“Dzienkuje” Sacha Baron Cohen!

We were waiting for Godot, but you sensed what we really needed and instead sent us Borat! And Borat is if nothing else a moveable feast and a gift that keeps on giving. You managed simultaneously to offend Kazakhs, frighten Jewish anti-defamation groups, outrage the orientalism monitors, tee off hypocritically thin-skinned Americans, provoke laughter across the Beavis and Butthead, Southpark, and Archie Bunker generations, and last–but certainly not least–provide glorious opportunity for Western intellectuals for criticize and debate merit, meaning, and interpretation of celluloid masterpiece. Finally, thanks to you, we can now confirm that rumors of Yakov Smirnov’s death were greatly exaggerated. It turns out he is fine and doing well, having found gainful employment in great American city called Branson, Missouri (“Hours great…auditorium, career, and pockets less filling…but what a country!”…ok, bad example)! Slamma dunk, emission accomplished, and hiyya-fiyva, to you Sacha!

Talk about a movie that led to theatergoers being bombarded–even before they checked cinema times–with conflicting cues and instructions from cultural elites, trendsetters, and peers:

1) Go the movie. Laugh, have fun!

2) If you go to the movie, don’t laugh!

3) Go the movie, laugh, but later feign outrage!

4) Don’t go the movie–in part because you might laugh!

5) If you do go, there’s something wrong with you.

6) If you don’t go, there’s something wrong with you.

Borat!: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan can’t help but leave the impression that we may have become an over-scripted, over-programmed culture.

This article attempts to address some of the controversies and larger ramifications resulting from Borat the character and Borat! the movie (hereafter Borat!). It does so by tapping some of the wide-ranging film criticism, op-eds, and Internet postings that the film has spawned. An admission and disclaimer of sorts about the film seems in order before I begin: I went…I laughed…I wept …(but because I was laughing, not because I went).

Is for make fun of Kazakh peoples!…NOT!!!

Let us begin with a question that has consumed so many keystrokes in recent months. In part we can do so because Sacha Baron Cohen’s intent (i.e. production/supply side) is so much more straightforward than is the question of how the movie is or has been interpreted and used by audiences (i.e. consumption/demand side).

Shortly after the American release of Borat! an interview with Sacha Baron Cohen appeared in the 14 November 2006 edition of Rolling Stone. Clearly, a lot of people don’t know about the interview, haven’t read it, or don’t wish to, because on the Internet the debate about who Baron Cohen satirizes in the film rages on. While there can be, are, and will be many interpretations of who gets hurt as a result of Borat! (more on this below), Baron Cohen’s comments to the interviewer Neil Strauss really eliminate much of the speculation about what Baron Cohen intends the film to do. That Baron Cohen may have realized too late that there was real value and power in keeping mum about his intentions with Borat is possible when you consider that, according to Strauss, Baron Cohen was bothered enough by the encounter that he called Strauss back a week after the interview to discuss it.

Here is what Baron Cohen said that should–although probably won’t–once and for all dampen speculation about his motivations in making Borat!. Baron Cohen was reacting to news that the Kazakh government was thinking of suing him and placing a full-page ad promoting the country in The New York Times (they eventually did the latter):

I was surprised, because I always had faith in the audience that they would realize that this was a fictitious country and the mere purpose of it was to allow people to bring out their own prejudices. And the reason we chose Kazakhstan was because it was a country that no one had heard anything about, so we could essentially play on stereotypes they might have about this ex-Soviet backwater. The joke is not on Kazakhstan. I think the joke is on people who can believe that the Kazakhstan that I describe can exist–who believe that there’s a country where homosexuals wear blue hats and the women live in cages and they drink fermented horse urine and the age of consent has been raised to nine years old.

Thus can end much of the debate about Cohen’s intentions. It’s about the people Borat interviews–in the film, Americans–not about Kazakhstan and Kazakhs. The film is designed to be about Americans.

Certainly, this was what Ryan Gilbey of London’s leftist weekly, New Statesman, took away from the film. An article introduced as “Sacha Baron Cohen’s exposure of crass Americana” and “The Kazakh ace reporter uncovers uncomfortable truths about the US” summarized the film as follows:

The violence that Borat encounters on the New York subway after trying to greet male strangers with kisses is frighteningly real….There’s an aging cowpoke who requires only the mildest of prompts to endorse the murder of gays and Muslims. Others indict themselves as much by what they don’t say as what they do. A redneck rodeo crowd shows no compunction about cheering Borat’s gung-ho speech about Iraq, clearly not realizing that what he actually said was: “We support your war of terror!” And it’s shocking to witness the tacit acceptance with which Borat’s ghoulish requests are greeted. Trying to find the ideal car for mowing down gypsies, or seeking the best gun for killing Jews, he encounters only compliance among America’s salespeople. The customer, it seems, is always right, even when he’s far right.

An April 2003 article by Lucy Kelaart in the British daily The Guardian, suggests that some Kazakhs–at least those with some exposure to the West–understood this about Borat even back then (based on his British television show visits to the US). Most of Kelaart’s interview subjects on the streets of Almaty were unamused, rather than really offended, and thought Borat was just plain stupid:

Ainura, 25, recently spent a year living in the US. Does she think Borat is giving Kazakhstan a bad name. “Borat’s not making fun of Kazakhs, he’s making fun of Americans,” she says. “They are gullible. Not one of them said, ‘No way – that can’t be true.’ The show describes a US stereotype, not a Kazakh one. It lays bare the American attitude towards foreigners: strong accents, loud voices, stupidity, male chauvinism.”

Of course, as I stated earlier and we shall see, were Baron Cohen’s intentions the be-all and end-all of the criticism this article would be far shorter than it is. Particularly in the age of post-modern criticism, the audience and any real or potential sub-audiences take center-stage.

The “Full” Sacha Baron Cohen: Beyond Borat

Lest Americans who see Borat! think in ethnocentric terms that we are Baron Cohen’s principal target in his work, it is instructive to look at the “Full” Sacha Baron Cohen, or at latest a broader array of the characters he has played on television and in film.

In Baron Cohen’s other signature role in Hollywood films in 2006, he played Will Ferrell’s foil and antagonist in the movie Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby. Baron Cohen’s character, Jean Girard, is a French “Formula Un” driver who takes the NASCAR circuit by storm. He is a walking embodiment some might say of the “freedom fries,” “red(neck) state” American stereotype of the French–a snobbish, effete, espresso-sipping, opera-listening, L’Etranger-reading (adding insult to injury all while he drives!), Perrier-sponsored homosexual (his longtime partner played by Conan O’Brien’s one-time latenight sidekick Andy Richter).

