The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.
The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.
The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.
The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.
The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.
The challenges being both black and male present in American society are overwhelmingly disconcerting. In Looking for Langston the main character struggles with redefining for himself what it means to be a Black man. His college peers and the neighborhood young men have a hard time accepting his sexuality. X is meant to feel he is not ‘black” or “male” enough because his sexuality does not mirror the construction of Black male sexuality sustained by the ignorance of society and the media.
In the article “My Brother” Thelma Golden argues black masculinity is a social construct loaded with an abundance of unrealistic expectations and stereotypes. Golden argues the construct of black masculinity is a fantasy and so off balanced from the truth that no one could ever feel the void of the construction of Black masculinity. I agree with Golden’s argument and I think her argument is the source for why watching Brother to Brother was so painful for me. In the film, Perry is fighting a battle tremendously larger than he is capable of coping with and combating. Perry is fighting against a fantasy construction and loseing his true identity in the process. The hatred and indifference directed toward X from his friends, peers and strangers in actuality has nothing to do with who Perry is and everything to do with what society tells them Perry should be. My personal take away from the Golden reading and Brother to Brother is the acknowledgment and appreciation of all the various perspectives, personas, and sexualities, Black men have to offer.

Before reading “From Homoerotics Of Exile
To Homopolitics Of Diaspora” by Sima Shakhsari I was not familiar with queer politics in the context of Iran. I appreciated that the article allowed me to delve into thinking critically about a complex issues by framing the topic in an easily understandable fashion. The part of the article focused on the hanging of Ayaz Marhouni and Mohamad Asgari, two men assumed to be gay and rapists of a young man. I was especially intrigued by how the iconography of these two young men’s images were used to make political statements on both sides of the fence. Shakhsari argued Iranian governement represents itself as a “gran prison for queers”, in Iran the images of Marhouni and Asgari were used for the purposes cautionary propaganda. However, in Washington D.C. the images were used for purposes of protesting against the murdering of Marhouni and Asagri. I am looking forward to lecture and hearing more about Shakshari’s choice to protest against the protesters in D.C. I am a little confused by her choice and would like to her firsthand about that particular experience.

In the article “Chicana Art and Scholarship on the interstices of our discipline” Latorre explores the concept of intersectionality as it pertains to Latina women as members of the art world. Latorre argues Latina artist use art as an outlet for social commentary on both their experience as women and Latino. Latorre suggests some Latina artists feel obligated to use their talents as artists to call attention to the injustices that affect marginalized groups of people. This concept of using art for social commentary reminds me of the art exhibition “ Now Dig This! Art and Black Los Angeles 1960-1980” I went to at MoMA Ps1 in New York City. Similarly, art works displayed in this exhibit all made social commentary on the social injustice issues facing Black people in Los Angeles from 1960-1980. I feel partitas offer invaluable contributions to the advancements of their race and gender when they utilize their art for social commentary., especially when they are minority female artists. Their art captures the raw emotions of historic events that textbooks leave out and are unable to convey. For this reason I cherish art created by artists from marginalized groups because it allows me to step back in time and feel what they must have been feeling during the time of their struggle when the art was created.

“Why have there been no great women artists?” is the question Nochlin’s attempts to answer in her argument, Nochlin offers several different approaches to answering the question: women have created great art but it has gone unrecognized, women do not have the intellectual art genius to create great art, intellectual art genius is nit innate to men but women have not been in the right circumstances to obtain intellectual art genius. I am not an expert on art and even after reading this article I am still not sure why there have not been any female equivalents to the likes Picasso and Matisse as Nochlin argues.

I do not want to accept simply that there really has never been a great female artist. However, I have never known of a female artist to be held in the same esteem as Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Picasso, or Matisse. Is the intellectual genius to create great art really only exclusive to men? I am not sure, but my pride certainly will not let me buy into that argument. Are women less great because the assumption is women have never created great art? Or is it more reasonable to say just because women and men may not be great in all things, the ability to not be great in one field does not negate their greatness. For example, as mentioned in the article the art of ballet it is commonly believed women are greatest at ballet dancing, but still even in this field some men have been declared great ballet dancer. But no woman ever had been titled a great women artist is the basis of Nochlin’s argument. .

I agree with Nochlin’s concluding argument that intellectual genius is not innate, and perhaps she is right when she argues women have simply not had the right circumstances to obtain the intellectual genius to create great art. However, even as I wrote that sentence my pride in my womanhood nudged and pulled at me once again and I am still not able to even really accept Nochlin’s final conclusion. This article leaves me unsettled, dissatisfied and perplexed.

“ Now Dig This!: Art and Black Los Angeles” by art critic Ken Johnson explores the influence and presence of Black visual artists in Southern California during a time of tense race relations. Artists played a key role in expressing the sentiments of oppressed African-Americans and their struggles in their art. These artists had the talent to summarize complex issues and emotions in concise and simple ways in comparison to their counterparts in academia. The most salient points from the article include topics of African –American artists struggling, with in the White-dominated art world, to have their art be accepted and recognized as legitimate art. African –American art is criticized for not having the ability to permeate into a broader market and illicit a broader audience.

My understanding of the article is art created by White artists is perceived as superior because it is thought of as having the capacity to reach a broader audience. My reaction to this concept is both the Black and White artists create art from their own perspective influenced by their culture, life experiences, and ethnic backgrounds. When white artists create from their perspective is it broad but when black artists create from their perspective it is considered too narrow. This widely accepted perception of understanding art by categorizing it based on the racialization of the artists perplexes me. Why are minority audiences forced to consider art created by White artists acceptable, but if white audiences consider minority art acceptable they are consider to be deviating from the norm? Why can’t art just be valued for its artistic worth and not by the color of the artists?