Booth EJ20
Mysteries and Mythologies: Chiara No and Manju Schandler Respond
We create myths to envelop mysteries, as a means of explaining that for which we cannot find an empirical answer. We often divide these myths into ideals between what is deemed ‘good’ and ‘bad’ - but what becomes immediately apparent is what falls into the good and what falls in the bad. One notices, with interest, that those who embody mystery and ‘power’, those who do not fall into accepted standards are deemed bad. The division of good and bad is not a new social phenomenon, but one that has brought us comfort, in the Western World, since our inception. The birth of bad in the Western context begins with Eve, who is labeled as a temptress in her search for knowledge, if only she had left Adam in his state of innocence… Artists Manju Schandler and Chiara No, in their work explore this tendency of symbolic labeling in their mutual analysis of the myths and mysteries that do make up much of our Western identity.
In “The Modern Construction of Myth,” by Andrew Von Hendy he states the following: “the student of "myth" confronts a concept which has been and still is the site of contending ideological constructions, many of them connected only quite problematically to any objective referent,” implying that the idea of the myth,its existence, its understanding is directly connected and forged to the one labeling. Healers, when not male are comfortably labeled as witches - why? This labeling of the mystery of healing is safe in the hands of the male, but demonic and dangerous in the hands of the woman. Ironically, the social role and expectation has been that women forge in the wilds for foods, fruits, herbs and berries for sustenance and the health of her family. She does not earn money from this, but instead fills the bellies of her family; the moment she can earn money, and then infiltrate the role of the man,the provider of the family, she is demoted to evil. This quandary becomes even more interesting when considering some of what Roland Barthes says about labeling, identity and past time. Considering a social marker of culture, Barthes provides the example of red wine as a cultural marker for the French - which sways towards irony because laced in the consumption of anything, when in excess - lies danger. According to Barthes, the very thing that identifies the French, acceptably holds two juxtaposed qualities , but when a woman holds anything but the positive she is somehow dangerous by default. The idea then, of labeling and acceptance floats between control, moderation and swirls into chaos when abused. Does that then imply that when women stampede into male dominated roles that chaos is the only result - or is balance invited - and then the question becomes: is balance disruptive?
It should be noted that often myth is not defined by the object of its message, but by the way in which it utters this message. Thus, the affixing of symbolism from the interpretation of the one labeling cannot be trusted as the student of myth. The proposed expert on labeling infiltrates the myth with their own personal understanding, which of course, could be biased in the negative, or the positive. Myth then becomes the fodder of the labeler for their purpose. Artemis, simply in Greek mythology, is the huntress,but as time travels and unwinds she alters to incorporate elements tottering on evil . The message is reiterated that anytime the feminine has power - she is innately evil. The symbol of mother seems to only function when she is shrouded in self-sacrifice. Women who are both mother and individual, those who step in and out of the role, are often vehemently vilified as a failure as a mother. Is it not interesting that men can safely be a father and an individual at no cost to their character? All of the above questions and arguments are intrinsically woven and melded in and through the works by Chiara No and Manju Shandler, stimulating their responses to the fluidity of both signs, signifiers and myth. Unfortunately, it seems we can have no definiteness , no surety - because for some reason, we do not embody the role of the labeler.No, that is still left to some abstract judgment that takes no consideration of the human in their obsessive quest towards the removal and destruction of both original thought and individuality.
