[-empyre-] (no subject)

[Derek Murray]

Murat,

I took your last post as more of a comment than a question, but I
appreciate your clarification. I think your formation of "liquid
blackness" as not strictly racial is/can be productive, though in my
understanding of the notion, it has always meant to function in an
ambivalent manner, as Alessandra recently articulated.

Derek

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Murat Nemet-Nejat <muratnn at gmail.com> wrote:
> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> Hi Derek,
>
> Let me clarify my position. I am a Jew from the Middle East who grew up in Istanbul, but I have lived in the States for over forty years. Though I see the issues raised by "liquid blackness" relevant and provocative, I do not see them purely from a racial point of view. I saw "liquid blackness" as a concept relevant to any discussion on the relationship between the powerful and the oppressed or suppressed or manipulated. For me the consciousness of "liquid blackness" provided a way to fight, to be less susceptible to psychological or cultural manipulation. It was basically, as I saw it, a political concept. That is why I brought in the subject of using the word "Nigger" in the title of my translation "The Nigger In the Photograph." In my use of it, the word did not refer to race, but a boy prostitute--of course, making a link of brotherhood so to speak, between that boy who was an urchin on Istanbul docks and the black in the United States. During this past week, I felt the discussion was much more strictly racial, black artists/thinkers speaking to black artists/thinkers. The quote I included in my previous post starting the post "'what if we all took time to
> make black art?'..." referred to that.
>
> Ciao,
> Murat
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Derek Murray <derekconradmurray6719 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>> Hi Murat,
>>
>> My apologies for the slow reply.
>>
>> Blackness is a highly contested terminology, so I would say that my
>> definition of it would defer from the other respondents. Perhaps we
>> should individually define it? I suggest asking Tommy, since I was
>> initially responding to his query.
>>
>> Derek
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
>> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au
> http://empyre.library.cornell.edu