That headline is needlessly provocative and trying to start some stupid ‘culture war’ bull crap. It’s just about an artist taking inspiration from Colonialism and colonialist art and reframing that for her own work. Which is pretty cool.
Also for the headline to mention ‘trauma of empire’ in Britain specifically when the article literally begins with detailing a horrifying atrocity that took place on a French slave ship is a bit odd.
I get the point being made and agree somewhat but I don’t think it’s a very good article at all.
This is hellaciously confusing, because the lead artist is from Zanzibar. While it was a British protectorate for 73 years, it was never a colony. And Zanzabar retained their own Monarch.
Moreover, Britain had worked for literally 74 years previous to the protectorate to get the Muslim Sultan of Zanzibar to end the slave trade. The Brits even threatened a naval blockade, and fired its guns on the Sultan’s palace until it was demolished — they brought force to bear on the Sultan to end slavery.
Prior the protectorate, Zanzibar had been a Sultanate for 200 years and part of the Portuguese empire for 200 years.
This is just a grotesque misunderstanding (or willful warping) of the history, or an unwillingness to criticize one’s own faith.
The British weren’t enslaving folks in Zanzibar: they freed them. Say what you will about the protectorate system or the British empire (and I’m not a fan of either in particular), but the sin being levied isn’t one that belongs the Colonial British.
3 comments
That headline is needlessly provocative and trying to start some stupid ‘culture war’ bull crap. It’s just about an artist taking inspiration from Colonialism and colonialist art and reframing that for her own work. Which is pretty cool.
Also for the headline to mention ‘trauma of empire’ in Britain specifically when the article literally begins with detailing a horrifying atrocity that took place on a French slave ship is a bit odd.
I get the point being made and agree somewhat but I don’t think it’s a very good article at all.
This is hellaciously confusing, because the lead artist is from Zanzibar. While it was a British protectorate for 73 years, it was never a colony. And Zanzabar retained their own Monarch.
Moreover, Britain had worked for literally 74 years previous to the protectorate to get the Muslim Sultan of Zanzibar to end the slave trade. The Brits even threatened a naval blockade, and fired its guns on the Sultan’s palace until it was demolished — they brought force to bear on the Sultan to end slavery.
Prior the protectorate, Zanzibar had been a Sultanate for 200 years and part of the Portuguese empire for 200 years.
This is just a grotesque misunderstanding (or willful warping) of the history, or an unwillingness to criticize one’s own faith.
The British weren’t enslaving folks in Zanzibar: they freed them. Say what you will about the protectorate system or the British empire (and I’m not a fan of either in particular), but the sin being levied isn’t one that belongs the Colonial British.
I’m sure nobody in Europe cares?