It is hard to see this as a role in which Baron Cohen is somehow exploiting the American audience, other than that by playing a stereotype intended to be maximally offensive he is in a sense condescending that audience and its intelligence. Rather, his role as Jean Girard seems quintessentially English (a la Benny Hill), and in that sense sheds light back on Borat, as we learn from his Rolling Stone interview that Baron Cohen grew up idolizing Peters Sellers and loved Sellers’ infamous French stereotype, Inspector Jacques Clouseau:

Baron Cohen’s future was set when he was roughly eight years old by two significant events. The first was seeing one of Peter Sellers’ Pink Panther movies at a friend’s ninth birthday party–setting off a lifelong admiration of the British comic actor’s work. The other was when his older brothers snuck him into a theater to see Monty Python’s Life of Brian.

Certainly, Baron Cohen’s most famous character–and the one whose success probably was responsible for Borat getting a chance over the long-run–is the faux “gangsta” rapper Ali G.. Indeed, it is instructive to note that in Ali G.’s first full-length feature film in 2001, Ali G. Indahouse, instead of an epic quest for Pamela Anderson, Ali G. is in pursuit of the supermodel Naomi Campbell. Much of the criticism of “Ali G.” sounds in fact remarkably familiar when we see allegations about Baron Cohen’s insensitivity to Kazakhs. Within the UK, Ali G. precipitated comments like the following from Felix Dexter, a comedian on a British television series. Substitute “Kazakhs” for “black street culture” and one could get a characterization similar to what we see in the wake of Borat!: “But a lot of the humor is laughing at black street culture and it is being celebrated because it allows the liberal middle classes to laugh at that culture in a context where they can retain their sense of political correctness.”

Tell It to the Kazakhs!…Nevertheless, Why Exactly Kazakhstan?

The forefather and prototype for Borat was the character of a Moldovan television reporter, named Alexi Krickler, who Cohen played in the mid-1990s on British television. According to Cohen that character was based on a doctor he met at a free beach getaway in Astrakhan, southern Russia: “…there was a guy there who was a doctor, and the moment I met him, I started laughing…He had some elements of Borat, but he had none of the racism or the misogyny or the anti-Semitism. He was Jewish, actually.”

This is revealing inasmuch as that the personal characteristics are separated from the views he ascribes to his artistic creation, which some might complain is the essence of stereotyping.

It was as Alexi Krickler that Baron Cohen hit upon what Strauss terms “a tiny epiphany that would eventually fuel Baron Cohen’s career”:

For example, when interviewing someone about the rugby team British Lions, he’d go back and forth with the interviewee for ten minutes, seemingly unable to comprehend that they don’t have actual lions playing rugby. “I was struck by the patience of some of these members of the upper class, who were so keen to appear polite–particularly on camera–that they would never walk away,” Baron Cohen says.

Of course, there was a difference that may have petered out over the years…at least in Borat!: originally, Baron Cohen heavily concentrated on the genuinely powerful, whether celebrities or those with money and power, but in Borat! he clearly started sliding toward “taking the piss out of” more average citizens. Perhaps this is where he “crossed the line.”

Greetings from “Post(card)-Commiestan”

The Borat of Borat! was still to have several incarnations from Alexi Krickler to the Borat Sagdiyev of today. After Alexi Krickler came an Albanian television reporter named Kristo. Only later did Baron Cohen’s “Borat” become Kazakh: first as Borat Karabzhanov, then as Borat Dutbayev, and finally in 2003 as Borat Sagdiyev. This is perhaps important for it suggests that although Sacha Baron Cohen and Kazakhstan have become inseparably intertwined, Borat’s “Kazakhness” was almost incidental. One is inevitably reminded here of mistaken intention sometimes conveniently read into retrospective analyses: Bram Stoker’s Dracula is today inextricably associated with Romania, yet Dracula apparently started out in Stoker’s imagination as “Count Wampyr” from Styria (Austria) and only later (like Borat) migrated eastward to Transylvania.

Still, Moldova, Albania, and Kazakhstan have a clear common theme–they are all part of the post-communist world of the former Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union. And it is worth recalling here Baron Cohen’s own comments mentioned earlier: “And the reason we chose Kazakhstan was because it was a country that no one had heard anything about, so we could essentially play on stereotypes they might have about this ex-Soviet backwater.” In other words, a generic post(card)-Commiestan of sorts.

Baron Cohen has not commented specifically on why Krickler had to leave Moldova and change his name and why his television reporter is always from the post-communist world, but we can speculate. In this way not much has changed from Bram Stoker’s time: the need to find a setting that is simultaneously exotic and yet familiar, that acts as a prop but not distraction from the underlying goal of the artform. One wonders to what extent Borat’s migration from Moldova to Albania to Kazakhstan was dictated directly or indirectly by real world events–Albania certainly losing some of the “unknown” character that is key to this plot device, because of heavier news coverage surrounding Kosovo in the late 1990s (witness perhaps, the film Wag the Dog). Distance of course makes parody easier (witness the infamous Weird Al Yankovic song and video parody “Amish Paradise”–talk about a disenfranchised community who was unlikely to get upset!) But only up to a point: Go eastward young man!…but not too far east because then you become unrecognizable and your audience can’t relate and the power of the satire is lost!

Molvania, Romanovia, and Kreplakistan…Oh My!

This still leaves a key question unanswered: why has Baron Cohen sought to have his mock reporter come from real places…however fictionally-described? If, as Baron Cohen suggests, Borat is not from the real Kazakhstan, but from a fictional Kazakhstan so absurd that “the joke is on people who can believe that the Kazakhstan that I describe can exist,” why choose a real country name to begin with? Mirroring the separation, reclamation of independence, and micro-state phenomena of the region itself during the post-communist era, recent years have seen an explosion of “really imagined communities” in the form of fictional countries placed in the post-communist space.

As John Tierney opined in a New York Times op-ed,”I wish Cohen had instead invented a country like Molvania,” rather than have Borat come from Kazakhstan. Molvania is, of course, the well-known fictional land of the Jetlag Travel Guide series [Molvania: A Land Untouched by Modern Dentistry], described as “somewhere north of Bulgaria and downwind of Chernobyl.” (Despite the fictitious country’s name, stipulated location, and characteristics, its three Australian authors maintain it was not modeled on Moldova or even Romania, but was inspired by travels in Portugal. ) Among many other things, Molvania is home to Europe’s oldest nuclear reactor, and as one of its authors relates: “It’s a very beautiful country now that radiation levels have dropped to acceptable standards.”

