---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:27 AM
Subject: H-Net Review [H-Africa]: Wylie on Berger, 'Irma Stern and the
Racial Paradox of South African Modern Art'
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]>


LaNitra M. Berger.  Irma Stern and the Racial Paradox of South
African Modern Art.  London  Bloomsbury Visual Arts, 2020.  192 pp.
$110.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-1-350-18749-8.

Reviewed by Diana Wylie (Boston University)
Published on H-Africa (May, 2021)
Commissioned by David D. Hurlbut

South African Art: A Diasporic View

South African artist Irma Stern (1894-1966) painted portraits of
Africans that express and convey her delight in their beauty, but
there's a snag. According to art historian LaNitra Berger, Stern's
letters and affiliations, and sometimes her images themselves, betray
a lack of empathy with her subjects' plight as subordinated people.
This tension (called here a "a racial paradox") between "Stern's
racism" and her aesthetic appreciation of Africans lies at the heart
of Berger's effort to present Stern to an American audience from the
perspective of "the African diaspora" (pp. 12, xv). Her focus on the
paradox is so tight that other possible observations about this
renowned South African modernist are cast into shadow or omitted
altogether.

Another way of looking at Stern's achievement is to stress that she
participated in an important artistic dialogue between two continents
at a particular historical moment: starting just after the First
World War, she displayed in Europe new visions of Africa; shortly
thereafter, she brought European modernism to South Africa, and she
shared with other South Africans the beauties of the continent's
peoples. Following in the lineage of Paul Gauguin's Polynesian
adventures and Pablo Picasso's celebrated inspiration by African
sculpture in _Les Demoiselles d'Avignon_ (1907), she chose to paint
exotic Africa when it still had the power to thrill and surprise
Europeans, before the distance between the two continents was shrunk
by air travel. (The Union Castle Line typically took nearly two weeks
to transport people from Cape Town to London.) In South Africa she
helped to break down provincial attitudes among people who, despite
revering their European heritage, were initially put off by the
modernist art coming to them from Europe's cities.

Stern's life and work straddled the two continents. She was born in a
Tswana-speaking area of northwest South Africa where her German
Jewish parents had been drawn to farm, perhaps by the opening of
diamond mines nearby. Between the ages of sixteen and twenty-six she
lived back in Germany (Berlin and Weimar), where she would eventually
find a ready audience for her African paintings among artists and
gallerists who were similarly drawn to what she later confessed was
her early "lovely fairytale outlook on Native life" (p. 123). Having
to avoid Germany between 1933 and 1945, she traveled instead to Dakar
(1937, 1938), the Congo (1942, 1946), and Zanzibar (1939, 1945) in
search of visually thrilling folkloric sights. She drew and painted
her findings--such as a vibrant "Congolese Beauty" and a lush
"Zanzibar Garden"--and published two travel narratives.[1]
Immediately upon the war's end, she returned to Europe and either
visited or exhibited there every other year, on average, until the
end of her life. From 1960 she even shifted the subject matter of her
paintings away from Africa to the Mediterranean, the European side.

Within South Africa from the 1920s Stern enjoyed great, though
initially controversial, renown. She helped to break down stultifying
South African artistic provincialism. _(_The question why white South
Africans were offended by modern art remains an intriguing one.) In
her own words, she "meant to shock the people of Cape Town" in 1922
by exhibiting nudes drawn in the bold, slashing Expressionist style
she had imbibed during her residence in Germany from 1910 to 1920.[2]
She succeeded. Nudity offended local sensibilities more used to
decorum and pastels. Gradually she won popular acclaim for her
eye-popping colors and simplified forms. Her choice of African
subjects did not present a serious challenge to her local popularity
in part because social critique was not on her agenda.

Especially from 1948 her devotion to folkloric scenes sat well with
apartheid ideology that depicted Africans as fundamentally rural and
tribal. Her local fame led her to be chosen to represent South Africa
in two international biennales, and in 1951 the South African
Association of Artists included her work in an exhibition otherwise
devoted exclusively to European luminaries like Albrecht Durer and
Camille Pissarro. Despite Berger's claim that Stern "chose to accept
support from the apartheid government to advance her career," there
is no evidence the government sponsored any of her shows, paid her
travel expenses, or tangibly advanced her career (p. 12). What
support did the apartheid government actually give her?

>From the 1930s to the 1950s Stern painted vibrant portraits of rural
Black South Africans, such as a Xhosa woman wearing ochre make-up or
a Zulu girl whose head is crowned with a chic _isicholo_. In the
words of art historian Marion Arnold, Stern was using her African
subjects "as picturesque vehicles for her modernist aestheticism."[3]
There is no doubt that Stern's portraits present Europeans as
individuals and Africans more as design challenges, confirming
Berger's insight that Stern had more "empathy," and certainly more
familiarity, with her European subjects.

Snippets of Stern's letters convey her increasing discomfort with
modern African politics: by 1955 she could no longer idealize African
life "when I see the most lovely people acting not like children but
like devils incarnate to the White people up in Kenya" during the Mau
Mau revolt, adding that she understood why: Africans had awakened to
the fact that "White raced people ... [have] their foot on [African]
necks" (p. 123). The growth of Stern's awareness that trouble was
also brewing in South Africa is vividly evident in the painting that
graces the cover of Berger's book. After years of looking for and
depicting folkloric Africa, Stern briefly turned to the city and in
1955 painted a maid in her uniform. The maid is not happy. She looks
askance. Stern's portrait bears honest witness to the gathering
political storm, without judgement. That Stern was unable to
participate in it is abundantly clear: she contributed only one
painting to the Treason Trial Defense Fund in 1958 "[because I] don't
particularly want to be mixed up more in this business."[4] Stern did
shy away from struggle-era politics, but in what ways was she
"complicit" with oppression (p. 14)?

