Author Archives: Nisma

Politics & Art

Posted on by
3

Last Friday I went to the Matisyahu concert at the State Street Theater. I had never heard of this artist before and knew absolutely nothing about him so I wasn’t sure exactly what to expect when I went. I didn’t really enjoy the opening act of the show so I didn’t have very high expectations for the main act.

Matisyahu arrived on stage to lots of cheers and applause from the audience. He had a very powerful voice, which I was surprised by but I liked it even though I couldn’t understand a lot of what he was saying. It was a very laid-back atmosphere and seemed more like a garage jam out session than an actual concert but I liked its relaxed feeling. He mostly let the band play and didn’t actually sing that much, but I was really amazed by the band and I thoroughly enjoyed their performance. After hearing the opening group I wasn’t sure that I would stay very long but I ended up staying for the rest of the concert because I liked the band so much. However, I will have to look into Matisyahu more to decide if I like his music as I didn’t hear much from him and I couldn’t understand a lot of his lyrics.

An interesting thing that happened was that there were people protesting outside the venue on Matisyahu’s behalf in support of his pro-Israel leanings. It was slightly uncomfortable as one of the women protesting shoved flyers into my hands and I remember thinking “why does everything have to be politicized?” This was a reminder of the very strong link between politics and art. Politics affect the world that artists experience which is reflected in their work. It’s really rare that one can enjoy a work of art without considering its political aspects. While I may not have agreed with the protestors, its important to acknowledge the political implications of art.

Are Microaggressions Harmful?

Posted on by
2

Last Monday, I attended the Intergroup Dialogue’s session on microaggressions. It began with a skit in which a white person repeatedly asked a person of color where they were from and congratulated them on being able to speak English well. It was a pretty familiar scene for me as I think it is for most Americans who are either immigrants themselves or come from immigrant families. This past summer, both of my jobs required a lot of public interaction so I was dealing with a lot of people every day. At least a few times a day someone this awkward scenario would occur and it always followed the same dialogue.

White Person: So where you from?

Me: Oh, I’m from Seattle.

White Person: Oh….but where are you really from? Like where did your parents come from?

Me: Well my family is Somali—

White Person: Oh yeah, I thought you might have been Ethiopian or something.

And this is usually where the conversation ends because said person wasn’t interested in anything about me besides figuring out my ethnicity. Most already had an idea of where I was from and were too afraid to actually ask, but they had the idea and basically wanted to confirm it. A few brave souls would ask outright if I was Ethiopian, which I’m not. While I don’t really mind the interaction that much, it’s still an annoying, repetitive occurrence and I wonder if it will ever stop.

The leaders of the dialogue dubbed this process as “Other-ing”. Once I confirm my ethnicity, the person I am speaking with immediately sees me as foreign despite the fact that I was born and raised in the United States. While this is a pretty harmless interaction, asking where I’m “really” from does insinuate that I am not truly American as if there are other qualifications for being American besides being born and raised here (i.e. whiteness).

Although sometimes, these interactions can become more harmful as they reveal fixations on “exotic” backgrounds and even the fetishizing other cultures. I remember one instance in particular that occurred this summer in which an older white man followed me in his car to ask where I was from and proceeded to tell me about how he collected his previous wives from “all over the world”.

One topic that came up in our discussion was whether we considered microaggressions to be on the same level as overt racism. I personally believe that overt racism is worse just because I think there is a difference between lynching, for example, and someone asking where I’m “really” from. However, microaggressions reveal persistent damaging prejudiced attitudes that are not socially acceptable to fully display anymore. So it’s important to have these conversations because these instances that may not seem like that big of a deal often reflect prejudiced ideas and it’s important to create spaces where people of color can safely raise such concerns.

Redefining Love

Posted on by
1

We started our discussion by examining images that expressed those different types of love. I was surprised that the image of romantic love was ignored while most people were moved by the images that conveyed familial love, love of worship or love of humanity. When we think of love, we usually think of romantic love yet this seemed to be the least meaningful type of love for the people in our group.

