negatively towards the Smithsonian and Mr. Clough’s decision. In the background is a political tug of war between conflicting views of the two major political parties that bodes poorly for the future of public arts funding at this time.
Political turbulence in the art world has intensified on many levels in recent years. In the U.S. Native Americans have fought to protect their heritage and believe that their home lands and grave sites have been raided, and that museums and collectors have misunderstood and defiled their culture. Art that was stolen by the Nazi’s from Jews during WWII is now being sought out, and museums are supposed to search their collections to make sure they do not possess such art. Nations are seeking the repatriation of works they feel were illegally obtained and taken out of their countries. The Greek government is battling with the British museum in an attempt to have the Elgin Marbles returned to the site of the Parthenon; they have even created a special museum for that purpose. In the midst of this chaos, the America Association of Museums and the Art Museum Directors Association, along with governments and international agencies, have weighed in with debate and some conflicting guidelines and emerged with general agreement on what constitutes stolen art and guidelines for negotiation and restitution.

The Next Planet — Will Robots Care?
The stress of the apparent current economic down turn is causing additional political problems for the art world.  With huge deficits and funding cuts in every level of government, arts agencies are witnessing shrinking funding.  In some cases, state art agencies have been shut down, and art as a part of the curriculum in public education is being eliminated or curtailed in many parts of the country. This, of course, contradicts everything that has been learned about the vital role the arts play in learning and cognitive development. It also runs contrary to the recognition that economic success in the future is utterly dependent upon creativity and creative thinking. Despite the chaotic state of the current political realm and its relationship to art, a more optimistic case could be made.
Indeed, art has been stolen, destroyed or misinterpreted throughout history, and guidelines for justice and restitution make sense. There is also beginning to be an understanding that had art not been appropriated and moved across the globe, we would have even less understanding and appreciation of each other’s cultures and, that because of war, conflict, and natural disasters, if the art had only remained insitu much of human cultural patrimony would be lost. The recent war in Iraq showed how quickly things can be lost through theft and destruction. Breaking down barriers in strange ways never anticipated, the internet is creating opportunities for people to access art from the darkest recesses of museums and Curators will no longer be the sole proprietor of examination and evaluation of cultural patrimony, let alone government. Individual and crowd sourced interpretation is both fascinating and horrifying the museum world.
Although human beings are far from reconciling living together harmoniously, there is progress. The ‘Arab Spring’ in the Middle East has also been given momentum by the internet and is being called a hopeful sign that all pockets of oppression may begin to disappear. The fear, of course, is that it could go quite the other way. The nation of Saudi Arabia, which has a great deal to fear in this time of Middle East transition is building one of the most ambitious museums on Earth. It is known as the King Abadula Aziz Center for World Culture. It is monumental and in its own way is as intimidating as the ancient gates of Babylon. It, however, declares as its purpose “a community gathering place designed to serve as a focus for individual and collaborative learning and the open exchange of ideas.” One hopes that the women of Saudi Arabia will soon be allowed to drive their children to this museum.
We have not yet truly come to grips with our common humanity, but art, often swimming against the tide of the political body, has helped take us a great distance. Some artists have begun to reflect on a world of artificial intelligence, the ability to genetically engineer humans, and the possibility of hyper longevity. There is the emergence of an idea called ‘singularity’ that essentially says human beings are rapidly approaching a time when they will be able to transcend and no longer be tied to their biological existence.  This could create a place of true inequality and beings that are like us, but not quite us. Art as the furthest reach of human expression, when untethered by political oppression, may be our best chance to sort out our common humanity before this strange possible future over takes us.

