This past Thursday, I attended an art history
lecture titled, “Are the Monstrous ‘Races’? Representing Difference in Medieval
Art” and it was presented by Asa Simon Mittman. This lecture revolved around
the subject of monstrous beings and ethnicities and how they were perceived in
the old days and its connection to how we perceive race today. Mittman based
his lecture off of a few different definitions of race, each of which he
analyzed and provided examples for. One of the definitions of race he provided
defined it as being based on physiological differentiation like distinguishing
hairstyles and/or clothes (Bartlett). Another defined race as being a
structural relationship that is impermanent and unstable (Heng) and a third
defined race as being physically discrete, inherited, and meaningful (Blackburn).
He used these definitions to help emphasize his point that these beings tend to
be so close to us that we have trouble finding the contrast. This therefore,
led to his pondering of the question of whether these beings can even be
described as monsters or a different race for that matter.
Another
point that Mittman emphasized revolved around the idea of the unknown. In the
context of this presentation, the unknown is the East and this unknown is
always on the move. It starts out as Persia, then moves to India, and then to
East Africa. Mittman brings up the idea of orientalism and how this idea has a
large role in this theme of the unknown and that the “West” always believes that
they know everything and this mindset is what leads to issues such as genocide.
What
I took away from this lecture, is that by looking at Medieval art, you can
understand how many views and opinions of the world have been shaped. By
looking through the lens of monsters, it can be easy to understand how
different beings are catalogued by their features almost instantly. It brings
up the concept of what the “norm” in society is and how it was set in society
in older times. Essentially these monsters are setting the standard for what
people should base their judgements off of and this idea is very relatable to
contemporary society.
Overall,
I would have to say that although I enjoyed the overall message of the lecture
I had a very hard time following it. The way in which Mittman presented was as
if he was reading a very long speech and he did so in a very quick manner with
very little time devoted to pausing and discussing certain concepts. There were
many times throughout the lecture that I felt lost or confused and there were
many times that I wanted clarification of an important point that I feel I
never got. It felt almost as if Mittman had a time limit he wanted to keep to
and this caused him to rush through the presentation as a result, but the
content was nonetheless very interesting and thought-provoking.
No comments:
Post a Comment