We read an excerpt from All About Love: New Visions by bell hooks, which defined love as “the will to nurture our own and another’s spiritual growth”. She rejects the notion that love is simply a feeling and that love requires action. I agree with this idea because I think that we use the word love a lot and for it to truly express something, it needs to be accompanied by action. We also see romantic love as something we have no control over but I think we actively choose to fall in love. But, we fall back on the excuse of having no control over our emotions to compensate for failings within relationships. We also discussed whether hooks was right in saying that willingness to nurture and foster growth was required for a loving relationship. Can two people who are damaging to one another still love each other? I think that if a relationship is abusive then it cannot be called love and it may be obsession or infatuation. While the two people may feel as if they are in love, they are choosing to express love in a way that hinders their partner.

I think people have trouble accepting that their partner hinders them more than they nurture them. We make too many exceptions in the name of love and don’t take responsibility for our own well-being. More people would get out of unhealthy relationships if we measured love through actions rather than words.

The Cornell-Ithaca Divide

Posted on by
1

Last Saturday, I volunteered for Into the Streets with a group of other Rose House residents. We went to the Greater Ithaca Activities Center and did some yard work there because the facilities employees who can only work limited hours are unable to tend to the outdoor areas. We finished the job pretty quickly as there were a lot of volunteers from Rose House and the space was fairly small. I enjoyed the experience and it’s important that we find ways to give back to the Ithaca community. As I spend most of my time on campus, I often feel very isolated from the town and I can’t help but think how, despite our proximity, we are very distant fro the Ithaca community. We have over 14,000 undergraduate students yet we do so little for the community we live in.

The GIAC is an incredibly important resource for families and children in the area. It provides tutoring for students as well as STEM programs. The GIAC receives funding from the city of Ithaca because of the need there is for its services in the community. The GIAC is committed to helping its students succeed and collaborates with the neighborhood schools to address student needs. In the past, Cornell students have received university funding to set up programs at the GIAC, but these programs no longer exist because of a lack of students willing to sustain and continue them throughout the years. If you are interested in helping out and giving back to the community, the GIAC accepts volunteers all year round.

The Failings of International Criminal Law

Posted on by
1

Last Wednesday, I attended Professor Ohlin’s talk about International Criminal Law. Professor Ohlin discussed the bombing of the Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan and whether this was a case that could be argued in court. While morally we may believe that any innocent life lost in a military strike puts that military’s government at fault, it is generally accepted that collateral damage is a part of war. As long as the amount of people killed is not proportional to the value of the military strike then said actions are lawful. However, it seems impossible to argue such a case because I’m not sure how one could go about measuring the value of a military strike in comparison to the loss of human lives. As Professor Ohlins pointed out, this is why such cases are rarely taken as lawyers prefer to take on cases where it’s clear that there was no value at all in the military attack.

This means that war criminals are rarely brought to justice. I was particularly struck by the manner in which South Africa protected the president of Sudan, Omar Al-Bashir, while there was a warrant out for his arrest. South Africa also faced no punishment for failing to bring Al-Bashir into custody. It was also unsettling to see how easy it is for big powers such as the U.S. to evade accountability due to the veto power in the U.N. Security Council as well as the fact that we are not part of the International Criminal Court. There need to be checks in place to ensure justice especially because the U.S. has so much power and maintains a global presence.

