I picked the 6th painting to analyze. What drew me to this painting was the expression on the prisoner's face. Although we cannot see his eyes, the horrible drawing-down of his mouth expresses everything that he is feeling: pain, dejection, degradation, humiliation. Almost as striking and haunting is the single, blue-gloved hand that come in on the left hand side, holding the leashes of the dogs. It represents the "separation of self" we talking about in class today; the disjointment of the hand from the prisoner represents the complete stripping of humanity the soldiers in Abu Ghraib must've put themselves through in order to commit such atrocities.
The background of the painting is very dark, depicting stark iron bars against an "abyss" of darkness behind the prisoner with a solitary half-window in the background. The lightness of the skin of the prison, along with the brightness of the blood pouring from his many wounds, bring the prisoner into the foreground, forcing the viewer to examine everything about him. The prisoner is simultaneously being bitten on the right knee and clawed on the chest by two large, ferocious dogs, while a third dog seems ready to pounce. The prisoner is leaning forward into the dog clawing him in the chest, which seems to show just how helpless he is; he has no idea where he is; the only thing he knows is pain.
Paintings, especially these paintings, are meant to invoke certain reactions and feelings within its audience. The artist has the right to manipulate what he sees into a message he wants to get across; a photographer has to do so with what is physically in front of him. These paintings provide a more horrible image of the Abu Ghraib prison tortures because of their cartoonish features. The prisoners are depicted as almost comically overweight, and they are so almost to the point where you want to laugh, but then you remember what you are looking at, and the horror of what you see hits you twice as hard.
I completely agree with you, Tyler. I hadn't thought of the separation of self with the gloved hand, but more of the controlling aspect of the guard but I also think that you are right. This painting seems to be something that would be found on a storyboard for the next "Saw" movie not something that should actually be happening in our reality.
ReplyDeleteI like the part about the glove as well. It reminds me of the difference between "personal" and "impersonal" killings (i think those are the correct terms, but i may or may not be making them up). In personal killings, the killer literally takes the life of the victim, by stabbing or strangling them with thier hands. However, an impersonal killing has another means of ending the life - by something like a bullet. With personal killings, you can feel the life of the victim ending. I feel like the dogs are a means of impersonal torture. The torturers don't have to get thier hands dirty, but they are just as guilty as they would be if they bit the victim themselves.
ReplyDeleteI also like the point you made about the blindcloth and how the man seems to be leaning into the attacking dogs. He is so discombobulated and has no sense of place. There is nothing he can do to escape. Perhaps there are more dogs behind him if he backs up? I mean, I get scared of the dark. I can't even imagine how terrifying that experience would be.