Just got a note from our intrepid Infidel at Large Mighty Like A Rose. SHe sent a note to the artist herself and got a reply today.
They're trees.
The Note:
Hi ------,
Sorry for such a late reply. This is Farideh Lashai's assistant. We think that the year of the work is 1999, They are abstract trees. It was exhibited at tehran museum of Contemporary art, and since Farideh Lashai's works have been included in many international exhibitions, including "Iran Inside Out" at Chelsea Museum in NY. She does not sell prints of her works. Please let me know if you need any further information onher work.
Best regards,
Nazanin
UPDATED AND BUMPED
CNN Host Christiane Amanpour's Rather Odd Choice of "Art"...Burning WTC Towers...
UPDATE -
I think weazel zippers is making the wrong assumption here. I do not think it is a portrait of the World Trade Towers. I have written Mr. Krause and asked if he knew the paintings subject and title. Hopefully he will answer. Until then, based on what I have seen of Ms. Lashai's paintings, some of which are displayed on her site, I do not think this is the WTT. I will let you know if Mr. Krause can/does shed some light.
Sounds reasonable, but let us look at a couple of Farideh Lashai's other painting:
What do you think?
47 comments:
Pastorius,
I'm kind of shocked actually. You'd think that she might be a bit more sensitive to the feelings of nine eleven victims and their families, at the very least.
I think she has consistently shown contempt for America in her reporting.
While after hearing her schlock for years and being convinced that she's an islamist, it makes absolutely no sense that she would allow her supposed objectivity to be so compromised.
I guess she feels that it can be explained away when and if necessary while the message of solidarity to her fellow islamists will remain solid and clear.
I think weazel zippers is making the wrong assumption here. I do not think it is a portrait of the World Trade Towers. I have written Mr. Krause and asked if he knew the paintings subject and title. Hopefully he will answer. Until then, based on what I have seen of Ms. Lashai's paintings, some of which are displayed on her site, I do not think this is the WTT. I will let you know if Mr. Krause can/does shed some light.
However, the Safari jacket is tasteless enough:)
Note also, that she claims her Lashai painting is her favorite possession and the dining room her favorite place in the apt.? But I do not think it's the WTT.
Yes, please do keep us apprised.
MLAR,
How do you know that painting is by Farideh Leshai?
Actually, it does not look like the work displayed at Farideh Leshai's website.
Leshai's work looks watery and impressionistic. This painting looks expressionistic.
Ok, I figured out where you got the Leshai reference from.
I gotta agree with MLAR on this. Doesn't quite look like the towers to me (be better if we had a full on frontal view)(of the painting, not Amawhore). More like a vase, maybe.
Very similar painting here:
http://mahartgallery.com/en/?id=selectedworks&pid=71&dir=farideh-lashai&page=1
2nd row, 2nd from the right.
You know I looked at the gallery and although I can see the resemblance to the piece in Amanpours apartment, even the ones in the gallery brought 9/11 to mind anyway.
Look at the first page bottom right magnify and you can even differentiate the different impact floors.
I know this may sound bad, but I also can't help noticing that the artists name might also help generate my paranoia.
Maybe it's just me.
I see what you mean, cjk.