White America Turns a Blind Eye to a Bloody History

Posted on by
Reply

Last Wednesday I attended the Becker-Rose café where Professor Cheyfitz spoke about the history of mistreatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government. There is a lack of awareness by most people in this country to the plight of Native Americans, which is an attitude shared towards other race issues as well. Professor Cheyfitz began by talking about how Cornell University itself has yet to formally recognize that it exists on the homeland of the Cayuga tribe. Further, The United States government has put in place an extremely complicated system so that many Indian tribes are not federally recognized. The federal government also has jurisdiction over major crimes on Indian reservations but they do not exercise that power while Native Americans cannot hold their own trials. This is especially dangerous because 1 in 3 Native American women will be raped in their lifetimes. Native Americans have experienced various forms of genocide by Westerners. This includes war, ethnic cleansing, and cultural attrition. Professor Cheyfitz was sure to point out that the manner in which the U.S. has wiped out Indian culture falls under the U.N. definition of genocide. I was especially struck by the boarding schools that Native American children were forced to go to where they were not able to speak their native languages and were forced to assimilate. Professor Cheyfitz argued that part of the reason Native Americans who continue to live on reservations are so disadvantaged is because of their refusal to assimilate. This is a similar attitude that the U.S. holds towards immigrants, however, Westerners themselves were immigrants and established their society as the norm.

It’s necessary to have these frank conversations about the history of this nation and the global impacts of colonialism. We owe it to the people who are still affected and disadvantaged today to recognize our actions and work to fix them. It is also necessary so that we can recognize the forms of neo-imperialism that the U.S. takes part in today. Professor Cheyfitz mentioned how it was impossible to teach American history in schools without teaching Native American history, however most people in the room did not learn much about Native American history in grade school. He compared this to how we learned extensively about the slavery of African Americans. While it is important to recognize the existence of slavery in our history, I think besides slavery and the Civil Rights movement, we learned very little about Black culture or history that goes beyond stories of oppression. It’s important that we start teaching the histories of different racial groups in the United States, to be honest about the atrocities our government has committed, but also to recognize that the history of racial minorities in the U.S. is not confined to stories of oppression. We should teach all history in the same manner that we approach the history of White Americans.

observations by a Non-Artistic Person

Posted on by
1

Last week I attended the art show, which featured the work of Nicholas Carbonaro. The first piece that stood out to me was titled “Refugees”. The faces appear waxy, as if having been recently embalmed. The way in which their faces emerged from the cloth made it seem like they were pushing against a veil between the world of the living and that of the dead. The color of the plaster cloth, a faded brown and red, looked like it had been stained by blood and dirt. This piece seemed as if it had stood the test of time. This speaks to the story of refugees who endure lives of fear and hardship in order to reach safety and peace. I spoke with Nicholas who did not come from a refugee family but was inspired by their stories. Nicholas was amazed by how refugees often carried just one rucksack or bundle containing all the things they would need to survive so he showed a refugee family encased in such a bundle to show how that even in the most horrifying circumstances, the love of family is the refugee’s saving grace. The piece itself has its own story of survival after it was nearly thrown out by Nicholas’s father but saved by his brother. However, I don’t think this truly captured the spirit of the refugee because the faces appear dead, immobile and are painted a dull gray. Refugees are often on the run and live in high-stress situation with a lot of emotion involved, showing a lot of vitality and energy. I think the strength of the family plays a huge role to refugees, but I think that the message of the family being the saving grace of the life of the refugee makes it rather one-dimensional, as it doesn’t give proper due to the more predominant features such as the prevailing fear and lack of freedom, autonomy, and power.

Another piece that caught my eye was “Fat Cat”. Nicholas spoke to the crowd about being around transgender people in his community as he was growing up. This piece shows an androgynous figure with the left half of the person’s body presented as a woman and the right half presented as a man. The left side shows thicker, curled eyelashes and a sagging breast while the right side does not share these features. The right side is also partly hidden within the shadows so its featured aren’t emphasized as much and fade into the couch and the blanket. It’s interesting because there’s nothing inherently female about thicker eyelashes or a sagging breast and you could find those features on a man but that’s where the mind goes when comparing it to the right side of the body. This makes the audience aware of our need to identify and classify others because we try to distinguish the male or female characteristics when gender identity is fluid. This reminded me of when Laverne Cox began to rise in the media and interviewers kept asking her about her transition and surgeries. While being interviewed by Katie Couric, who asked a series of invasive questions, she talked about how the preoccupation with the physical transition process objectifies trans people. I’m not sure if this was the intent of the artist but while viewing this piece, I think the audience is complicit in that sort of objectification.