Unsafe nuclear power plants, environmental degradation, and genetic mutation are also the punchline in Ben Stiller’s 2004 comedy Dodgeball, in which we are introduced to Fran Stalinofskivichdavidovitchsky of Romanovia: “In her home country of Romanovia, dodgeball is the national sport and her nuclear power plant’s team won the championship five years running, which makes her the deadliest woman on earth with a dodgeball.”

Then there is Mike Myers’ creation of Kreplakistan in the Austin Powers series: Kreplakistan is a former Soviet republic apparently unable to protect its nuclear warheads and in a state of perpetual chaos (as mock CNN clips of people running pell-mell convey to us). There is speculation on the Wikipedia that Kreplakistan is “likely based on the real Karakalpak Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, now the Republic of Karakalpakstan.” More convincing, however, is the idea that “kreplak” is inspired by “kreplach, an Eastern European Jewish dish consisting of meat-filled dumplings.”

But is inventing a country the solution to the problems of negative stereotyping and prejudice? If the Internet is any indication: apparently not. Molvania comes in for sharp criticism from those who view it as yet another variation on the (neo-)orientalist theme. There are angry denunciations particularly of the photos the authors use in the book and on the Molvania website–for while they play the role of fictional, mockworthy Molvanians, they are indeed real people. Nor have criticisms of Molvania been consigned merely to the orientalism monitors. In comments similar to those of Kazakh officials about Borat, in 2004 former UK minister for Europe Keith Vaz criticized the book because “it does reflect some of the prejudices which are taking root [in Europe]…The sad thing is, some people might actually believe that this country exists.” Ironically, too, the choice of a fictional “everycountry” can in fact be interpreted as even more insulting because it treats the people of an entire region or group as an essentially undifferentiated “them”–“I can’t tell ’em apart, they all look alike…”

Borat, Class, and Urbanity

The parallel drawn by John Tierney between Borat! and Molvania is arguably a natural one, and thus one that many, especially on the Internet, have made. Particularly as stories began to come out about how Borat’s mock “Kazakh” home village in the movie was filmed in a poor Roma (gypsy) village in Romania–where the villagers received as payment for their work the feast of “a pig” and while Sacha Baron Cohen reportedly spent the night in the swanky mountain retreat of Sinaia –the issue of class entered the discussion about Borat!. It is difficult not to conclude that the issue of class can become funny in the film precisely because it is portrayed by a “safe cultural environment.” That is: poverty becomes broadly funny when it is portrayed by the comparatively unknown or culturally unprotected…be it Kazakhs or “trailer trash” in “red(neck) state” America.

The Polish author of the blog “Beatroot” captured this well in a post on the Molvania guidebook entitled: “Why is it that the only people ‘liberals’ think it’s OK to laugh at these days are the white working class and Central and Eastern Europeans?”

Europe’s ‘white trash’

…There is something a bit strange happening in the West. If this sort of book had been written about, say, African people, then, quite rightly, there would have been uproar and outrage. Words like ‘racism’ would have been used by lefty-liberal reviewers. But it seems that Political Correctness extends to all groups these days except poor whites from urban, rural or semi-rural areas in America and Europe.

Indeed, I would venture to speculate that had the villagers in Borat! been presented as Roma or “gypsies,” rather than as fictional Kazakhs, there might have been greater outrage about this, precisely because of the hierarchy of officially-recognized discrimination that prevails in cultural and political circles in the West. By being presented as the comparatively-unknown Kazakhs, however, it made it “easier” to laugh freely. And had the English tabloid press not taken an interest in the village of Glod (meaning “mud”!) and shown clips of the movie to the villagers, it is possible that these fictional Kazakhs would have been every bit as disenfranchised as the Amish relative to Weird Al Yankovic: according to the journalists, “not a single villager we spoke to had ever been able to afford a trip to the nearest cinema, 20 miles away”!

Sun-Baked Mud or When Things Get All Bollixed Up: The Uses of Borat

That finished cultural products can become intermediary inputs or be reprocessed for things their creators never could have dreamed of and might not even agree with is well-known. A few years back I remember seeing a television report in a major US metropolitan area where real estate agents were being investigated for using the shorthand “Archie Bunker” to describe clients with ‘discriminating tastes,’ thinking that by using such language they were somehow remaining within the bounds of equal opportunity regulations. Similarly, US troops in Iraq have described their incorporation of the satirical jingoistic ballad “America, **ck yeah!” from Team America: World Police on their missions. So it has been with Borat. This is undoubtedly the complaint of Jewish anti-defamation groups: that it doesn’t matter that Baron Cohen is Jewish and seeks to highlight anti-Semitic prejudice, if his audience laughs with, rather than at, Borat’s anti-Semitism.

The London tabloid The Sun, well-known for its “misgivings” over immigration and some would argue pandering to racist and xenophobic attitudes, searched for its pitchfork to make hay out of Borat! in the context of the looming immigration debate connected with Romania and Bulgaria’s entry into the European Union on 1 January 2007. The paper delighted in quoting Gheorghiu Pascu, 46, as saying “Borat is a son-of-a-bitch who made us look like savages. This is Transylvania, home of Dracula. If he ever returns we will stick a stake in his backside and impale him. Then I would cut his b***s off.” Two weeks later, under a headline blaring “We’re leaving Romania” was a picture of villagers in horse-drawn carts with the caption “Horse and cart … Romanians are heading our way for a better life; slowly.” The article quotes a villager saying “people will simply get around the restrictions by working in the black market or being self-employed,” and ends with another pledging, “Borat should watch out. He might bump into some of us in London soon.”

America the Stereotype…Now Coming to a Theater Near You:

Getting America’s Wrongs Right, its Rights Wrong, and its Right Wrong

Borat! is replete with what might be called “nesting occidentalisms” or “nesting anti-Americanisms”: that is, it creates and plays on foreign and domestic hierarchies of Americans, good, bad, and ugly. Chris Jones hits on the triteness and tawdriness of Baron Cohen’s itinerary in the film as follows:

…Borat starts his American trek in New York, land of the cold and the distant, where the only communication is by epithet. Then he heads to the South, land of the obsequiously and idiotically polite, where the local gothics haven’t changed their outlook since the days of Scarlett O’Hara. He takes a turn for Texas–where outsize nuts in cowboy hats chew their cuds on every corner. And after a brief sojourn in the ghetto–where every street is named “Martin Luther King Blvd.”–he ends up in Southern California, where surgically enhanced breasts heave in every swimsuit.

In other words, Baron Cohen took the road so-frequently-travelled through the European’s amusement park of American stereotypes (and some would have us believe only Americans view the world as an extension of Disneyland!) “Othering,” it turns out, does not acknowledge the class struggle or political correctness.

