Amputee (Election II), 2004
Martha Rosler’s House Beautiful: Bringing the War Home, New Series delivers a piercing image of the horrors of war. This 2004 piece, titled Amputee (Election II), from the series depicts a war amputee walking across a living room. Present in the background is an image of President George W. Bush and his brother former Florida governor Jeb Bush. What appears to be smoke and flames are also visible in the window. The work is a reflection of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000s.
This work decisively constitutes avant-garde art through the style in which it presents the destructive nature of war. The brutal environment disrupts the peaceful household setting through a montage of different images ripped directly from magazines. Such a method strongly contributes to the work’s overall purpose. Political leaders and war veterans intersect domestic life. This definitely pushes boundaries by directly challenging the actions of our government through unique artistic means of imitation. The piece can be considered a mimesis in that it imitates both war and the home. The smiling president, the hallway, and the living room, all imitate the easy life of being at home, away from the terrors of foreign conflict. The household setting itself can be interpreted as an imitation of the family too. How the family interprets war is often shaped by how our leaders present it. The walking amputee is clearly an imitation of the genuine brutality that war produces, images that may not always be so present to those at home.
This work is very political, serving as a direct critique of poor foreign policy choices. Rosler aims to convey how repetitive American geopolitical actions have been over the past few decades from Vietnam to Iraq. Poisonous decisions by our elected officials have resulted in a diminished consciousness of the implications of war. Our leaders feel accomplished through their actions but may widely ignore the overall consequences their decisions have, what impact such efforts may have on specific individuals and if their actions were ever truly valid. The smiling President and his brother reflect the overall ignorance of the matter. One of Rosler’s primary intentions is to convey how society may lack awareness of such horrific events that result from reckless political leadership. It seeks to change the viewer through providing a distinct perspective as to how society may view war, that war may be distant but it is a product of the decisions made at home. We often overlook how domestic and foreign affairs may intertwine.
The work’s experimentalism is directly related to its political content. Through imitating both the war and the home, it crafts a distinguished message regarding how the former is a product of the latter. The individual at home should be more conscientious of what long lasting effects their own choices will have involving such intense topics, whether it be a citizen or an elected official. Perhaps the viewer should reconsider who it places in positions of power to avoid such cruel events from transpiring.
This post pays such close attention to detail and is an excellent interpretation of the piece of art. I believe it is avant garde not only because of the style in which in presents the destructive nature of war, but also because of the fact that in causes people to have difficult conversations regarding foreign policy and the presidency, specifically regarding the war of the early 2000s. This is typical of Martha Rosler’s art, as she does this in the art work I chose to examine as well. Her pieces clearly push boundaries in these ways. I also very much agree with Nick’s statement on the Bush brother’s smiling demeanors. There faces clearly represent a sense of ignorance, and viewers will most likely see a need for change. Really interesting and impressive work!
Your analysis of this piece is so wonderful, I loved Martha Rosler’s exhibit, but it was difficult for me to pay attention to a lot of her works. There was an overflow of information while I was walking through the exhibit so I was able to understand many of the pieces. However, I still had an emotional reaction to the work even though I didn’t understand.
All of the explanations of this piece make sense to me. While looking at this art I knew it would be about the wars in Iraq and Afganistan because of the fire and the picture of President Bush. I definitely agree with your idea about how this piece discusses how American families interpret war since we are so separated from the actual conflict. Overall, your blog post was super interesting to read!