and to show the output of gifted women artists – Muslims, Christians, Buddhists and Hindu – who live within Islamic civilization and contribute to that cultural heritage of this region.

Notably absent is the artistry of the frequently touted Jewish population that has resided (aka survived in abject dhimmitude) side by side in peace under the control of "Islamic 'civilization'".

Saudi 'investment' in the Clinton (double wide)library appears to be paying dividends.

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at July 3, 2008 10:49 AM

What an odd way of saying it: breaking.

Not tearing or rending or lifting or removing?

Hmmm.

Posted by: undaunted at July 3, 2008 10:53 AM

Victims? What victims? There can't be any victims in such a peaceful religion.

This is par for the course. The world has blinders on when it comes to Muslims. Not when it comes to Christians. Just Muslims.

This morning, for yet again the upteenth time, I was accused of "not liking Muslims" and "just jumping on that [whatever the news item was] because it's a Muslim" because I was again telling the truth about Islamic oppression talking place all over the world. This was in a forum that I regularly participate in. Nevermind that I've never said I don't like Muslims. Nevermind that I provide solid news items (mostly from Jihad and Dhimmi Watch) to back up my statements about Islam and its encroaching dominance over the West. It. Doesn't. Matter. What. You. Say. People will ignore the things they don't want to see. And they will call you names and make judgments off your character in the process. Because there are no victims in Islam.

But one way or another (I pray it's not the hard way) those blinders are going to have to come off.

Posted by: Madame Vengier at July 3, 2008 11:22 AM

Since we all know, and are merely waiting for Bill Clinton to pretend to do the decent thing and reveal what we all know, that millions and millions of dollars have been poured into his Presidential Library, as into the Presidential Libraries and other monuments-to-themselves ("Institutes" or charitable foundations that they affix their name to) of Bush and Carter, and even into the similar undertakings of former presidential underlings deserved a special Arab financial tribute (see who's paying for what at the James Baker Institute, still headed by Edward Djerijian, a former ambassador to Syria and a full-time ignorer-of-and-therefore-unwitting-misunderstander-of Islam), from the Saudis and other Arabs, it is hardly surprising that this exhibit will do nothing to draw any kind of link between Islam and the mistreatment of women in Islam, nor will there be the slightest hint that in Islam the possibilities for artistic expression are severely curtailed, for no sculpture, and no depictions of the human form or face, are permitted.

We'll see how many of the "women artists" turn out to be Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Buddhist, and how many are real Muslims, and how many of those real Muslims produce anything except the on-canvas equivalent of mosque interior architecture (all those geometric patterns, those curlicuesm those Iznik-tile stylized tulips) and Qur'anic calligraphy.

And let's read those labels, and the press handouts, and see what is really going on, by way of apologetics for Islam.

Clinton (Bill) hasn't yet learned his lesson from the recent campaign. He's lost his touch. He's no longer immune; he's wide open for criticism, and his failure to open up about Arab money will not only cost him, but will cost -- in a possible future run -- his wife.

He might as well get it all out now.

Posted by: Hugh at July 3, 2008 11:39 AM

There may be some artistically talented muslims, but they are limited in what they are allowed to express in art form. Their talent is not due to their religion. If that was the case all religious people would be great artists.
Of course Clinton(s) has more than once displayed his own artistry, an exceptional con artist.
I am not surprised that he wants to know whats behind the veil.`It's all for art and better understanding. The Clinton way. The next thing he wants to know is whats under the burka. Watch for a traveling art show with the theme, 'Breaking the Burka', a path to peace...or something like that...

Posted by: duh_swami at July 3, 2008 12:08 PM

wonderful

Posted by: Cornelius at July 3, 2008 12:49 PM

Clinton makes it sound kinky.

Posted by: MP at July 3, 2008 12:58 PM

This sort of cultural event is like those organized by Communist dictatorships during the Cold War. Sure assemble an orchestra of talented musicians and show those decadent westerners just how talented Marxism made us proles.
Of course, superwoman Queen Rania of Jordan, the Goebbles of the Islamic world, is behind this crap. The whole thing sounds so patronizing, as if a couple of paintings is supposed to shut us all up and make us feel like ignorant bigots cause women have it so good there, just like those happy proles and peasants in the USSR.

Posted by: MorrisMinor at July 3, 2008 2:22 PM

Besides, Islamic strictures about human pictures hinders Islamic art, women or not. You can bet that Queen won't delve too hard into that aspect either.

Posted by: MorrisMinor at July 3, 2008 2:28 PM

You can see the oppressive effect Islam had on Persian art when you compare pre and post Islamic periods.

Islam retards and kills just about every aspect of human endeavor and expression there is.