Baron Cohen certainly takes–or at least wishes to portray–himself seriously. It should thus come to no one’s surprise that those Americans who come off best in the film are a religiously-observant elderly Jewish couple who run a bed-and-breakfast and an African-American callgirl (variously claimed on the Internet to be an actress):

I think part of the movie shows the absurdity of holding any form of racial prejudice, whether it’s hatred of African-Americans or of Jews…Borat essentially works as a tool. By himself being anti-Semitic, he lets people lower their guard and expose their own prejudice, whether it’s anti-Semitism or an acceptance of anti-Semitism….I remember, when I was in university I studied history, and there was this one major historian of the Third Reich, Ian Kershaw. And his quote was, “The path to Auschwitz was paved with indifference.” I know it’s not very funny being a comedian talking about the Holocaust, but I think it’s an interesting idea that not everyone in Germany had to be a raving anti-Semite. They just had to be apathetic.

But is that really what we are talking about with the ugly Americans Baron Cohen meets in Borat!? For one thing, Chris Jones poses a good question: did Baron Cohen really have to “cross the pond” to find such disturbing stereotypes?

Because Cohen is now reportedly the highest paid comic in Britain–and because he styles himself as a radical–here’s the movie he should now make. Let’s see his Borat make some Cultural Learnings of his own smug world. It wouldn’t be hard for him to chat up a racist in a London pub. He could go to any British soccer game and find a cacophony of anti-gay slurs. Get an Irishman on the street chattering about Eastern European immigrants and someone will put a foot in it. Borat could spend time with French gothics from the Dordogne. He could teach us about the way Europe has integrated (or not) its Muslim citizens. Don’t they have hookers in Hamburg? Let’s see if they’re welcome at your better class of German party.

As Andrew Mueller notes about the movie: “What astonishes about every American he encounters is not their naivete, but their politeness, hospitality, and the extraordinary degree to which Borat has to inflame situations to provoke reaction. Had he attempted these antics in many other countries–bringing a hooker to dinner, desecrating the national anthem in front of a rodeo audience–he’d have conducted the publicity campaign in traction.”

I would argue that Baron Cohen to some extent misinterprets the reactions of those he “exposes.” Is what he sees with most of the Americans he captures on tape the same as what he claims of the “upper-class Englishmen…so keen to appear polite for the camera”? I don’t think so. The reserve, the failure to act, the consensual behavior of the Americans Baron Cohen meets, I would argue, is born of a desire not to offend the guest, no matter how odd he is, not to speak or ask questions lest one show one’s ignorance. After all, the biggest faux pas one can make in today’s globalized day and age, we are told, is to mock or express ignorance of our interlocutor’s culture. Don’t be judgmental, just play along, go along to get along…

This is American socio-cultural laissez-faire -also known as American self-centeredness–at its best and worst, a world where individual privacy can reach absurd proportions, whether it be not asking a neighbor about his salary or the worth of her house, or not interfering with the neighbor next door even though you might question the noises you hear at night as indicating physical or mental abuse. Indeed, the very American counter to Borat! can be seen in the final episode of the long-running comedy series Seinfeld, where the four main characters are hauled into court for failing to fulfill a newly-passed “Good Samaritan” law and helping a man in distress, whom they instead made fun of because of his weight–an homage, intended or not, to American self-centeredness.

Is it safe?…Is it safe?

“Is it safe?…Is it safe?” is no longer just something you hear at the dentist anymore. It is the thought that crosses people’s minds before, while, or after they laugh in our post-modern world. Perhaps the lesson here, however, is to not to take all this overly-seriously.

Americans should actually be thankful for such a movie: it holds a mirror up and tells us how some in the rest of the world view us. As has frequently been said, in the past many who disliked the United States had a compartmentalized view that separated U.S. foreign policy from the American people; increasingly surveys of foreign public opinion suggest that foreigners are no longer drawing this distinction (although it may indeed be that the perceptions of the former are negatively affecting the latter). Like it or not, Baron Cohen has tapped in effectively to foreign perceptions of the United States and he found enough Americans to play the ugly stereotypes he expected of them brilliantly.

On the other hand, yes, Virginia, it is safe to laugh at Borat. Andrew Mueller explains why:

The reason that Borat is such a liberating hoot is Baron-Cohen’s understanding that nothing is funnier than what we’re not supposed to laugh at–and, in the early 21st century, the pressure upon us not to laugh at the backwardness and stupidity of foreigners has been considerable. We are expected to take seriously people who want to execute cartoonists for drawing, and stone women for having sex–neither of which, as ideas, are dafter than the Kazakh custom, described by Borat, of compelling gay people to wear blue hats.

Nor should we cry too much for Kazakhstan (Moscow certainly doesn’t). As one poster on a website debating whether Borat is good or bad publicity for Kazakhstan stated: “Without Borat, Kazakhstan is just another obscure Central Asian republic.” Another pointed out, Borat is portrayed as “naïve, but he is not cruel or bad.” Others suggest, the Kazakhs could pull off a real coup if they were now to use the Borat character in a film to market “the real Kazakhstan.” Professor Sean Roberts notes that, according to GoogleTrends, Borat more than doubled Kazakhstan’s usual Google hits during the lead up and height of the Borat film’s PR campaign.

All that remains then is the final plot device for Baron Cohen to kill off Borat, so that nobody is upset anymore. A modest proposal: How about a “Dallas”-like plot twister with “Who shot Borat?” Was it the Americans, the Kazakhs, the villagers of Glod?… Why it was the Baron Cohen himself

Western dresses have a large array of styles and design patterns which magnetise our attention instantly. There is a wide collection of dresses in both online and offline markets where it becomes really difficult to choose from for any fashionable women. With such a huge variety of styles, these dresses are further divided in terms of occasion-wise wearing. And this is where one gets confused. Be it a wedding, cocktail, and lawn side party, college farewell or reception, at each and every occasion one needs to select a different type of dress. It all depends on the mood or tone of the event. Each and every dress has its own purpose and it all depends on how you accessorise it, will further pitch up your appeal. For instance; where wedding dresses need to be light in weight, sheer, and subtle in colour, party wear dresses should be somewhat flashy.

Bodycon Dresses – Bodycons can be said as the second skin of the wearer as this type of dresses is generally tight and glues with the skin to showcase your proper body shape and figure. These body-hugging dresses are silhouette-skimming dresses which make your look completely astounding. These can be also worn as party wears with skyscraper heels or can be played out with printed block heels and retro shades. In general, these drapes are available in plain silhouettes, single shade and plain design. But one can also buy online western dresses like this with quirky prints as well.

