This satirical piece calls attention to the ability of ignorance to infiltrate academia as well as the ability of bigotry to mask itself with “woke” language. Through a series of emails to an unnamed female, black professional, the sender, named only “Black Feminist Man,” reveals himself to be the very kind of bigot he claims to be against. It’s a quick read, but the issues it expresses linger like a bile in the back of the throat; they give voice to a frustration often felt in academic and professional circles which claim to be “progressive.” The piece poses the implicit question of whether or not renaming something is enough to change its nature.
This might pair nicely with this post and this post, which both also deal with the ability of words to shape our reality.
“The Couple in the Cage” was a piece of performance art by Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gómez-Peña that took place from 1992-1993, 500 years after Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas. It debuted at the Field Museum in Chicago, Illinois, and toured from city to city across the world while it was active.
During each performance, Fusco and Gómez-Peña donned the traditional clothing of the “Guatinaui” people, a tribe previously undiscovered by Western society. In the cage, they also performed traditional Guatinaui tasks such as sewing voodoo dolls, watching television, and dancing. The catch? Neither the Guatinaui people nor the island they were allegedly from existed.
The performance was supposed to be a satire of the human zoos (featuring indigenous people) created by Christopher Columbus and practiced for centuries thereafter. However, it didn’t go entirely as planned; many of the audience members actually believed the Guatinaui people were real, and readily stepped into the shoes of the white colonist examining the indigenous person as an artifact.
This video documents the entire tour, and is a piece of art in itself. It’s long, but it’s extremely powerful. Fusco and Gómez-Peña’s art is significant not only in the statement it makes against colonialism and racism, but also because it reimagines what art can be. In this piece, the audience is as much as part of the art piece as the performance artists themselves.
If you do decide to watch the video, be aware that it contains both racism and nudity; for five dollars, museum visitors were allowed to see the “male Guatinaui’s” genitals. Consider, as you watch, what medium of art this would be considered, as well as its shape, form, color, etc. Why might this performance say about gender? Sexuality?
Odyssey, Extra! 