Berger's evident disquiet over the "racial paradox" sometimes leads
her to make forced, and not entirely credible, interpretations of
Stern's words. Stern did indeed express colonial attitudes toward
Africa. She blithely referred to cannibalism, fetishes, and idols as
if they characterized the African cultural landscape. Quite
understandably alienated by Stern's ignorant words, Berger tends to
interpret all the artist's statements through a political lens. For
example, she concludes immediately after describing Stern's reaction
to a "lifeless" Muslim bride at a Zanzibar wedding that Stern
believed "colonialism was the best form of government for people of
color" (p. 97). At these moments, the book's core mission--to lay out
the quite real paradox that Stern appreciated Black South Africans
"aesthetically, but never socially, culturally, or politically"--has
crowded out subtlety (p. 154). (Wealthy Muslim brides at that time
and place were meant to pose like splendid gifts.)

It would be a mistake to approach this book with expectations that
range beyond its title.[5] _Irma Stern and the Racial Paradox of
South African Modern Art_ does not put on display and discuss the
range of Stern's subject matter, technique, and style and how they
changed over time; a full biography of this difficult woman; the art
world she inhabited in South Africa.[6] Ten of Stern's works are
reproduced in color here, but the thirty-five black and white
illustrations are so small that their content is largely mysterious.
The book's production values do not foster a great deal of confidence
in the editorial oversight of Bloomsbury Visual Arts. To give a
couple of further examples: "Oppenheimer" is introduced without a
first name or identity (p. 56); the content of footnotes 42 and 51 in
chapter 2 already appear verbatim in the text. There are other
errors. Some are linguistic: "Dumela Marena" is not mistranslated,
but means "Greetings, Lord." Others are historical. To say that
Britons came to South Africa to "experience a new 'frontier'
lifestyle" simply does not capture the complex reality of immigration
and industrialization (p. 42). The sketchiness with which the
historical context is laid out is best illustrated by the fact that
the pieces of legislation setting up the homelands--the official
justification for the apartheid state--are omitted from the list of
laws said to "form apartheid's core" (p. 107). Other errors occur in
the citations: Marion Arnold did not "suggest that Sterns' _work,_
while problematic, was 'unremarkable for the time'"; the word
"_work_" actually reads "_racism_" in the original text (p. 11).[7]

How is Stern regarded by Black South Africans today? In her
introduction, Berger writes that Stern's name evokes "angry glares
and negative comments" (p. 8). And yet, in her conclusion she quotes
young artists from Johannesburg's Artist Proof Studio who do not
agree. Duduzile More says Stern's "skill in color is what I can take
away from her" (p. 147). Pule Ratsoma says he is inspired by Stern's
documentation of the "beauty of life and her surroundings" (p. 148).
The director of the Johannesburg Art Gallery, Khwezi Gule, says there
is "nothing inherently racist" in her images (p. 141). Even Stern's
contemporary, African American philosopher Alain Locke, appreciated
as early as 1925 that Stern was "push[ing] the conventions of
contemporary Black representation"; he thought Black American artists
should be inspired by her (p. 151). It is easy to share Berger's
disappointment with and ambivalence toward Stern, as well as to
understand the relief with which she apparently embraced the idea
that "even progressive art can be complicit with oppression" (p. 14).
Berger is to be respected for concluding her book by evenhandedly
quoting all these voices of people who show no evidence of sharing
her particular diasporic perspective and need.

Notes

[1]. Both books--_Congo_ (1943) and _Zanzibar_ (1948)--were published
by van Schaik in Pretoria.

[2]. Marion Arnold, _Irma Stern: A Feast for the Eye_ (Winnipeg and
Stellenbosch: Fernwood Press/Rembrandt van Rijn Art Foundation,
1995), 18. Arnold notes that Stern's first exhibit was not shut down
by the police as Berger claims, perhaps based on the memoirs of Mona
Berman, for whom the story may have been family lore. Mona Berman,
_Remembering Irma_ (Cape Town: Double Storey, 2003), 42.

[3]. Marion Arnold, "European Modernism and African Domicile: Women
Painters and the Search for Identity," in _Between Union and
Liberation: Women Artists in South Africa 1910-1994_, ed. Arnold and
Brenda Schmahmann (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 62.

[4]. Stern to Freda Feldman, November 13, 1958, quoted by Berger,
128.

[5]. Berger's 2009 Duke University doctoral dissertation was entitled
"Pictures that Satisfy: Race, Gender, and Nation in the Art of Irma
Stern (1894-1966)." The insertion of "racial paradox" in the title
indicates the centrality of that particular idea to this published
volume.

[6]. Stern also painted still lifes and landscapes, and she sculpted
and drew.

[7]. The actual citation comes from Arnold's 2005 article (see note 3
above) rather than, as cited by Berger, from Arnold's book _Women and
Art in South Africa_ (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1996).

Citation: Diana Wylie. Review of Berger, LaNitra M., _Irma Stern and
the Racial Paradox of South African Modern Art_. H-Africa, H-Net
Reviews. May, 2021.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=56527

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.




-- 
Best regards,

Andrew Stewart


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#8798): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/8798
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/83136310/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES &amp; NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly &amp; permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to