Peplum Dresses – It’s an essential for every fashionista’s closet. Peplum dresses showcase amazing mid-wave umbrella type of silhouette which starts from the waist of the dress. One should opt out sleek jewellery, shoes and accessories to complete her look. Avoid shoes while complementing and put on small heeled ballerinas or pencil heels. These dresses are formal environment-friendly as well.

Cocktail Dresses – Cocktail party is an event where clinking of glasses and laughing on dark humour is a trend. On this special occasion, one needs to put on something which is highly comfortable to wear all day long and showcase sophisticated designs and hues. Little embellishments on the neckline or sequins all over the dress are some special features of this type of dresses. You need to be a little bit more creative while choosing complementary accessories and jewellery. Try out contemporary choker necklaces with chic hanging earrings.

Wedding Dresses – A wedding is a big fat event in which a stylish and fashion serious woman is supposed to dress in eye-catching western wears. White, pastel, and coral hues are much in trend nowadays. Whatever is the colour, design or style, the bride or bridesmaids needs to look comfortable and absolutely stunning on this day. And wedding dresses here solve the purpose. These dresses are generally made of net and satin or silk fabric with less yet alluring designs. Apart from any casual wedding at the church, garden weddings, beach wedding, and banquet weddings can be enjoyed with the different type of thematic dresses.

Shift Dresses – These dresses are like the reincarnation of 60’s era and its clothing styles. Featuring short and straight structure, these dresses lie a little above the knees and look great when spiffed up by gladiator flats or block heels with laces. Quirky prints or sparkling shades are in trend. These dresses can be worn at casual meet-ups and as a funky college wear. This western wear for girls with captivating fashion sense is a must-have for summer, spring and autumn season. In winters, one can wear them with pop coloured leggings and boots.

I thoroughly enjoyed “Kishido: The Way of the Western Warrior” by Peter Hobart. The book can be read pretty quickly. It contains 50 short chapters in 161 pages and then includes a short Glossary of Japanese terms used in the book as well. While the chapters are short, the contain some very important lessons.

The book is a series of lessons that Hobart’s martial art master passed to his students while not only teaching martial arts, but teaching virtues embedded in all traditional martial ways. The instructor taught through example that conduct is just as important as ability. He exemplified integrity, dignity, courtesy, chivalry, truth, trust, benevolence, and wisdom. He passed these lessons to his students, and now Hobart has written them down so the reader can blend the philosophical and spiritual concepts found in martial arts with the physical and technical training of their specific art.

The lessons are categorized in five parts: Foundation, Range, Strategy, Harmony, and Void. There are ten chapters in each section, and they cover topics such as: Shoshin (An Open Mind), Junshin (A Pure Heart), Fudoshin (A Determined Spirit), Heiho (Strategy), Gi (Right Decision), Yu (Bravery), Jin (Benevolence), Rei (Right Action), Makoto (Truth), The Dao (Interconnectedness), and Girei (Professional Courtesy).

There are quite a few topics with quite a range of lessons. I think some of the most important are illustrated in the final chapter, those of gi, yu, jin, rei, makoto, meiyo, and chugi; or Right Decision, Bravery, Benevolence, Right Action, Truth, Honor, and Loyalty.

The book is full of stories and examples of how the master not only taught the lessons, but lived them as well. I’ll say again, you can read through this book quite quickly, but it will mean more if you savor each lesson and look to see if you are applying it to your own life. I know I related many of the lessons to teachings that I’ve had from my instructors and I looked for ways that I could better live by the code outlined in this book to make me a better teacher as well. I hope to be an example of these traits to my students also, and I truly believe if you are going to teach someone skills that can hurt or kill someone, you must also instill the positive character traits so that person will only use those skills if necessary and will never misuse the teachings.

I highly recommend this book. I believe the teachings Hobart has shared from the wise master will enhance your own martial art journey.

Photorealism — The Concept

Photorealism, also known as Hyperrealism, Sharp Focus, or New Realism, is a form of Modern Western Painting. It is a step closer to reality than the Realist painting style. It originated in 1970s and remains popular in the present Western Art scene as well. Louis K. Meisel first proposed the term ‘Photorealism’ in 1968. As the name suggests, the base for this type of work is a photographic image.

The Controversies

Public opinion on Photorealism has always been divided. Its nearness to reality has drawn a lot of criticism, on the ground that it lacks artistic imagination. It is argued that neither Photorealism is perfect enough to replace photography, nor is it artistic enough to be categorized as a painting in true sense. The argument in favor suggests that an artist’s treatment of work distinguishes Photorealism from Photography. In addition, its model (photograph) is a steady reference for painting that is not subject to changes, and thereby, provides room for depth and focus, as against a flattened representation.

The Details

Photorealists are careful in choosing their subjects, such that they do not capture the mundane and commonplace scenes. Sometimes, the choice is the ugly and unsavory reality, while at the other times the focus is on uncommon beauty. Mood of the scene plays a significant role in adding ‘body’ to the work. The technique used for Photorealist paintings involves transferring a photographic image on the canvas by the traditional grid/mosaic method or by employing a projector. This produces a magnified version of the original photographic slide to be used as the base for a Photorealist Painting. The final touches are given through bristle brush or an airbrush and little paint. The choice of tools depends upon the effect desired. Some painters avoid prominent brushwork and prefer the smooth airbrush finish, whereas others prefer to highlight visible brushstrokes to add ‘artistic’ grade to the painting. Nevertheless, the attempt in both the case is to closely follow the contours and to produce a photographic perfection.

Technically, the Photorealist’s impression of the original is a highly complex and cumbersome job. The artist has to take into account, the minutest of the details of the original shot. Many artists prefer to add some more details or features of their choice, to enhance the artistic appeal of their piece. However, the scope of leaving out certain elements is limited, as the painting is created on the base of a ‘true’ capture.

Photorealist Examples

Among the lead artists of Photorealism were Audrey Flack, Richard Estes, Charles Bell, Ralph Goings, Robert Bechtle, Howard Kanovitz, Richard McLean, Chuck Close, Tom Blackwell, and Don Eddy.

Notwithstanding the divided opinions about Photorealism, this work of finesse makes it among the most cherished art forms of the present times.

Spatialism – The History
In 1946, famous Argentinean sculptor and painter Lucio Fontana (1899-1968), came up with a novel art style, called Spatialism or Movimento Spaziale. This art movement was a contemporary to the Abstract Expressionism of the United States. The philosophy behind Spatialism was dispelled through its manifesto titled ‘Manifesto Blanco,’ which discussed the need for a distinctive ‘spatial’ form of art to capture the spirit of the post-war era.