from her biography
". . .The landscapes that Lashai illustrates through her imagination have no definite time and narrative. The paintings’ details lose their original specificity, and the borders between the objects and elements of nature disappear in very much the same way that the memory of the landscape itself fades away. Even when she paints the joyful instances of nature, such as the growth of vegetation, there is still an illusionary silence prevailing the work, as if everything has surrendered to the fatal beat of time. This is why she draws a live plant in the form of a lifeless element. Lashai never intends to concentrate on the details and elements of nature. Neither is she interested in experimenting and evaluating. Instead she wishes to illustrate nature in a symbolic and ambiguous way, creating a sense of the atmosphere of a landscape in the poetic artistic tradition of China and the Far East. Although few conventional and familiar symbols may be traced in her landscapes, the feeling of nature and the signs of its constant development, destruction and inner force may be sensed-creating, in Immanuel Kant’s words, the equivalent of beauty." link
additional works
also the following snippet may explain the tortured expressionism of this particular artists renderings:
Quote: ". . .This book includes interviews with well known women who were tortured, such as Fahimeh Farsai, Atefeh Ja'afari, Farideh Lashai and Mastoureh Ahmad Zadeh, the sister of Massoud, Majid and Mojtabah." . . .link
I just heard from Mr. Krause. He says:
"Thanks for the email. The Farideh Lashai painting is in the background of the portrait and the one referenced in the interview. I really do not have much more information than that as I just the photographer and not interviewer. Hope that helps."
I will now attempt to write Mr. Lewine. I am having trouble though finding his email address, may have to resort to emailing the editorial desk. Determined to get to the bottom of this. I too read her bio Anon, and I think it suggests that this is not a WTT painting.
I just wrote a message to him on his Facebook page. Hopefully, we'll get a reply? I shall return.
God, I loved MacArthur.
Her bio would suggest this is not a WTC painting.
But, you know, even if it isn't, look at it this way;
Christiane Amanpour is a Manhattanite. 9/11 effected Manhattanites far more than it effected the rest of us. For me, that image looks like a WTC image even if it is not.
As such, I can not imagine ever having such a thing in my home, much less referring to it as my favorite possession.
Also, take note that Ms. Lashai, this woman, who was tortured, still maintains ties in Iran. She may well live in Iran, I don't know.
But, the point is, if I had lived in the Islamic world, and had been tortured, I would hightail it out of there, and sever all ties.
Farideh Leshai lives in Iran for everyone's information.
That just put me over the top as I now assume it is indeed the WTC attack.
Nobody does nothing of an artistic sort in Iran without the governments approval nor THEIR approval of that government.
Well, if she lives in Iran, then I want to know who tortured her.
Farideh Lashai was a "leftist" who opposed the Shah's government of Iran.
She was imprisoned and tortured during those years.
I guess now she is comfortable living under the Mullahs.
Just because it is an Iranian,
just because it might be the WTC ..if the artist wished to express ANYTHING the Iranian govt might find objectionable, IN ANY WAY, would we even be able to tell at this end?
In fact it is Amanpour's delusional world view and what she thinks of america which is coloring our view of this artist and what the artist mightbe expressing.
There might be a LOT of reason to create art of the WTC..disgust with religion comes to mind pretty fast,,think any Iranian would advert that as raison d'etre for such a creation?
Or it could be a frigging american hating freak exulting in our deaths creating 'death art' and hung by a moron looking to appear to be sensitive.
I'd like to know
My obvious conclusion is that her ultimate sponsors (the Mullahs) are pleased with her 'art', otherwise she wouldn't be allowed to produce it under their control nor would it ever be shown in Iranian galleries.
Furthermore I believe Amanpour knows exactly what she owns.
That's just me.
Quoting again: " . . .Although few conventional and familiar symbols may be traced in her landscapes, the feeling of nature and the signs of its constant development,
destruction
and inner force may be sensed-creating, in Immanuel Kant’s words, the equivalent of beauty."
Most curious reference to Kant who also asserted the principle that
"human beings should be treated as ends rather than as means."
The 'art' produced by Leshai clearly demonstrates the severe limitations of creative expression within the Islamic fold.
The impressionist style of Leshai leaves interpretation of her work wide open to the objectivity/subjectivity of her patrons/clients/whatever you call the viewer examining her work.
Considering the placement of this particular piece, and the history of Christiana Amanpour's bias . . .this canvas appears to be reflective of the twin towers
destruction.
If it's not mentioned yet, a similar piece.
A skyline at the bottom left?
