Extra Credit for HUM - Movie Review Example

Shirin Neshat: Art in Exile – An Analysis Watching Shirin Neshat present how her of exile as an artist had challenged her view of politics and democracy in relation to her artistry and sense of art discernment based on cultural perspective, one may readily engage with her prevailing sentiments and depth of advocacy for the sake of politically unbounded art. Typically, art as itself in our common knowledge has nothing to do with politics unless it is forwarded as a critical demonstration in direct reference to the political body.

Shirin states that artists are ‘reporters of our people and communicators to the outside world’ which feels as if an accountability to speak of the truth exists in the hands of these creative individuals yet the government seems to employ suppression instead of support as most officials could not afford to tolerate revelations of hidden crime and indifference for the nation to discover. As she utters ‘artists are at risk; we are in a position of danger – we pose threat to the government’, recollection of her painful exile obviously details the great measure of physical control the political power has over cultural and social aspects of living which are especially sensitive to the issues of freedom and democracy.

According to Shirin, ‘art is our weapon; culture is a form of resistance’ yet it appears that such liberty must first be acquired as a privilege or one that is readily acknowledged from the beginning just like the condition of the artists of the west. Shirin admits that she is somewhat envious of these workers for ‘the fact that they can distance themselves from the western culture in their freedom of expression’. She is, however, worried that the type of culture that influences the western art is a form of detainment, more of an entity with a separate sphere detached from the responsibility of communicating higher consciousness that involves real political and social dimensions for the welfare of the majority.

I suppose this implies that artists are not confined or ought not to limit themselves to the scope of applying knowledge and skills within a profession where art only serves to be appreciated due to its aesthetic value. It is further thought-provoking for Shirin to have established profound commitment to studies of Islamic revolution and incorporate this instruction in her craft that exhibits Iranian women as the subject. Through her technical presentation, these women are depicted in black suit with a portion of their face filled with creatively written words that occur to represent inner struggles which cannot be outwardly spoken.

She expresses that the women of Iran, as a whole, seem to be a historical embodiment of political transformations so by studying them, one may well examine the structure and ideology of the country. By the concept promoted in Shirin’s photography, there emerges a unique potential of bringing the audience to the context of discerning significant roots of history and culture which have often been taken for granted in association to higher discourse that taps into political affairs. Indeed her endeavor far outweighs the power of mainstream art which merely amounts to a commodity.

This is completely alienated to the sensibility of the woman artist’s critical approach that necessarily reflects her recognition of the possibility to convey the ‘intersection of love of God, faith, violence, crime, and cruelty’ the understanding of which she claims essential as a lesson learned while away from her home in total disunity yet to return an empowered artist despite all the perils encountered.