Delving into a hitherto unexplored aspect of Irish art history, Painting Dublin, 1886–1949 examines the depiction of Dublin by artists from the late-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century. Artists’ representations of the city have long been markers of civic pride and identity, yet in Ireland, such artworks have been overlooked in favour of the rural and pastoral, falling outside of the dominant disciplinary narratives of nationalism or modernism. Framed by the shift from city of empire to capital of an independent republic, this book chiefly examines artworks by of Walter Frederick Osborne (1857–1903), Rose Mary Barton (1856–1929), Jack Butler Yeats (1871–1957), Harry Aaron Kernoff (1900–74), Estella Frances Solomons (1882–1968), and Flora Hippisley Mitchell (1890–1973), encompassing a variety of urban views and artistic themes. While Dublin is renowned for its representation in literature, this book will demonstrate how the city was also the subject of a range of visual depictions, including those in painting and print. Focusing on the images created by these artists as they navigated the city’s streets, this book offers a vivid visualisation of Dublin and its inhabitants, challenging a reengagement with Ireland’s art history through the prism of the city and urban life.
the very real and transformative forces of globalisation and migration, discussions about identity politics in the art world have fundamentally transformed the dominant Western conception of the ‘international art world’ as an exclusive club for Westerners only. Such discussions paved the way for an institutional multiculturalism that has changed the mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion of non-Western and migrant artists in the art institutional system of the West. To illustrate this transformation, I will use a telling survey by Lotte Philipsen of the number of
Given the significant similarities and differences between the welfare states of Northern Europe and their reactions to the perceived 'refugee crisis' of 2015, the book focuses primarily on the three main cases of Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Placed in a wider Northern European context – and illustrated by those chapters that also discuss refugee experiences in Norway and the UK – the Danish, Swedish and German cases are the largest case studies of this edited volume. Thus, the book contributes to debates on the governance of non-citizens and the meaning of displacement, mobility and seeking asylum by providing interdisciplinary analyses of a largely overlooked region of the world, with two specific aims. First, we scrutinize the construction of the 2015 crisis as a response to the large influx of refugees, paying particular attention to the disciplinary discourses and bureaucratic structures that are associated with it. Second, we investigate refugees’ encounters with these bureaucratic structures and consider how these encounters shape hopes for building a new life after displacement. This allows us to show that the mobility of specific segments of the world’s population continues to be seen as a threat and a risk that has to be governed and controlled. Focusing on the Northern European context, our volume interrogates emerging policies and discourses as well as the lived experiences of bureaucratization from the perspective of individuals who find themselves the very objects of bureaucracies.
what Mishra calls a ‘scene of situational laterality’. In this ‘situational laterality’, the emphasis falls on how the migrant’s identity and subjectivity are linked to an active and situation-specific becoming or hybridisation, and how this process forms part of a strategic positioning that is constitutive of identity.31 Of these two fundamentally different notions of transnational attachments – dual territory and situational laterality, it is the latter that seems to provide us with the better basis for understanding the socio-cultural conditions of migrant artists
) – are now rearing their ugly heads again. The shared experiences of injustices and the dislocation of self – for migrants, migrant artists, and artists dealing with the subject of migration – are met with a thirst for cultural exchange, and these constantly redraw the borders of their communities. These experiences, partaken in or mediated through art, reclaim identities from reification, assert the need for embodied action in a shared space, and defeat expectations of ‘tidy definitions of otherness’ (Antoni and Hatoum, 1998 : 54). This volume would not be complete
outlook on the world. But the neglect of the aesthetic dimensions in postcolonial identity politics and the dissociation from Western traditions often leaves unanswered the crucial question of how migrant artists contribute not only to changing institutional structures but also to renewing artistic and cultural expressions. The challenge for all those who wish to use the concept of migratory aesthetics as a catalyst for an analysis of cultural change related to migration, and to the kinds of mobile individuals that these changes both create and are created by, consists
transformable selfidentifications. If the latter is stressed, intersectionality can be used to conceptualise individual agency. As Ann Phoenix has pointed out, intersectionality is incompatible with essentialist identity politics. It ‘fits better with a notion of strategic alliances, where people make temporary alliances for particular purposes’.10 It is thus well suited for exploring how identifications and disidentifications can shift as migrant artists (and migrants in general) cross national borders, reorient themselves in new contexts and develop other attachments. The
, he also knows that this is compromised by these associations. Editors: More generally, what is your answer as a curator to these labels? What place do you think should be given to terms like ‘foreign artists’, ‘settled artists’, ‘migrant artists’ or ‘expatriate’, ‘exiled’, and similar terms? What do you do with the hyphenated labels that spring up whenever you curate migrant art, or art that has migrated? Dieter Roelstraete: Artists are quintessentially migratory paradigms anyway. The vast majority of artists are people who were born in one place and travelled
-Manuel Miranda in the guise of Alexander Hamilton. Editors: What is the place given to foreign artists, settled artists, and migrant artists in the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery? How does the National Portrait Gallery mark borders and nationalities on its museum labels? Are there any markers of migration? Leslie Ureña: We include the birthplace of the sitter. Robert Capa, born Budapest, Hungary, for example. We do not specify nationality, however. Some artists do not want to be categorised, or have changed nationalities mid-career, or use one nationality in one
Coercion in Swedish Immigration Detention’, European Journal of Criminology Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1477370818820627 (Accessed 7 August 2019). Canning, V., Caur, J., Gilley, A., Kebemba, E., Rafique, A. and Verson, J. (2017). Migrant Artists Mutual Aid: Strategies for Survival, Recipes for Resistance. London: Calverts Co-operative. Carr, M. (2012). Fortress Europe: Inside the War Against Immigration. London: Hurst and Co. Clante Bendixen, M. (2018). How Many are Coming, and From Where? Refugees Welcome Denmark. Available at: http