(I guess a person can be against the oppressive regime, far left, religious, and/or anti-American, all at the same time. No simple enemy of the enemy-concept. The artist's brother "also a leftist" according to this page.)
Subjectively, that's the first impression I got looking at that painting, and I couldn't have that thing anywhere in my home either. Which is not to say it was intended to be a portrait of the WTT. (Is this her Manhattan apartment? I'm trying to figure out what that building is you can see through the window in the background.)
Amanpour has long impressed me as basically a power freak so it doesn't surprise to hear her self-righteously denounce waterboarding and hang a piece of modernist crap that screams WTT in flames on her dining room wall. And don't you just love that pretentious blathering biographical piece. Tortured under the Shah but beloved of the mullahs. And Islam forbids representational art. Something smells from the head here.
Fallaci would mop up the floor with Amawhore. Rand would quietly cut her to ribbons. Since they are no longer with us, my fond wish is to watch Pam decimate her on tv one fine day. She needs a serious verbal slapdown in front of the widest possible audience, even worse than the one she got from Thiessen a couple weeks back.
RRA,
Yes this is Amanpour's Manhattan apartment overlooking Central Park.
Epa's point, that because we are not privy to Iranian culture, we would have a hard time understanding what this artist might have meant, is a very worthy point.
Also, we need to consider that representational art is banned by Sharia. Iran is a Sharia state. So, any Iranian artist has to get their message across in a veiled way, so to speak.
However, I would also point back to the fact that this woman was willing to undergo imprisonment and torture to oppose the Shah's regime, but she says nothing about the Mullahs.
Well, I have not received a reply from Mr. Lewine, so I wrote the Mah Art Gallery. Given that Iran dropped all email services last week in favor of a government one, I may or may not hear back and may or, hopefully, will not find myself marked for death:)
If you notice on her Wiki bio, it shows her last two exhibitions as being in 1998 and 2005. Since the painting is very similar in composition to the 2005 exhibition collection, we can assume, and only assume, it was part of the 2005 collecton or era? Ms. Amanpour says she got it in Iran a few years back. A few years suggests with the last decade? So if we just go with that timeline, then we can assume, and only assume, the painting was painted after 9/11. If it was indeed painted after 9/11, then that, without an admission from the artist, would be the closest we can get to a smoking gun, or burning building, literally speaking.
Let's hope they write back. But if I suddenly wind up dead, well, I only regret that I have but one life to give my country:)
In NYT she say about this favorite item in the apartment: "It gives me joy every time I walk in my door".
It should to a jihadi?
Someone suggested that this is a message of loyalty ...from Our Woman in New York. It's probably spontaneous, a.k.a. more genuine. A disturbing confidence from this pro-islam bias journalist.
Wish this get broader publicity.
Magnus... inconceivable that Amanpour means that any representation of 9/11 gives her joy.
Not even to a Howard Zinn.
We'd be talking Ward Churchill, or Jeremiah Wright.
Not just disapproving of American actions, but u need to get to the point of hating the American PEOPLE, and our way of life, and desires to get joy from that.
I don't think much of Amanpour's politics ..but I DON'T THINK THAT of her.
Big difference.
Maybe that means this art represents something other.
No idea.
Very confusing.
For what it's worth, I think that building in the background is the El Dorado apartments on 90th St. and Central Park West, which would mean she probably lives on Central Park South or 5th Ave. to get that particular view.
Amanpour has, in the past, compared the U.S. treatment of terrorist detainees to the torture tactics of Pol Pot:
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2010/01/marc-theissen-wh-speechwriterbush-rips.html
She has said that Palestinian Terrorists Are In The Same League As The Dalai Lama:
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2008/08/christine-amanpour-says-palestinian.html
And then, there's her interview with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2007/09/christine-amanpour-sucks-up-to-mahmoud.html
And there's also "God's Warriors":
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2007/09/storm-track-disinformation-useful.html
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2008/08/warriors-of-god-for-cause-of-allah.html
It seems to me this woman is a militantly anti-Western extremist.
