Beyond words

Slobodan Milosevic by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photoessay "Potency"

Slobodan Milosevic

Idi Amin by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photo essay "Potency"

Idi Amin

Saadam Hussein by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photoessay "Potency"

Saadam Hussein

Chairman Mao by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photoessay "Potency"

Chairman Mao

Augusto Pinochet by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photoessay "Potency"

Augusto Pinochet

Joseph Stalin by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photoessay "Potency"

Joseph Stalin

Adolf Hitler by Nina Maria Kleivan from the photo essay "Potency"

Adolf Hitler

The photographs to the left are part of a photo essay titled “Potency” by Nina Maria Kleivan. Its intent is to question how innocent children become pinicles of evil. The photographer is the daughter of a a member of the Norweigian WWII resistance who eventually was captured and placed in a German concentration camp. As a child her anger at what her father suffered was so intense that she carried around the name of one of her father’s prison guards in hopes of one day killing him. As a new mother she was struck by the innocence of children and then by the seeming innocence of dictators. “When all you see is a picture, Stalin could’ve been anyone’s kind grandfather. You can’t see the millions of people on his conscience or what a paranoid, dreadful human being he was.” she tells HaAretz.

Evil doesn’t always “look evil”. We come to associate the dress of Hilter or Mussilini or Idi Amin or Sadaam Huessein with evil because of a life long chain of choices. Those choices lead to personal actions and even world events that define a person. The actions and their outcomes, not the clothes make a dictator or a rapist.

Yet when we as a society finally acknowledge evil, we tend to look at the outside. The characteristic dress of the perpetrator becomes the symbol of evil and the process by which evil comes to be is lost. We forget that any of us, making the a certain chain of choices in a certain social context could be perpetrators of evil. In Klevian’s words to HaAretz:

We all begin life the same. We all have every opportunity ahead of us. To do good, or inexplicable evil. You need to be conscious that your actions have consequences that impact on your fellow human beings. The people I let my daughter portray didn’t give a damn about the human cost, the casualties, their thoughts caused. The responsibility is yours alone. You can’t throw it away – as a parent, as human beings – and say that you just followed orders.

Klevian raises important questions: where does evil come from? How does innocence become a symbol of evil? Unfortunately, much of the on-line debate has centered on whether a mother should or should not dress her child up in the clothes of dictators. When all one sees is a picture of a baby, it appears that all one sees is the baby. The child succeeds as a symbol of innocence, but fails as a symbol of choice.

We lose the tension between the grandfatherly picture of Stalin and the mass graves of the Stalinist purges carried out on his direct command. The clothes of an adult Hilter or Milosevic represent their choices because adults are actors in control of their life. Infants do not choose their clothes. At best their clothes represent the choices of their parents and the influence those parents will eventually have over the child’s life.

So is this an essay on the role of a parent in shaping a child’s moral identity? No, because at some point children become adults. They become moral agents in their own right and responsible for their own choices. The evil that so apalls us is the product of adult choices. Evil parents don’t always raise evil kids. In fact, childhood experiences of evil can bring out the best in human beings rather than the worst.

Dressing the child in the clothes of despot also fails as a symbol of the danger of following commands. Childhood in fact represents the one stage in life where following commands may lead to more rather than less morality. Most of society sees a child’s ability to follow commands as an essential step in moral training and development. How many times does a child share food or toys because their mother or father insisted that they do? Some children are naturally generous and outgoing. Others need to be encouraged.

Furthermore, the despots portrayed in Klevian’s photos were the ones who issued the commands. They were in full control of their moral agency and chose to use it to draw lines between friend and foe. All who supported them lived. All who opposed them were candidates for death. Of course they looked like kindly grandfathers. To the people they saw as friends, they were.

Susanna and the Elders

Judith Beheading Holofernes

Self Portrait

Artemisia Gentileschi (1593 – 1652/1653) was the one of the most important early Baroque women painters and the first woman ever to be admitted to the esteemed Accademia di Arte del Disegno in Florence. She was a contemporary of Galileo and counted herself among his friends.

She is particularly well known for her portrayal of women. In Susanna and the Elders she defies the then current tradition of portraying Susanna as a seductress. Instead Susanna is clearly intimidated by the attention of the elders who look upon her with whispers and accusatory words. This is arguably the first painting in history that portrays unwanted sexual attention through a woman’s eyes.

Her painting of Judith’s slaying of Holofernes portrays the same scene as a well known painting by Carravagio, but shows much more powerful women. Carravagio’s Judith appears almost afraid of her own sword and her accomplice is an old woman who stands to the side. In Artemisia’s painting, Judith wields the sword with determination and her accomplice is her own age and bent over to help her.

Both painting were produced in the order displayed above at a particularly difficult time of her life. At 17 Artemisia’s father had tried to find a place for her to study at an artist’s academy but she was refused a place since she was female. Her father did not want her to stop painting so he apprenticed her to his friend, Agostino Tassi. Shortly after, she was raped by her teacher. Her father pressed charges and Tassi was tried and convicted for rape. A transcript of the rape trial exists to this day. Excerpts may be seen here. Shamed by the way the trial assaulted her reputation, Artemisia moved to Florence.

The third painting, sometimes titled “The Angel” or “Allegory of Inclination”, is believed to be a self portrait. It was painted in Florence two years after the trial. In the painting she holds a compass and looks to the distance with both sadness and expectancy. The original painting was a full length nude, the drapery was added a generation later in the name of modesty.

There is no way of knowing what was in her mind at the time of these paintings, but three paintings together portray a journey from shame to empowerment to determined hope. The last is the painting of a survivor whose determination to follow her inclinations and look towards her source of meaning cannot be stopped no matter what sadness her artistic inclinations have brought to her.

An additional 31 paintings with biographical and artistic commentary may be seen here.

February 18, 2010toMarch 4, 2010

It began with a guerrilla art campaign in New York in 1994. Today it is a three part fine art exhibit at the University of Pennsylvania running from February 17 through March 5.

Charles Hall, then a creative director at Chiat Day Advertising, threw himself a 30th birthday party. The next morning he found out that someone had tried to rape one of his guests. In response he designed a stickers with the slogan “This isn’t an invitation to rape me” and plastered them all over New York City. More »