Fountain, Marcel Duchamp (1917)

Marcel Duchamp was a French artist who lived in World War I. “Trained as a painter, Marcel Duchamp made a radical break with traditional art by inventing the ‘readymade,’ a pre-existing, industrially produced object” (Comenas). “Fountain” was one of the “readymades.” It was created in 1917 when Duchamp was asked to send his artwork to an exhibition. Then Duchamp sent a urinal named Fountain as his artwork. Fountain “caused considerable controversy when he submitted it for exhibition at the Society of Independent Artists exhibition of 1917” (SFMOMA).  Even though it was hidden in the corner during the show, it still caused a sensation at the time. It still has a great impact on art today. “When, in 2004, five hundred art experts were asked to name the most influential modern art work of all time, they chose Duchamp's Fountain” (SFMOMA)

Fountain is essentially a urinal. With Duchamp’s signature on it, the fountain stands for a new kind of modern art. The hole in the front of the urinal looks like the muzzle of a gun where bullets can fire out at any time. Additionally, the hole is right in the middle of the urinal making it look as if the gun is pointing at the people who are looking at the sculpture. It seems like Duchamp is trying to use the urinal to terrify and warn people about the volatility of violence. Duchamp used a urinal to represent his artwork and as an outlet to express his disillusionment of society with its wars and violence. He mockingly used a urinal as art to illustrate his disgust for the pretentious society around the time of the Roaring 20s where the rich lived pretentious lives while the poor were exploited by the unethical businessmen. He was mocking the violent society that was full of wars. Additionally, by merely taking a urinal and signing his name to claim it as art, he was openly mocking how people interpret art.  It was a bold and daring step away from traditional art into the modern, industrialized world.

Speechless, Shirin Neshat (1996)

Neshat is an Iranian and has been living in the United States since 1974. “She is a visual artist who has gained recognition for her photography, film, video installations, working through a variety of textural material, to express complex philosophical ideas behind contemporary Islam and her country Iran.”(Neshat and Ebrahimian) During the mid-1990s, Neshat created a series of large photographs called “Women of Allah” that  provide a sustained rumination on the status and psyche of women in traditional Islamic cultures.  Using three primary elements: the black veil, modern weapons, and the written texts,” Neshat was able to portray the hidden violence that plagued the many Islamic women in her country (MacDonald and Neshat).  "Speechless” was one of the pieces in the series.

“Speechless” is an image of a woman’s face with a subtle weapon that also resembles jewelry by her ear.  At a glance, the weapon is almost easily ignored and dismissed, highlighting the hidden violence that the Islamic women suffered from in their country. The half-face image is far more profound than the full-face image because half-face makes the reader more focused on the eye. Her eye is delivering a “speechless” condemnation of violence and a sense of sadness because she is threatened by the gun by her ear.  Under Islamic rules, women have subservient and restrictive roles and perhaps through her eyes, she is communicating what she is traditionally forbidden to say. The veil illustrates that the woman is trapped by the ultra conservative tradition of Islamic women, as it blocks her vision and restrict her from breaking free. The tiny Islamic words printed all over her face demonstrate that she has so much to say but can’t because of a repressive society.  After all, according to Islamic rules, women must only be visible in the household and can be seen in public, but cannot be heard.

This photograph delivers a powerful message of the silent violence because while the woman’s face—her complexion, her hair, and her features—seem alright because she’s not physically hurt, her eye delivers another message.  It shows her vulnerability, fear and sadness at being suppressed by her Islamic religion, tradition, and society.

Marat Assassinated, Jacques-Louis David, 1793

Jacques-Louis David was an active pro-revolutionary artist during the French revolution. His painting, Marat Assassinated, commemorated his friend Jean-Paul Marat after Marat was killed by Charlotte Corday, another figure of the French Revolution who believed that Marat was partly responsible for “Reign of Terror”.  Marat was a radical journalist and politician who was part of the radical Jacobin faction that led to the “Reign of Terror,” a period full of massacres.  As a journalist, Marat had certain capacities to influence people through his published castigation toward his enemies. Though David admired Marat since they were close friends, most people of the era felt that Marat was “merely a hateful demagogue”(The Death of Marat - Jacques-Louis David). Therefore, Corday believed that Marat caused unnecessary turmoil in France and chose to assassinate him.

The painting shows Marat being assassinated in the bathtub, a time and place where most people are vulnerable since bathing is a private moment.  David chose the bathtub as the setting to drive the point that Marat was defenseless and that it was cowardice of Corday to attack his enemy unguarded. The dagger is tossed on the ground to show the audacity of the murder since he didn’t even care to hide the weapon. Blood is oozing from Marat’s breast as the life is squeezed out of him. One of his arms is drooping lifelessly while the other holds a note. Through Marat has a virile body and soft skin, it is clear that David tried to embellish the image of Marat in this picture to make him more youthful and innocent. Compared to the upper part of the painting that is shrouded in the dark background wall,  the lower part is full of details. It accentuates the cruelty and suffering that Marat experienced as he lay dying. David tried to illustrate the violent assassination by demonstrating a horrific death to inspire public empathy for Marat and his cause. Ironically, violence was one of the reasons got Marat assassinated as he promoted the massacres of enemies who went against the Jacobins.

Though Marat died at the hands of his enemy, his facial expression showed no hatred or anger.  In fact, he seemed almost content, as if dying for a cause.  With the note in his hand as he dies, the painting evokes the image that Marat died fighting for what he believed in.  David purposely painted it this way to win the support and sympathy of the public for his friend. The peacefulness of his death and the violence of his assassin further strengthen David’s message and purpose of creating a martyr out of Marat.