Posted by: waltc at July 3, 2008 2:40 PM

Just one question do the people in power in this nation america think weare all complete idiots i mean they talk about the freedom of women in muslim countries like the indoenesian and pakistani christian virgin girls sacrificed beforte weddings or in indoenesia christians cant use the word allah my god we need a total change./

Posted by: spcbat at July 3, 2008 2:52 PM

Oh please. Haven't Muslim women been abused enough?

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at July 3, 2008 2:55 PM

Islamic "civilization"

Now there's an oxymoron.

Posted by: Laughs_at_Silly_Jihadis at July 3, 2008 3:24 PM

"Haven't Muslim women been abused enough?" Funny, and too true Isabella.
/Where is the feminist outrage?

Posted by: MP at July 3, 2008 3:39 PM

Bill Clinton to peek behind Muslim veils

Show me your . . . er, umm . . . faces.

Posted by: Pelayo at July 3, 2008 3:58 PM

When Bill Clinton and Islam are mentioned together, my mind immediately jumps to two things ... his interest in money and polygamy. Now I'll have to mentally amend that thought to include ... art appreciation ... which resonates about as much as humanitarian bombing.

Posted by: LoneRanger at July 3, 2008 4:12 PM

Good Grief.

I hate Bill Clinton, an enemy.

Posted by: darcy at July 3, 2008 4:37 PM

And in the same spirit of totalitarian, fascist ideologies producing talented women, in the next room, is the Leni Riefenstahl Women of Nazism exhibition.
BTW, how are the acheivements of non-Muslims Islamic? What next, the Klan claims black achievments under Jim Crow?
http://www.bravenewsworld.blogspot.com

Posted by: Max Publius at July 3, 2008 4:40 PM

Willy Clinton filled his pockets nicely.

It is rumored that he made over 200 million dollars since he left office, on speaking tours and 'advisory' functions to the ME. That alone doesn't make him a vile and despicable creature. But for the liberals to claim that the Clintons are somehow less corrupted than the Bush clan is a sick joke.

Does Hillarity still have her Sowdi-Arab girlfriend alongside wherever she travels?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at July 3, 2008 4:43 PM

After September 11th, there was a lot of talk about women in Islam and how repressed they are. We assembled this collection for tour in the United States and Europe with the hope of breaking the stereotypes of women in Islam, and to show the output of gifted women artists – Muslims, Christians, Buddhists and Hindu – who live within Islamic civilization and contribute to that cultural heritage of this region.
........................................

The only way this statement makes even the least sense is if you assume that the main problem is not the repression of women in Islam, but the biased and wrongheaded stereotypes Westerners hold because they *believe* women in Islam are repressed.

Although it is not explicitly mentioned, there also seems to be an attempt to cure Westerners of the nagging idea that perhaps non-Muslims--those Christians, and Buddhists, and Hindus--might be a teeny bit "repressed" also.

Posted by: gravenimage at July 3, 2008 5:21 PM

Weasel Bill is giving payback to his Saudi masters who are funneling money into his pocket. Hillary's campaign debt will also be wiped away by Petro dollars and she too will dance to the fiddle of Islamic sheiks. Traitors of modern America.

Posted by: Briars at July 3, 2008 9:12 PM

I'm assuming the artists are modern visual artists. But let's broaden 'arts' to include all the arts, including verse, and literature, and dance, and song, shall we? What will happen then?

Who will explain to Mr Clinton, about Asma Bint Marwan? Or what Mohammed did to poor little Aisha in the episode of the embroidered cushions?

And has Bill forgotten about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, or Taslima Nasreen?

Why aren't THEY in the touring party?

I wonder if they'll show the animated film, 'Persepolis'?" Is Marjane Satrapi included in the party?

For those who don't know it, I quote here in full Satrapi's description of what it was like to take art classes at university in Khomeini's Iran (see pp. 301-302 of 'Persepolis', the graphic novel, in the chapter entitled 'The Socks'):

I quote:1. 'to keep us from straying off the straight path, our studios were separated from those of the boys: "I'm your anatomy professor. In the past, we drew nudes, but things have changed. Your model will be covered. Try to make the best of it.' 2. no text: woman-in-black confronts girl art students. 3. picture of black draped triangle with face, students staring at her - 'we tried'. 4. 'We looked' 5. 'from every direction' 6. and from every angle 5. 'but not a single part of her body was visible'...'we nevertheless learned to draw drapes'.

'After a few weeks, we discovered, along with our professor, that it was preferable to have a model on which you could at least distinguish the limbs. Our director approved. [Picture of girls drawing CLOTHED *MALE* MODEL...].

'One evening, before the college closed, one of the supervisors paid me a visit. 'What are you doing here so late?''I'm drawing'.

