Martha Rosler’s show at the Jewish Museum called “Irrespective'” is full of avant-garde and political art. Each of her pieces pushes boundaries and is politically charged, however what stood out to me most were the selections from her work called “Airfare”. Projected on a small digital screen that is mounted on the wall is a slideshow of pictures that show different meals given to different passengers who travel on planes. The pictures show that first-class passengers are served meals that include salmon, wine, pasta, and even creme brulee, while economy passengers receive nuts, water, jam, pizza and bagged snacks. The contrast between these different meal plans is apparent at first glance and makes a statement in different ways.
This piece is an example of avant garde art because it pushes boundaries. It is art that forces the viewers to look at a very present hierarchical difference right in the face. It does not shy away from issues or hard conversations, but rather encourages these conversations, which is not typical of regular paintings that hang in museums. It is forward-looking by inciting these types of dialogues. Therefore, this piece is not only avant garde, but is also political. There is an important message being made. As the blurb next to the digital screen in the museum writes, this “offers a pointed comment on the hierarchies of privilege in that system of mass movement.” These photos clearly show the class differences in society that manifest themselves in many ways. Martha Rosler herself is critiquing this disparity and is trying to send the message to her viewers to take a closer look at the disparity as well.
The art work’s experimentalism is related to its political content because Martha Rosler attempts to convey her political message subtly, as there are no words or verbal critiques. However, she still manages to make her point very effectively, and perhaps it is even because of the medium she choses for the work of art. By using a television screen very non-traditionally, it causes those who see it to be taken aback. This wakes them up and tells them to dissect America’s prevalent issues. There is nothing plastered on a huge white wall, nor is there anything hanging from the ceiling, like some of Martha Rosler’s other works of art. Rather, there is just a small black screen with eight to ten pictures on repeat that each show for no more that six seconds. But this innovative way of presenting the pictures causes viewers to become fixed on the photos, and therefore helps make her political message very clear.
This is a very well written and engaging post. It’s quite interesting how symbols of class can be represented through specific meals. Indeed, the very food we are served reflects our economic position. I really like how you address this as a way in which class differences are manifested in distinct representations. Perhaps individuals in the first-class are served such food because it is viewed as what they may be “deserving” of. Meanwhile, individuals belonging to economy (the lower classes) are denied access to such options. Wealth and status highly reflect what resources we are granted. This develops a general concept of having more regarding social hierarchy, that the more you have the better you are. Personal value should not stem from our ability to pay for things or our overall possessions as this breeds an unfair system. Rosler thus challenges the concept of being less deserving because of socioeconomic status. Individuals should not be offered special privileges solely because they have more money. Overall, this was a very intriguing post. Well done!
Molly,
I really enjoyed reading this post. Your analysis was great and it was well organized into three paragraphs, addressing the three different questions in the task. I think this collection of photos of airline are a lot more than photos of airline food. I think this is a mimesis of class as she shows some people are handed a plate of creme brulee and wine while others receive nuts and water. Why is this? Through her pictures she is able to challenge the notion of class and capture the inequalities found in society. This brings me to think about the question we mentioned in class on whether or not artwork is a moving force. I think her collection of photos are a way of capturing the injustice in class divisions and she is forcing the viewer to think about this even though it may be uncomfortable.