One Nation Under God

Although Tea Party folk haven’t defined an artistic style to accompany their movement, visual imagery certainly has been put to political purpose. Search the internet and you will find designs for t-shirts, buttons, and bumper stickers that mock President Obama, howl over taxes, and trumpet individual freedom. There are posters too, the most famous of which is Sarah Para Bellum by the political cartoonist “Dale.” Here, Sarah Palin’s likeness replaces Rosie the Riveter in Norman Rockwell’s Saturday Evening Post cover from 1943. Sarah cradles a shotgun in her lap, instead of Rosie’s rivet gun, and holds a Blackberry with the words “Death Panel” on the screen, rather than a sandwich for lunch. The image of Sarah prepared for war (with whom?) speaks to the defensive posture of the Tea Party movement and appears to thrill many, more so because it irritates Liberals than for its iconography. In any case, appropriating Rockwell does not make for original political art.
Historical imagery of the American Revolution is prevalent in Tea Party visual sensibilities. The Liberty Bell, Continental soldiers, “Indians” of the Boston Tea Party, and generous use of red, white, and blue adorn websites and tchotchkes. It is reminiscent of the cheerful public art that accompanied Bicentennial celebrations in 1976, but with a less genial attitude. Most didactic are the historical fantasies painted by Jon McNaughton that depict the Tea Party narrative in original, artistic compositions. In One Nation under God, Jesus, with Constitution in hand, steps out of a pantheon of American historical figures who reverentially gaze upon him and the viewer through the mists of time. In the left foreground, kneeling in awe, are a teacher, a mom, a marine and others representing various mainstream walks of life. On the right, with their backs to Jesus, are the damned: Satan, a professor, a supreme court judge, a liberal news reporter, a politician, and Mr. Hollywood. Reactionary historical pieces, unlike compelling artistic expression, require a lot of explanation; McNaughton does not disappoint. Slide your mouse’s pointer over the internet version of the painting and a text box pops up to explain the symbolism of each figure. Who’s the fellow “lovingly counting his hundred dollar bills”? A corrupt lawyer.  In Forgotten Man, McNaughton captures brilliantly the Tea Partiers’ fetish for the Constitution and disdain for Liberals. President Obama stands indifferently with one foot on the Constitution while all past presidents look on and react in a tableau that brings to mind Disney’s animatronic Hall of Presidents. Madison reaches down to pull our founding document from the dirt. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Reagan gesture toward the downcast, average Joe seated in the foreground, forgotten. Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, and Bill Clinton, applaud Obama. McNaughton’s work, delivered with historical polemics, is as compelling as an overly elaborate joke followed by an explanation of why it’s funny.

The Forgotten Man

 
Do Tea Party folk present a danger to art? Yes and no. Their efforts to diminish public institutions for the sake of reducing taxes will lessen public funding for the arts in schools and community endeavors. Yet art is spared, for the time being, from the ideological framework that is so damagingly applied elsewhere in the public sphere. Take for example, the most recent cultural battleground in the state of Texas, public school curriculum guidelines. Social conservatives with Tea Party sympathies on the State Board of Education made national headlines over the past two years with revisions to the kindergarten-12th Grade Social Studies TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills). Despite vigorous opposition from the public to a narrow interpretation of the American past, a majority of the Board enshrined constitutionalism, Christianity, and capitalism (the Board prefers the term “free enterprise”) as the guiding themes for U.S. history courses. A reverential catechism devoted to “American exceptionalism,” rather than guidelines promoting critical thinking and expression will be the order of the day in Texas social studies classes.
The Fine Arts TEKS are currently undergoing revision. The recommendations of review committees and appointed experts will become available in fall 2011, and the first public hearing is scheduled for January 2012. The fine art guidelines since 1998 emphasize four themes for K-12 Texas students: perception, creative expression/performance, critical evaluation, and historical/cultural heritage. The heritage category is apolitical at present and guides curriculum planners to include diverse cultures along with those of Texas and the United States. Tea Partiers may well try to politicize the revised Fine Arts TEKS by defining narrowly what “heritage” includes, while diminishing or eliminating attention to “diverse cultures.”
Tea Party folk have contributed little so far to political artistic expression (except for public theater, of course). They could yet do great damage to public funding for the arts and to art education in the public schools. It may well become necessary to stand against Tea Party efforts to limit or demean artistic expression. Perhaps you could earn a spot among the damned in McNaughton’s One Nation under God. There’s room for an artist next to the professor.
References:
El Lissitzsky, Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge, http://www.designishistory.com/1920/e-lissitzky/.
Dale, “Sarah Para Bellum,” political cartoon, All Right Magazine, April 27, 2009, http://www.allrighmagazine.com/political-cartoons/daletoon-of-the-day-sarah-para-bellum-2424/.
Jon McNaughton, http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/.
Texas Education Agency, “Social Studies TEKS,” http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=3643.
Texas Education Agency, “Fine Art Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills,” http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=2147499973.
Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part II, Chapter 117, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Fine Arts, http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter117/index.html.