Can't fight those facts.
Well to me it means she is unfit to report TO AMERICANS.
But joy in death art?
Does she watch 'faces of death' at home over coffee or cognac?
I agree with you, Epa. It is very hard to understand. It could be that she doesn't see the WTC in that image.
But what New Yorker wouldn't see the WTC in that image.
I do.
Who knows... maybe it's like the bad tooth you just keep pushing your tongue against.
Incomprehensible humans. They are a pain aren't they?
I will admit that I too "subjectively" see the Trade Towers in this painting. But, if the painting was done before 9/11, then it is only, as one here said, a subjective art experience.
I think the irony of the article's title "War Rooms" is also interesting. And the irony too that this picture hangs in her home in NYC is compelling. There is no way anyone can look at that painting in that city and not see the WTT.
I have not heard from the gallery in Tehran. So I just wrote Ms. A at CNN asking them for the year and title/subject of the painting.
If anyone here has a twitter account, her twitter address is:
Twitter: @amanpourcnn
Hit her up with the question on twitter. I would love to hear her answer to the speculation on the painting. She was so willing to address it as her favorite item, shirley she would be willing to address the controversy of it resemblance to the WTT?
And since he was so kind in his initial response, I think I might write Mr. Krause again, who was there, who took a picture of her standing in front of it, and ask him, a photographer, what his subjective response to it was?
Oh geez, forgive me for being so obsessive about this, but ... I would wager that shown this print as a Rorschach test, a very large percentage of people, worldwide, would say: WTT, 9/11.
I just wrote Mr. Krause. I so hope he offers his response to the art. He was there! He's an artist! He's got to have an opinion, have had an inner response to it. I would also speculate that the painting had to have been discussed by all those there given that her picture was taken in front of it and she declared it her favorite item, so why his initial reticence?
Just received this auto response from CNN that tells us that all comments/questions are read and become part of the daily "viewer response report." The heat is on! The pot is boiling! :)
"This auto reply is your notification that we have received your correspondence. While we are unable to personally reply to every email your comments are important to us and we do read each and every one. All comments become part of the viewer response report that is prepared and made available each day to the producers of Amanpour and CNN senior management."
Mighty Like a Rose,
I appreciate you being so "obssessive" about this. I think it's a big deal, or could be anyway.
You're right about the Rorshach test, I believe.
Must play devil's advocate, however. If this painting was done before 9/11, we and weasel zippers must eat crow, can only speculate as to what the painting means to her. Abstract is exactly that.
I really hope I get some sort of reply. I hope someone twittered? Would no reply equal admission? Will try to reach Lewine through the NYT. You KNOW they discussed the painting. They acknowledged the elephant in the room in the interview.
Just posted a question on the NYT art page, The Week in Culture Pictures. Shirley some art critic in NYC will see this and perhaps know some answers! Come on NYC! Talk to mama! :)
Well, I'm having fun here!
You're being a good reporter.
:)
I'm a journalism major:) She has her own website! So, straight to the source, I wrote her, and the US chapter of the International Art Critics Association. The art review on her page though, reiterates her focus on "nature." However, in the city, buildings are the landscape, yes?
http://faridehlashai.com/Biography.html
Wow, the stuff on her gallery page is BEAUTIFUL.
I love that stuff.
I would go to that exhibition.
I was surprised by the nude. I didn't think they could do nude. It is beautiful. I don't so much get abstract art. I wouldn't know how to judge a master from a monkey if the paintings were anonymous.
Excellent MLR, thanks. Way to go.
I feel some sort of relief
" We think that the year of the work is 1999".
I don't trust anyone who works for the Islamic Republic. I'd like to know the date of the paintings, that shouldn't be a big deal to give a definite answer.
I'm talking about the last painting of those white cube like structures. Sure some may be from 1999, but I'm interested in that one.
Post a Comment