Ghetto Tarot Art Project

banbha

Hmm. The word "ghetto" apparently originated in Venice and referred to a restricted enclave of Jews. It has become a racial flash-point for moderns (especially Americans) who are hypersensitive to political correctness.

Most people are familiar with the roots of the word ghetto. It's about segregation: cultural, racial, or economic. To ignore the more recent history of the word is perilous (for you) in the both the material and rhetorical sense of the discussion, as your second sentence proves.


In Haiti, whites and mulattos combined constitute only 5% of the population, which suggests that the segregation in Port-Au-Prince is economic, not racial. The Haitian residents who participated seemed proud of their work, and it didn't come across as exploitation to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghetto

That's fine for you and those who agree with you. Enjoy your deck.
 

banbha

It's fine to take umbrage with the name of the deck, but it's also important to read all the information about it - the acting troupe who appears in the images were an active part of the naming and scene creation process, were paid for their work, and are receiving part of the profits from sales of the deck. A problem with the name is a personal comfort thing, but jumping from the word 'ghetto' to an assumption of exploitation or appropriation because the photographer is white seems like a large leap to me when she didn't make these decisions without the input of people who have every right to choose how that word is or isn't used. I was pretty wtf about it until I read all of the information on the page about the creation process.

I think you make good points barefootlife and it is important to know all the information on any deck, but especially one like this. Please though, do not make assumptions that those who might disagree, and on more than just the word ghetto, haven't read all the info on the indiegogo page about the creation of this deck. :)

And for me it's not just a personal comfort thing, I find the whole idea offensive. It's also it's about sharing the deck with friends with whom I know it would cause offense, again, not just the word but the entire concept. I care about that. I don't want to put my $ down on a project I disagree with; but I support the right of others to do it.

What would not have been offensive to someone like me you might think: Handing the camera -and- the project to the art group. Taking a step back. Be an advisor. Hey, she chose not to do that and it's her project. That's why I'm passing on this one.

:livelong:
 

trzes

Okay, fair enough, I didn't read through the older thread. But "claiming she doesn't have the right" to do what she's doing is not the same as them having the power to enforce her rights not to do it. They're still just expressing an opinion about it.

I agree she has the right to create her art as I have the right to critique it.

I might be a bit over-sensitive here. It ist true that people making a general claim of the sort "she doesn't have the right or the legitimacy" normally can't physically prevent other people from doing what they don't want them to do. "Just" expressing an opinion doesn't describe the subject very well either though.

I'd rather draw the line where an expression of disdain (opinion, fine by me) turns into social pressure and the disparagement of other's artwork/viewpoints as someting morally inferior. The latter is a form of powerplay that may be less effective than raw physical power, but that shows a similar mindset. Many people who build up this social pressure would (without admitting it) actually like to restrict freedom of art and speech.
 

Barleywine

I never said I intended to buy the deck, it's too large and I don't need another RWS clone, especially not a slavish one. What I think is a shame is an inability to appreciate art on its own merits without trying to politicize it. I admire the ingenuity and fidelity of the artists, especially if they felt appropriately acknowledged and compensated for their work, and couldn't care less about second-guessing the assumed motives of the white artist/entrepreneur, who probably had connections and resources to help make it happen in the first place. Was it a "win-lose" proposition, or "win-win?" There were a great many "blaxploitation" films from the '80s that made a far more egregious case for the former.
 

banbha

I might be a bit over-sensitive here. It ist true that people making a general claim of the sort "she doesn't have the right or the legitimacy" normally can't physically prevent other people from doing what they don't want them to do. "Just" expressing an opinion doesn't describe the subject very well either though.

I'd rather draw the line where an expression of disdain (opinion, fine by me) turns into social pressure and the disparagement of other's artwork/viewpoints as someting morally inferior. The latter is a form of powerplay that may be less effective than raw physical power, but that shows a similar mindset. Many people who build up this social pressure would (without admitting it) actually like to restrict freedom of art and speech.

Interesting points but I don't see how they apply to this project right now.

You have me at a bit of a disadvantage because you're bringing up what happened in a previous thread, even what your saying was deleted from that thread, this would be difficult for me to discuss this with you in any case.
 

barefootlife

I think you make good points barefootlife and it is important to know all the information on any deck, but especially one like this. Please though, do not make assumptions that those who might disagree, and on more than just the word ghetto, haven't read all the info on the indiegogo page about the creation of this deck. :)

And for me it's not just a personal comfort thing, I find the whole idea offensive. It's also it's about sharing the deck with friends with whom I know it would cause offense, again, not just the word but the entire concept. I care about that. I don't want to put my $ down on a project I disagree with; but I support the right of others to do it.

What would not have been offensive to someone like me you might think: Handing the camera -and- the project to the art group. Taking a step back. Be an advisor. Hey, she chose not to do that and it's her project. That's why I'm passing on this one.

:livelong:

You're right, I made an assumption there - I'm very much used to dealing with the wider internets, where people get offended first and read second (and this is a serious epidemic amongst 'woke' white people speaking on behalf of black folk). That's the audience I was addressing. You are clearly not one of those people.

I also agree that it might have been better for the acting troupe to completely control the project. I fully respect your right to disagree with the project and also to not put your money toward things you don't fully respect. It's an admirable quality. I equally appreciate your understanding that others may be equally educated about the project and still make different choices.
 

banbha

I never said I intended to buy the deck, it's too large and I don't need another RWS clone, especially not a slavish one.

On that we can agree.

What I think is a shame is an inability to appreciate art on its own merits without trying to politicize it. I admire the ingenuity and fidelity of the artists, especially if they felt appropriately acknowledged and compensated for their work, and couldn't care less about second-guessing the assumed motives of the white artist/entrepreneur, who probably had connections and resources to help make it happen in the first place. Was it a "win-lose" proposition, or "win-win?"

Art is political though, no less this project.

I don't have to second guess or assume her motives, only look at what she has done.
 

Barleywine

On that we can agree.



Art is political though, no less this project.

I don't have to second guess or assume her motives, only look at what she has done.

Saying that all art is political is taking a rather narrow and claustrophobic view of art, with which I certainly don't agree. It has often been so, but not to the exclusion of all other forms of motivation.

. . . and about what she did, rather nice , isn't it? })
 

trzes

Interesting points but I don't see how they apply to this project right now.

You have me at a bit of a disadvantage because you're bringing up what happened in a previous thread, even what your saying was deleted from that thread, this would be difficult for me to discuss this with you in any case.

Yes, that's true. You have been dragged into a discussion that you aren't responsible for. I had that feeling before. I don't really think we disagree on this meta-stuff anyway, do we?

So back to the deck: Isn't a bit of offense inherent to every kind of art? I am sure the rather emblematic bare breasts in the original RWS deck have rather been a scandal back when it came out... And how boring is art that isn't controversial at all. Even if your work is almost entirely abstract (think Mamluk card reproduction as a far fetched example) people at least disagree on whether hand drawn or strictly symmetric construction is better.

In those mild cases like with the ghetto tarot people should learn to cope with feeling offended or at least admit that this can be a form of indirect powerplay too (not always of course).
 

trzes

Saying that all art is political is taking a rather narrow and claustrophobic view of art, with which I certainly don't agree. It has often been so, but not to the exclusion of all other forms of motivation.

. . . and about what she did, rather nice , isn't it? })

This.