The Correleations
Three art movements – Dadaism, Tachism, and Concrete Art – had a defining influence over Spatialism. Dadaism consciously ignored the ‘aesthetics’ in Fine Arts to bring out revolutionary compositions. Tachisme was often regarded as the French style of Abstract Expressionism. Concrete Art of 1930s was predominated by the interplay of colors and lines, for representation. Although, the underlying ideas behind Spatialism and the Abstract Expressionism were similar, Spatialism did away with the preponderance of paint and easel media, as the tools for creating artworks. Instead, it focused on the ‘moment,’ represented as a function of time and action.

The Details
Spatialism synthesized the elements of sound, color, space, movement, and time, in its frames. In a way, Spatialism represented a union of the fundamentals of science with Fine Arts, using tools, like television and Neon lighting to name a couple. According to ‘Manifesto Blanco,’ Spatialism was conceptualized to, “transcend the area of the canvas, or the volume of the statue, to assume further dimensions and become an integral part of architecture, transmitted into the surrounding space and using new discoveries in science and technology.” Another distinguishing characteristic of Lucio Fontana’s works was the presence of holes or ‘slits’ of varying sizes and angles, across the canvas. Fine examples of this technique include ‘Concept Spatiale’ of 1959 and ‘Concetto Spaziale’ of 1964. The body of these works by Fontana was known as the slash series.

The Artists and the Artworks
Spatialism eventually began focusing on the negative aspects in the depiction of its subjects. Its subsequent manifestos dispelled the tenets of the expression, artificial emotions, and color scheme over geometrical space, rather than capturing the ‘real,’ as it exists. Fontana’s 1947 work, ‘Black Spatial Environment’ was a classic example of this theory. It consisted of a room painted in all black and another 1949 work, named ‘Spatial Environment’ lit by an array of Neon lights. Among the most celebrated artists associated with Spatialism were Roberto Crippa (1921-72), Cesare Peverelli (1922-2000), Gianni Dova (1925-91), and Enrico Donati (1909-2008). Fontana’s revolutionary style not only created a niche for him, it became a powerful influence on several artists and art forms.

Science is the study of theory, its verification through observation and experimentation to verify those observations in the context of the theory. If the theory is verifiable through an experiment and a meticulous observation then it is successful otherwise not. Science includes various areas of study like physics, chemistry, mathematics etc. Science is passion of west but the reality is that it has its roots in India also. It would not be wrong to analyze the reasons about why India lagged behind while the west progressed ahead to left India behind in Science.

Why Indian science lagged behind the western science and why Western science is more advanced and genuine? Indian Science progresses like anything else through the early years of first century to eleventh century especially astronomy. While Europe was still living in the dark ages under pope and Christianity, Indians had already made progress in the mathematics and astronomical sciences to name a few. An Indian scientist was the first person to cite the idea that the earth revolved round the sun and not the other way round which was a remarkable achievement made thousand years before Copernicus proposed his heliocentric theory. Another Indian scientist proposed theorems on several geometrical figures and other mathematical proofs which seemed several years advanced. It was India which gave the world the idea of zero and numbers.The numbers concept was given by India which was later transferred to Arab World by Arab Scholar which later passed on to Europe. After having achieved so much remarkable scientific discoveries why Indian Science lagged behind?

Indian Science never saw the same trajectory of development as seen by western science during the renaissance period. The progress of Science in west began by Newton and other scientists. Indian society was Caste-ridden.Society had strata of castes where every Caste had its own hereditary profession. There were hard lines drawn between the castes and out of these boundaries no one could jump so if a merchant class worker do the work of art he has to do that work only even if he proposed some noble thoughts out of his mouth some heyday was a thorough nonsense as it was not considered his profession. Brahmans were the only privileged class to have some say in intellectual matters while others classes were left devoid of any such privilege. So in a way there was not such development of science was possible in ancient India where there was no freedom of exchange of thoughts and ideas. Once scientific development got broke in eleventh century A.D. it could not had been kept up in the later years.

Invention of printing press happened only in 13th century not in India but in China. It was certainly a misfortune for India that it was not invented earlier. Paper is more powerful medium of storing knowledge and passing on this knowledge to future generations, thereby building on the past knowledge. The Indian ancient scientists (as before mentioned names) could not have been able to do so. The knowledge once created could have been lost forever and could not be stored in a reliable and compact book. In contrast western science when in its nascent stages in the fourteenth century could have capitalized on the opportunity as paper was already invented. So a scientist like Newton or Copernicus or Galileo could have passed such knowledge in the form of books. What would have happened if newton could not have passed his knowledge in form of book called the Principia of mathematics or Copernicus would not have published his work of heliocentric theory? Certainly western science could not have progressed as it did. This knowledge in form of books could be then be used by future scientists to further the progress of the western science. Invention of paper cannot be cited as the sole reason for Indian science to not to have progressed. There are some more reasons which needs investigation as what was the real reason for Indian Scientific thought that originated around fourth century B.C. could not carry on to do what western science has achieved.

The Chinese traveler Hun-Tseng while visiting India saw well-established universities in modern Bihar. The University had well laid down monasteries and renowned teachers called gurus. The students lived in monasteries and taught in areas of literature, history, science etc. There was a proper medium of teaching and communication between the guru and the student. Many scholars visited University from various countries to learn higher education. There were some well-known teachers. Another University in modern Pakistan was also a great center of learning in north-western part of India. These were great institutes of learning and could have been great harbinger for cultivation of modern scientific thought for Indian in the coming time and could have placed the country on top of the pile in terms of scientific achievements and other knowledge frontiers. But what happened to such well-established centers of learning. The answer to this curious question is India was a hunting ground for plunderers. India was a rich country at that time with large wealth in form of gold and other precious ornaments. Many plunderers from North West invaded India and destroyed its well established establishments including the universities. There were invasions which created new rulers especially of barbaric nature who wanted to destroy such established learning systems and wanted to lay their own method of administration of the state. The ruins of great Indian Universities suggest how they got destroyed by these invasions of loot and destruction. Once destroyed these systems of learning could not be established on large-scale but prevailed on small-scale. Although these centers of leaning were not like the modern university system of west but they do had the potential to become great centers of learning. Western Science progressed with the aid of the universities system. These were the temples of higher learning where scholars could do research and publish their works. This system of universities could be considered as backbone of western science without which progress of science could not had been possible. Indian science could not have flourished without this education system which is obvious and sensible thought. So in a sense absence of such centers of learning was one of the determining factors for Western science having been triumphed while the Indian science which started so early could not had seen the bright day.

