Artists Manju Shandler and Chiara No, in their work explore the tendency of symbolic labeling in their mutual analysis of the myths and mysteries that make up much of our Western identity often focusing on what may seem to be 'bad' but in truth represents a balance.
We create myths revolving around mysteries as a means of explaining that which we cannot find an empirical answer. We often divide these myths into ideals between what is deemed ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’ - but what becomes immediately apparent is what falls into the good and what in the bad. After this categorization occurs one notices, with interest, that those who embody mystery and ‘power’, those who do not fall into accepted standards are deemed bad. The dividing of good and bad is not a new social phenomenon but one that has brought us comfort, in the Western World, since our inception. We begin, with Eve, who is labeled as ‘bad’ and a temptress in her search for knowledge, if only she had left Adam in his state of innocence… Artists Manju Shandler 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 one of his statements: “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 and its existence and understanding is directly connected and forged to the one labeling. For example, 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 - but for sustenance - 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, his being the provider of the family - she is demoted to evil. This 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 speaks about red wine as a cultural marker for the French - which sways towards the ironic because laced in the consumption of anything, when in excess - lies danger. According to Barthes, the very thing that identifies the French, hold two qualities and in this instance, it seems to be acceptable, but when a woman holds anything but the positive - there is danger? 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 symbol from the interpretation of the one labeling cannot be trusted as the student of myth, or 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. Take for example, Artemis, simply in Greek mythology she is the huntress - but as time travels and unwinds she alters to incorporate elements tottering on evil - as though 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; interesting isn’t it that men can safely be a father and an individual at no cost. 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 definite, no surety - because for some reason, we do not embody the role of the one who labels - no, that is still left to some abstract judgment that takes no consideration of the human in their obsessive quest towards the removal - destruction of both original thought - and individuality.
Curation and Statement by Melanie Prapopoulos