David Fisher is a historian teaching at the University of Texas-Brownsville.

by Phyllis L. Evans

For the past five years, South Texas College, located in the US/Mexico border community of McAllen Texas, has hosted a Human Rights themed exhibition in conjunction with an annual Human Trafficking conference.

The art exhibit serves as an educational event that addresses global and regional human rights concerns. Emphasis is placed on opening both internal and external dialogues to confront the horrors and injustices that occur throughout the entire modern world.  As a border community, through which many immigrants are willingly and unwillingly smuggled each day, this event is especially relevant to the unique problems faced by the people who live in South Texas. “Through the exhibit’s conceptually and aesthetically unique artwork we hope to connect with viewers on an emonal and personal level,” says Richard Lubben, who teaches art at South Texas College and serves as the exhibit coordinator and juror.

As the show gains notoriety, submissions have grown increasingly compelling with each year. The 2010 Best of Show winner, Jim Boden’s Interrogate #42, oil on Mylar, depicts with bold gestural strokes a human backside enveloped in the somber darkness of what might be a windowless underground room. The figure reflects a harsh, singular light source, suggestive of a bright lamp used in interrogation. The paint appears to have been applied violently with large swatches of red paint slicing across the flesh. “I awarded Jim Boden’s oil painting, “Interrogate #42,” the Best of Show award because of its powerful visual and conceptual impact.  The brushwork has a raw and energetic quality that I think effectively conveys the brutality of the concept, but at the same time is controlled where needed.  I also thought the Mylar polyester surface used was an unusual choice. I think it communicated a feeling of shredded flesh better than canvas or another surface, “ says Lubben.

The art exhibit is scheduled each year to coordinate with an annual three day Human Trafficking Conference, sponsored by South Texas College’s Women’s Studies Committee. This conference brings together practitioners, directors of NGOs, academics, activists and law enforcement for the purpose of raising awareness of the crime of human trafficking and to explore the deeper causes and functions of human trafficking. Conference Coordinator Jennifer Clark teaches political science at South Texas College and serves as the Chair of the Women’s Studies Committee. She calls human trafficking a “deplorable crime…. It is an abhorrent, grotesque crime in which millions of people are entrapped. “ Clark explains that the economic globalization of the post Cold War era has resulted in a rise of the buying and selling of human beings. Poverty, social instability, lawlessness, gender biases, and ethnic hostility contribute to worsen the situation, resulting in greater and greater numbers of trafficking victims.

Several works in the exhibit open themselves to interpretations that deal directly with the issue of human trafficking. In Ellie Iranova’s digital photograph Broken, a nude mannequin, disassembled and discarded, wearily rests her head against the edge of the frame. Her vacant, indirect stare conveys a catatonic state of hopelessness. A broken plastic leg clad in fishnet stockings and a cheap red curtain backdrop suggest the sexual use of a human who has been reduced to an inanimate object. Broken recalls Hans Bellmer’s sadomasochistic and erotically charged dolls, but the emphasis here is on empathy for the figure that has been the depleted of her humanity.

Stephanie Meyer’s mixed-media work, Eye of the Beholder, consists of a rusted metal door in which a small square hole, just two or three inches wide, is cut. A realistically rendered human eye peers through the hole, suggestive of imprisonment and the psychological “breaking down” of a trafficking victim. The viewer is left to wonder which side of the door is shown. Is it seen from the inside looking out, or from the outside looking in? Are we seeing the point of view of the victim or the victimizer?

By exposing and shining a light on human trafficking and other human rights issues, the conference and art exhibit combined to provide a unique learning experience for both the students and the faculty of South Texas College. With an audience consisting of presenters and attendees from around the world, the show and conference together reinforce the idea that human rights violations are global problems that concern us all.

Phyllis Evans is an artist living in Edinburg, Texas. She is currently the Chair of Visual Art and Music at South Texas College in McAllen, Texas.