Comments on: Peter Schjeldahl wanders blind through the Met’s new Islamic wing

By: Nasser Rabbat

Nasser Rabbat — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:03:00 +0000

You hit the nail on the head Sean. Schjeldahl does display an alarming ignorance about Islamic religious practices, cultures, and most importantly art. His views are of course widespread within the general culture, but they are also dominant in academe, which is where the problem lies. Especially damaging is the notion, still defining all fields of history in Western universities, of the separation of cultures, mostly alone the lines of us and them, and the insularity of a unified Western culture from its presumed roots in Greco-Roman cultures to today. That a Judeo-Christian tradition permeates this cultural lineage is not only a new invention (probably after WWII) but also wrong for most of the history of European Christianity. Most egregious, of course, is the insistence that Islam is not part of that monotheistic heritage, which is still the way most Americans see it, and, to judge from Schjeldahl’s statement you quote, so does he.

By: Reopening the Islamic Wing at the Met | Majjal

Reopening the Islamic Wing at the Met | Majjal — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 20:58:35 +0000

[...] Schjeldahl admits to not knowing much about Islamic art, something Sean Rocha notes in his commentary on the New Yorker article, where he points out [...]

By: On The New Yorker's approach to Islamic art - ScrollPost.com

On The New Yorker's approach to Islamic art - ScrollPost.com — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:21:05 +0000

[...] PressArabist Arabist – 13 November 2011 13:20 CETOn The New Yorker’s approach to Islamic art Peter Schjeldahl wanders blind through the Met’s new Islamic wing | Sean RochaSean Rocha makes a good point about this amateurish review of the Metropolitan Museum’s new [...]

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:13:00 +0000

Glad you wrote that: Sinan is a poor example to illustrate his intended point but a perfect illustration of the shallow knowledge of the Middle East. Also, am I the only one astonished to learn that a renowned art critic in his late-sixties has only traveled to one predominantly Muslim country — and even then, to a city that was predominantly Christian for much of its history? What an odd and unexpected lack of curiosity this suggests. And it shows: I had drafted a whole section about that ending of his piece but dropped it because, among other things, I simply couldn’t figure out what he meant. ”Christian prayers skyrocket. Muslim prayers skim the ground, toward Mecca.” Really?

Sean

By: Sean Rocha

Sean Rocha — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:09:56 +0000

Glad you wrote that: Sinan is a poor example to illustrate his intended point but a perfect illustration of the shallow knowledge of the Middle East. Also, am I the only one astonished to learn that a renowned art critic in his late-sixties has only traveled to one predominantly Muslim country? What an odd and unexpected lack of curiosity this suggests. And it shows: I had drafted a whole section about that ending of his piece but dropped it because, among other things, I simply couldn’t figure out what he meant. “Christian prayers skyrocket. Muslim prayers skim the ground, toward Mecca.” Really?

Sean

By: Gregg Dourgarian

Gregg Dourgarian — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 23:37:00 +0000

It gets worse Sean…Schjeldahl shamefully mistakes Sinan, the great Armenian (read: Christian) architect forcibly converted to Islam to serve in the Janissary corps, to be Muslim.

He’s way off spiritually as well writing that Islam via Sinan’s Suleymaniye Mosque produces in Schjeldahl “The effect, like Heaven pressing down to earth…the opposite of …Christian religious architecture”.

It’s the descent of the holy spirit that Sinan is depicting. Too bad the poor guy had to censor himself.