The broken string of the scientific thought after the eleventh century A.D. could be seen in the reigns of famous rulers like Akbar. There were experts for literature, music and other arts but not even a single expert on science. Besides that there was not any significant work on science written which can suggest that scientific temper prevailed at that time. Although there were enough works of arts like music, literature that could be cited easily. The rulers in the west had experts like Leonardo Da Vinci in Italy and Tyco Brahe was people whose works changed western science. Presence of such geniuses in the courts of rulers suggests how western scientific thought was given respect by rulers at that time when western science was just flourishing. So in a way ruling aristocracy played a great role in progress of western science in an indirect way by encouraging the scholars of such calibers to continue their work by providing the financial support. In India the situation was entirely different and thus one can consider that Science was entirely forgotten and the though of its progress in such a situation was out of question.

Science requires inventions like the steam engine or any other work of technology. The Indian climate is not so harsh and severe as compared to the western countries where cold and harsh weather demanded invention of technology. Requirement for clothes demanded invention of machines and other devices. Indian whether being good did not demanded any invention of technology. So climatic conditions were also had role to play. The demand to go long distances in harsh British winter led to the Invention of steam engine. The demand for clothes and other articles of use led to the establishments of factories. While in India the domestic demand of clothes, utensils and other items got fulfilled by small groups of private artists and workers who specialized in a particular work of art.

The scientific discoveries happened in form of patches of scientific discoveries but there was no clear trajectory of the progress of Indian science. The trajectory could had continued and completed but it broke in between by the factors as already cited like castes, the breakup of university system, royal patronage, climate, printing invention. In a way these factors suggest that Indian science could not have progressed as western science progressed. So in the end social, political and economic structural differences certainly made Indian science lagged behind the Western Science.

Introducing Barcelona

Barcelona is the capital of the Catalonia region of Spain, and Catalan is the most widely spoken language. The history of the region and its dealings with the other parts of Spain is often fractious but always fascinating.

Barcelona port hosts many Mediterranean cruises and Barcelona city makes a brilliant tourist destination at either end of your trip. The city has lots of things to do, from gazing at spectacular Gaudi architectural masterpieces to relaxing and people-watching at a sunny Las Ramblas cafe, and offers visitors a seductive feel for the laid-back Spanish lifestyle.

Barcelona Port

Ships dock at Port Vell, which could not be more conveniently situated, being just a mile or so from Barcelona’s major sights. Today the port has become a tourist attraction by itself with a large Maremagnum shopping mall with an IMAX theater, and Europe’s biggest aquarium. Port Vell leads directly on to Las Ramblas, the main Barcelona boulevard packed with cafes and street entertainment that leads into the center of the city (Las Ramblas is alternately called by its singular form, La Rambla).

There are eight terminals at the Barcelona port, divided into 3 quays.

1 Adossat Quay

Cruise Terminals A, B, C and D are located at the Adossat Quay and are furthest away from the port entrance. Terminal D also has the name Palacruceros. Shuttle buses make the short trip from these cruise terminals to the start of Las Ramblas.

2 World Trade Center Quay

There are 3 terminals in the World Trade Center quay called North, South and East terminals. From these it is an easy walk to the start of Las Ramblas.

3 Sant Bertrand Quay

Sant Bertrand Quay is just across from the WTC terminal. This terminal which normally handles ferries is only occasionally used for cruise ships.

5 Best Things to Do in Barcelona (Editor’s choice!)

It takes even an enthusiastic tourist several days to explore Barcelona, so if you have only a day or two, it’ll be a manic rush. Be sure to include well-known spots like La Sagrada Familia, Gaudi’s astonishing church, the romantic and medieval Barrio Gothic area, and the Picasso museum. Finish your whistle-stop tour by heading up to Montjuic for a wonderful view over the whole of the city and the surrounding countryside and sea.

1 Las Ramblas

A magnificent promenade connecting Port Vell to Placa de Catalunya, right in the middle of of old Barcelona. The street is packed with shops, cafes, florists, street entertainers, and the not-to-missed Boqueria, a colorful market. You’ll also pass by the Gran Teatre del Liceu, Barcelona’s magnificent opera house. Las Ramblas end ups at the Placa de Catalunya, a large square surrounded by offices, restaurants, and shops.

2 La Sagrada Familia

Barcelona’s funky church was designed by the famous Antonio Gaudi. Work began in 1883, and the intriguing building is still to be finished. Don’t miss features like the nativity theme of the frontage, the towers decorated with mosaic work, and the massive doorways inscribed with designs representing faith, hope and charity.

3 Barri Gotic

In Barcelona’s gothic quarter the buildings date back to the thirteenth century. The streets are narrow and winding and packed with busy life. At the center of the Gothic Quarter sits the Museu Picasso, featuring the works (unsurprisingly!) of Picasso. Also worth visiting is the Cathedral of Santa Eulalia, a magnificent example of early-European architecture.

4 Parc Guell

A big treat for Gaudi fans, Parc Guell is an intriguing public park. The planting is imaginative and colorful, but the premier attraction is Gaudi’s hard landscaping, like concrete arbors and mosaic lizards.

5 Montjuic

The pretty village of Montjuic rises 700 feet above the city’s port and is home to museums, art galleries, boutiques and cafes. Don’t miss the Museu Arqueologic with a diverse range of items from prehistoric civilizations from Catalonia and the Balearic Islands. Another excellent museum is the Museu Nacional d’art de Catalunya, featuring an excellent collection of early works.

Picking a Cruise from Barcelona

The most popular itinerary is a circuit circumnavigating the beautiful Western Mediterranean. Other ideas include the Canary Islands, North Africa, or longer trips to the Eastern Mediterranean and Greek Islands.

Typical itineraries would be: Eastern Mediterranean (from NCL) calling at Barcelona, Civitavecchia, Piraeus, Izmir, Alexandria, La Valletta, Barcelona and Spain, Monaco, Tunisia (from Costa) calling at Barcelona, Monaco, Livorno, Olbia, Naples, Tunis, Port Mahon, Barcelona.

Travelling to the Port from Barcelona Airport

By public transport

Catch the Bus to Placa Catalunya in Barcelona, next travel by metro from Catalunya to Drassanes. From Drassanes walk to the statue of Christopher Columbus at the port entrance. Wait for the Blue bus which shuttles to and from the cruise terminals.

Taxi

The simpler method for travelling from the airport to the port is a cab. The trip will take you about twenty five minutes and costs about 30 Euros in total. This price will include per-bag extras and additional airport and cruise port levies.

Also Worth Knowing

Currency: Euro

Language: Catalan and Spanish (though English is widely spoken)

Have you been frustrated with trying to find the right saddle to fit your horse? It is a common problem with horse owners who either compete or just trail ride. And a crooked tree can happen to an English or Dressage saddle just as easy as to a Western saddle. Western saddles are commonly known to have crooked trees. It is just a matter of knowing how to spot a crooked tree.

