Not a member? Sign up now
Politician enjoys a delicious slice of racially insensitive red velvet cake
By EJ DicksonApril 17th, 2012, 6:30 pmComments (11)
If your first thought when you saw the above headline was, "Well, I don't understand. How can a cake be racially insensitive? Especially a red velvet cake, which according to recent scientific studies is 100 percent positively correlated with deliciousness and approximately negative 70 percent correlated with racism," let me be the first to say that I was just as confused as you were when I first saw this [NSFW] story (via the Swedish English-language newspaper The Local). Then I clicked on the link, and I was instantly proven wrong. Yes siree bob, that is one racially insensitive cake.
The lady enjoying the delicacy in question is Swedish minister of culture Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, who was photographed cutting the cake, which is intended to be a depiction of a black woman undergoing female genital mutilation, at the opening of an art installation at Stockholm's Moderna Museet during World Art Day. The cake was created by installation artist Makode Aj Linge, who also poked his head out through a hole in the table during the ceremony so it looked like the cake was alive. The piece is intended to provide commentary on the issue of female genital mutilation; whoever cuts the cake is supposed to symbolically start at what would be the woman's clitoris, after whispering "your life will be better after this."
Unfortunately, many Swedes and members of the National Afro-Swedish Association are not huge fans of racially infused cake performance art, as photos of Adelsohn Liljeroth surrounded by laughing onlookers have prompted many to call for her resignation. "The 'cake party' was meant to problematize female circumcision but how that is accomplished through a cake representing a racist caricature of a black woman complete with 'black face' is unclear," a spokesperson for the National Afro-Swedish Association said in a statement. "Her participation, as she laughs, drinks, and eats cake, merely adds to the insult against people who suffer from racist taunts and against women affected by circumcision."
For her part, Adelsohn Liljeroth is not apologizing anytime soon for her role in the incident: while she understands "quite well that this is provocative and that it was a rather bizarre situation," she argues that the intended meaning of the piece was "misinterpreted," adding that she was invited to speak at the museum during World Art Day about "art's freedom and the right to provoke." Which is a valid argument, and the piece is certainly effective as a work of provocation; nonetheless, using blackface and racist caricature in the context of artistic expression is almost never a good idea. Besides, Adelsohn Liljeroth could have done well to note the first lesson that every elected official learns on the job: don't be photographed slicing into the clitoris of a red velvet cake designed to look like a racist caricature of a black woman.
Commentarium (11 Comments)
There goes my image of Sweden as a liberal utopia. Holy shit that image is gruesome.
I'm oddly happy about this story because NERVE FINALLY GOT WHAT "BLACKFACE" IS CORRECT!
It's a great day... unless you're undergoing genital mutilation.
When I first read this article I thought it was just some of those overreactive people who like to complain for the sake of complaining. Then I clicked the video.
Why? Seriously. It didn't occur to anyone this might be a bad idea? And the cutting of the cake by itself would have been provocative enough, sticking some dude in blackface wailing like an overacting cartoon character seems more like they're making fun of the issue than trying to condemn it...
What... the... fuck....
I can still see it with my eyes closed!
I read somewhere that the artist, Makode Aj Linge, is of African descent. That doesn't excuse the trivializing approach and poor execution of the work. However if the artist is black, something about that complicates the position of the Afro-Swedish Association. I get that laughter is not the appropriate response to this performance, but are we supposed to be angry at the artist for that? Blackface doesn't have quite the same effect if the wearer is black or mixed *and* is wearer is attempting to inform rather than entertain. Still, the cake they're invited to consume seems to have blurred that line.
There is such a thing as an Afro-Swedish Association? Who knew! And why is a government minister wearing such nonprofessional eyeglasses?
Genital mutilation is a huge problem in Africa, especially among persecuted young black women, yes? And The African women who are abused through circumcision often have black skin, right? It's not "Blackface," i.e. a white cake painted black with shoe polish, right? It's an art expo, right? And shocking art is valid at an art expo, right? And the cake is a way to generate dialogue on the horrors of black women being mutilated, right?
So...why is this controversial, other than the reaction from the politician involved? It's half publicity stunt, half advocacy think piece.
It is controversial because it is outlandish and garish for the sake of being outlandish and garish. There are a million better ways to inform about the cause of genital mutilation than making a cake caricature of a woman in which the aim is the re-enact the same genital mutilation. All while painting the face of an actual person in a manner that is nothing BUT a reflection of old blackface-related stereotypes. If absolutely nothing else, the head/face paint wasn't necessary at all. This is done for shock value under the guise of art. That isn't to say the intentions weren't legitimate, but it was still Morbidly insensitive and poorly executed.
I personally don't have a problem with the art piece if the intent was to have people participate in the exploitation of and mutilation of a black woman, and to turn them into monsters. If that was the point, it was highly successful. What I have a problem with is what it reveals about people in general, and the people involved in particular; or in other words, it was a provocative piece, and I was provoked. The point of provocative art -- ideally -- is not just to provoke a feeling and walk away, but to provoke a feeling and then a conversation. It is "valid" as art, and this article and conversation is valid as dialogue about it.
I want a piece from the head.
don't these people have other people whose job it is to say "hey, no. don't do that. it will be career suicide"?