The theme of violence and brutality has always been widely dealt with within history of art since its most ancient times. To take an example the crudity of the scenes narrated in the "Lion Hunt" appearing in the Assyrian reliefs located at the British Museum, continously draw the the viewer to the point of maximal violence.
The scene continously draw the viewer to the predominance of the stronger on the weaker, violence cannot be seen as a funding condition for creation, but it is violence finalised to itself and driving to destruction and death.
This ancient conceptual metaphor operates in contemporary historical context, in which images of violence, brutality, horror, are everyday at use and consume to the mass of people. Newspapers, television and Internet web sites daily bombard us with imagery of horror and brutality.
To take an example the images of the American soldiers abusing of the Iraqi prisoners of war, the images of the Afghani and Iraqi war, state again the predominance of the stronger on the weaker, and old art mirrors contemporary times/art mirror one another.
What's the difference between Arshubanipal, the Assyrian king who murders the lions and Bush, Blair who state war against Iraq and Afghanistan? Is this civilisation? Aren't Bush and Blair more primitive and atrocious of Arshubanipal?
Didn't we learn from history? Is the western world civilised or the same as ever without change, untouched timeless completely unaware of the historical process that afflicted and improved the western society.
May 16, 2012
May 16, 2012
brutality, bush, canvas, hands, politics, war, Iraq, Afghanistan, cristina, Blair, prudente, world map