'Why are you looking at this man?' 'Well, because I'm drawing him'.

'Yes, but you're not allowed to look at him. It's against the moral code.'

'What would you have me do? Should I draw this man while looking at the door?!!' 'Yes'.

Then, a little further on, Marjane describes how the female and male art students with rebellious inclinations identified each other and found a way of getting knowledge.

"Little by little, I got to know the students who thought like me. We would go to one another's houses, where we posed for each other [picture of girl in top and closefitting long pants, posing for two male and two female art students]". At first there were only five of us/ then...[picture of nine people]/ and finally...we were much more numerous than I would have believed [picture crowded with faces]./ Our professor was so happy to see the sketches we did at home- 'bravo! an artist should defy the law! I congratulate you.' {Marjane draws the art teacher as a greying, elderly man...one must presume he was a secular Persian, French-influenced].

The whole story makes, very eloquently, the point that Hugh has made here, over and over again: that so much of what is claimed as 'Islamic' art, especially visual art, but one could also say the same of music, and, in Persia, of its classical poetry, is created not BECAUSE of Islam, but IN DESPITE of it, indeed, in overt or, more often, covert defiance of its tenets.

Finally, we can juxtapose this story with the one that was posted right here on jihadwatch, just a little while ago, about the Nigerian female singer who has been put in jail, because of sharia.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/021608.php

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at July 3, 2008 10:22 PM

Another example of an ancient classical women's art surviving not because of Islam, but in spite of it, is the tradition known vulgarly in the west as 'belly dancing'. It combines music (played by male musicians), dance and - in the often extremely elaborate and colourful costumes, designed and created by gifted seamstresses - the visual arts and crafts.

For an eloquent and accessible description of classical 'belly dance', and the tragedy that was overtaking its professional dancers, musicians and costume designers, as Egypt became more determinedly sharia-ized and a ban on public, professional performances of the dance was being ever more obsessively enforced, read Geraldine Brooks' "Nine Parts of Desire", the chapter entitled 'A Different Drummer'.

Brooks herself attempted to learn the dance, from a professional, and found that it was very, very demanding, physically and intellectually.

'Belly dance' comes across as a manifestation of Egyptian pre-Islamic culture, preserved over time (in despite of the explicit and strict sharia ban on dance and music) by sheer determination of its devotees, plus a massive dose of hypocrisy on the part of the Powers-that-Be.

Now: I wonder whether Bill's travelling 'art' exhibition would display examples of the rainbow splendours of the professional belly-dancer's costume? Or video of the costumes in use?

Or explain that these glories have been driven back into the women's quarters, into the harem, in the name of Islam; whereas once, in Egypt in the 1950s, they could be seen on dancers performing at an extremely high standard, equivalent in arduous professionalism to any western ballet, for mixed audiences in classy hotels?

From Brooks:

"the most famous costumier in Egypt inhabited a tiny cubicle in the midst of the vast Khan el Khalili bazaar. Inside a glittering profusion of glass beads and glossy fabrics spilled out of boxes stacked to the ceiling. Customers could leaf through a book of photographs showing possible designs - skirts embroidered with sunbursts in blazes of orange and gold, or peacocks in indigo and aqua. An aged seamstress took the orders and the clients' measurements. 'No Egyptians anymore', she lamented".

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at July 3, 2008 10:51 PM

undaunted noted the odd phrasing of "breaking the veil." Why were the more obvious verbs -- tearing, rending, lifting & removing -- not employed? Just a guess, but "tearing" & "rending" suggest violent assault, which, though featured prominently in the muslim playbook, is bad PR. "Lifting" & "removing," on the other hand, suggest undressing, which a good muslima is never supposed to do.

Also, the exhibition purports to "show the output of gifted women artists – Muslims, Christians, Buddhists and Hindu – who live within Islamic civilization and contribute to that cultural heritage of this region." I'd be curious to see which countries the Christians, Buddhists & Hindus hail from. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if many, or even most, of them are from majority non-muslim countries, which would make the statement that they "live within Islamic civilization" a blatant falsehood. Kinda like the oic padding its membership list with countries whose muslim population is less than 15%, or when islamic countries claim credit for the artistic achievements of their pre-islamic civilizations.

Posted by: sheik yer booty at July 4, 2008 1:11 AM

Just mention Clinton and all the rabid hounds start baying like crazy here. His library is just being used as a venue, one of many. This exhibition is not Clinton's brainchild, it is another organization. Honestly, you people listen to too much talk radio. It could be displayed anywhere.

Posted by: Dumbo at July 4, 2008 1:59 AM

From above: Just mention Clinton and all the rabid hounds start baying like crazy here.

Yes, I wonder why?

Posted by: duh_swami at July 4, 2008 11:47 AM