Here are a couple of tips and tricks you can use, to spot a crooked tree.

1. Set the saddle on a pole, or a rack, and look straight down the middle of the saddle horn on a western saddle toward the back of the cantle. Get the horn to line up to the middle of the cantle. If you can line it up, then look and see what the symmetry of the rest of the saddle looks like.

If you have to move the saddle around, in order for the horn to line up with the cantle, then the chances are it is sitting cockeyed on the saddle rack in order for you to line it up.

2. If you cannot tell with the saddle sitting on a pole or saddle rack, then set the saddle pommel end down on the floor, and look at straight down and line up the cantle with the horn.

Then look once you get the horn and the cantle lined up, now very carefully without moving the saddle, check and see if the saddle panels are going in the same direction as the cantle and the horn. If they look like they are shooting of to the left or right, you have a crooked saddle tree.

Transgressive Art – The Concept

As evident from the name, Transgressive Art is the one that transgresses against the basic norms or the traditionally accepted rules. In order words, Transgressive Art can be defined as a Shocking Art, developed to insult the social conservatives of one type or another. The word ‘transgressive’ has a wide meaning ranging from offenses against God, to breaching pieties and taboos, to crossing the conventional boundaries. Anthony Julius (1956), an eminent lawyer and lecturer, in his book Transgressions: The Offences of Art (2003) provides a useful typology to the Transgressions artwork, by breaking it into the following categories:

o By violating its own rule

o By breaking taboos

o By being politically resistant

Writer Jack Sergeant’s Deathtripping: The Cinema of Transgression was the most thorough book on the early Transgressive movement.

The History

In 1985, American filmmaker Nick Zedd in his ‘Cinema of Transgression’ used the term ‘transgressive’ for the first time to show his association with some of the filmmakers, such as Andy Warhol (1928-87), John Waters (born 1946), and Kenneth Anger (born 1927). In the later 90s, Transgressive Art extended its boundaries from art to literature and music. Around the same time, the art form gained popularity in China too.

The Details

Bordering on Dadaism, Surrealism, and Fluxus, Transgressive Art deals with mentally abnormal levels and psychological disturbances.

The Artists & the Artworks

Transgression Art was a Visual Arts movement. The sculptures, collages, and installations, intended to upset Christian religious sensibilities are among the most infamous works of Transgressive Art. The milestones range from the French painter Edouard Manet’s (1832-83) ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’herbe’ (1862-63), to the French artist Marcel Duchamp’s (1887-1968) ‘Fountain’ (1917), to American photographer Andres Serrano’s (born 1950) ‘Piss Christ’ (1987) – depicting a crucifix in a beaker of urine, to British painter Chris Ofili’s (born 1968) multi-media painting ‘The Holy Virgin Mary’ – some parts were made of elephant dung, to English performance artist Marisa Carnesky’s ‘Jewess Tatooess’ (2000).

Several Chinese artists have also done iconic work in the field. Zhu Yu’s (born 1970) images of himself eating human fetus, Peng Yu’s (born 1974) animal killing, and Yang Zhi Chao’s (born 1963) extreme body art are some marked works in the genre. In the early 80s, the famous American Transgressive artist was Richard Kern (born 1954). He started making films which some unpopular underground actors like Nick Zedd and Lung Leg.

The famous Transgressive artists of the 90s were American writer Lisa Crystal Carver (born 1968), American Punk Rock singer and lyricist GG Allin (1956-93), French performer Costes, and American artist Dame Darcy (born 1971). These artists significantly modified the art form. They were the source of influence for other artists, such as American band Cock E.S.P., German musician Alec Empire (born 1972), American action group Crash Worship, American writer Liz Armstrong, Iraqi-American film maker Usama Alshaibi (born 1969), British artist Lennie Lee, American Noise Artist Andy Ortmann, American musician Weasel Walter and American cartoonist Peter Bagge (born 1957).

Reductive Art – The Concept

Rather than being a distinct genre of art, this art form is a collective term for some Modern Art styles with same or similar underlying philosophy. The essence of Reductive Art lies in its simplistic designs rather than intricate work, clarity against obscurity, basic forms against elaborate patterns, and simple color schemes in the place of fantastical palettes. This philosophy took roots in America around the late 1950s, as a rebellion against the existing art movements. Finally, this art form resulted as a reaction of the modern day artists against the idealism of 1960s. Accordingly, the role of themes or subjects took a backseat and the significant of ‘concept’ was underlined.

The Correlations

Among the Modern Art forms and alternative names that can be categorized as Reductive Art are ABC art, Color Field, Minimalistic art, Cool art, Rejective art, Geometrical Abstraction, and Anti-illusion art. Therefore, Reductive Art is a pluralistic approach that finds expression in varied forms and techniques.

The Details

Precision and asymmetry are the prime attributes of Reductive Art. Geometrical Abstraction is mainly set in continuous forms and limited (or, only primary) colors. The idea (concept) for a particular pattern becomes the driving force behind the execution of these works. Therefore, Reductive art is free from the bounds of historical, social, political, religious, or mythological inspiration for the choice of subjects. It is claimed that ‘intellectual rigor’ for conceptualization of the works has precedence over the technique involved and medium used.

The Artists & the Artworks

Dutch painter Piet Mondrian’s (1872-1944) ‘Composition II in Red, Blue, and Yellow’ (1930), ‘Composition with Yellow, Blue, and Red’ (1937-42), and ‘Composition 10’ (1939-42) are works having rectangles of varying sizes painted in primary colors. The focus of Minimalism is to create as simple a design as possible. Russian painter Kazimir Severinovich Malevich’s (1879-1935) ‘Black Circle’ (1913) and ‘Black Square’ (1915) are strongly Minimalistic in nature. American Sculptor Tony Smith’s (1912-80) 1962 sculpture ‘Free Ride’ is remarkable example of Minimalistic designing. ‘Harran II’ (1967) by American painter and sculptor Frank Stella (born 1936), ‘Untitled’ (1990) by the American artist Donald Clarence Judd (1928-94), ‘Bronze Gate’ (2005) & ‘Untitled’ (1967) by American sculptor, artist, & writer Robert Morris (born 1931) are some of the other famous works in Reductive Art.

Conclusion

Minus Space is a curatorial project dealing in Reductive Arts, which has a strong web presence, a big community of artists, and a large collection of submitted works. Various members curate the exhibitions of submitted Reductive Art works of its members. This is an example of how aesthetics of such Minimalism and related genres continue to generate interest for the artists and the viewers alike