Representation of the Roma Otherness in Art

 Representation of the Roma Otherness in Art A research on how the image and stereotypes associated with Roma People have been portrayed and perpetuated in European, visual art. by, Jokubas Ragauskas and Edlira Folman Project Supervisor: Kirsten Holst Petersen Fall Semester 2014 1 Abstract This project investigates how the notion of otherness historically ascribed to Roma people (by the western societies where they have settled) is represented and perpetuated in visual art. The paper’s theoretical framework is based, primarily, on the concepts and ideas of Stuart Hall, Edward Said, Erwin Panofsky. Through a comparative analysis of two works of arts (paintings), one executed by a non­Roma, western artist and one by a Roma artist, we will attempt to show how perceptions of self, and ‘others’ are a product of cultural background, and the meaning and values we ascribe to people and events are consequently by­products of cultural conditioning too. Summary in English Through this project we investigate how the negative and stereotypical image of Roma people (constructed by discourse) as the others, is reinforced and perpetuated through art. As the notion of otherness has been defined in different ways, this paper, initially, introduces the reader to the definition of otherness this project works with. The theoretical concepts and ideas used for this purpose relate primarily to the works of Stuart Hall, Edward Said, Gail Kligman, Brigitta Frello etc. Through an understanding of Said’s definition of Orientalism, a theoretical rationale has been drawn in order to understand how Roma people, in the case of this project, have been cast into and defined to be the others, as opposed to the western mainstream culture. Stuart Hall and his ideas on cultural representation and signifying practices have been used to understand how meaning is produced, conveyed and represented in a cultural framework. Through Hall’s work we work in this paper to understand how cultural oppository positions are formed, and how we identify ourselves and others. Through Kligman’s and Frello’s research we elaborate further on the process of Roma people alienation and stereotyping. The theoretical insights gained and the 2 analysis carried out of two works of art depicting Roma people, are intertwined to shape our conclusion of the project which answers our problem formulation and research question. Summary in Albanian Nepermejt ketij projekti ne jemi perpjekur te studiojme si imazhi negativ dhe stereotipik i popullit Rom si te tjeret, eshte ndertuar politikisht dhe ky imazh vazhdon te perforcohet e te percillet edhe nepermjet platformes se artit, ne rastin e ketij projekti, te artit vizual. Duke qene se nocioni te tjeret eshte perkufizuar ne menyra te ndryshme, fillimisht ky dokument prezanton lexuesin me perkufizimin e nocionit me te cilin ne kemi punuar per kete projekt. Konceptet teorike dhe idete me te cilat ne punuam per projektin perfshijne punet e Eduard Said, Stjuart Holl, Geil Kligman dhe Brigita Frelo. Duke kuptuar perkufizimin e Eduard Saidit mbi Orientalizmin ne heqim nje paralele teorike per te kuptuar se si Romet, ne rastin e projektit tone, jane perkufizuar si te tjeret, dhe ndryshe nga normalja qe ne kete rast konsiderohet gjithcka vjen nga kultura perendimore. Stjuart Holl dhe idete e tij mbi perfaqesimin kulturor dhe praktikat kuptim­prodhuese i kemi perdorur per te kuptuar si prodhohet, percillet apo perfaqesohet kuptimi, ne nje kornize kulturore. Permes ideve te Holl, ne jemi perpjekur ne kete projekt te kuptojme si krijohen pozionet e kunderta kulturore dhe si ne identifikojme vehten dhe te tjeret. Permes ideve te Kligman dhe Frelo, ne kemi punuar me tej per te kuptuar se si ndodh procesi i tjetersimit dhe stereotipizimit te Romeve. Dijen e pervetesuar nga teorija dhe analiza e kryer mbi dy vepra arti, e perdorim per te arritur ne nje konkluzion qe i jep pergjigje problemit dhe pyetjeve studimore te ketij projekti. 3 Summary in Lithuanian Šiuo projektu mes tiriame, kaip negatyvus ir stereotipiškas Romų įvaizdis yra kuriamas ir išlaikomas per vizualų meną. Kitoniškumo sąvoka (otherness – eng.) apibrėžiama skirtingas būdais. Šis projektas siekia supažindinti skaitytoją su kitoniškumo apibrėžimu. Tam mes naudojame Stuart Hall, Edward Said, Erwin Panofsky, Gail Kligman, Brigitta Frello ir kitų autorių teorines sąvokas. Pasitelkiant Edward Said post­kolonijinių studijų teorijas apie Orientalizmą, šis darbas išryškina, kaip Romai buvo ir liko nublokšti į plačiosios visuomenės užribį ir apibrėžti kaip kitokie. Stuart Hall įdėjos apie kultūrinę reprezentaciją ir simbolines praktikas buvo naudotos suprasti kaip Romų įvaizdis buvo sukurtas, perteiktas ir įprasmintas Europinės kultūros struktūroje. Hall darbai mums padėjo susipažinti ir suprasti, kaip kultūroje sukuriamos priešingos pozicijos ir kaip joje mes identifikuojame save ir kitus. Kligman ir Frello moksliniai tyrimai mums padėjo giliau suprasti susvetimėjimo bei marginalizacijos procesus, kuriuos išgyvena Romų tautybės žmonės. Šiuo projektu įgytos teorinės įžvalgos ir po jų sekanti analizė tiesiogiai nagrinėja mūsų formuluojamą problemą ir atsako į tyrimo klausimą. 4 Table of Contents I.
Introduction ………………………………………………. 6 Project Motivation………………………………………... .7 Problem area and formulation……………………………. .7 3.1 Roma People in Historical Context and Background…….. .9 3.2 Roma as the Other………………………………………....11 3.3 Problem Formulation and research question……………....16 IV. Representational Theory…………………………………..17 V. Methodology……………………………………………….19 VI. Analysis of works of art depicting Roma people………….22 6.1 Analysis of Miklos Barabas’s painting Travelling Gypsy Family in Transylvania (1843)……………………...24 6.1.a Pre­iconographical analysis………………………………...25 6.1.b Iconographical analysis…………………………………….25 6.1.c Iconological analysis……………………………………….26 6.2 Analysis of Lita Cabellut’s painting After the Show (2011).29 6.2.a Pre­iconographical analysis………………………………..30 6.2.b Iconographical analysis…………………………………….31 6.3.c Iconological analysis……………………………………….32 VII. Conclusion ………………………………………………….34 VIII. Reflection on the project writing process, and points for improvement…………………………………35 IX. Bibliography and References………………………………..36 5 I. Introduction Through this project we investigate the representation of the notion of otherness in art. There are many ways 'otherness' has been defined theoretically and represented, just as there many social categories that have been identified and associated with it, hence the reader might wonder why choose the case of Roma? What makes it more note­worthy is the fact that though Roma people, though they have roots in terms of a shared culture, they are still a people without a country; they seem to be caught in discourse and are marginalized from the mainstream society. In many countries, Roma people find themselves in the lowest part of social stratification and have to face their status as outsiders, or the others. According to research, no matter where in Europe, Roma people are relentlessly faced with discrimination and prejudice (Kligman, 2001). Ironically, they seem to be the most reviled and in the same time the most romanticized people, and are often classified under stereotypes who see them racialized or eroticized as ‘the other’, wherever they are located in Europe, as Kligman states. (Kligman, 2001). It is precisely these stereotypes and this status of ‘otherness’ they have been given from the western societies, that we want to investigate through an analysis of works of art portraying Roma people. As we try to prove with this project art mirrors society and its attitudes and cultural traits. In order to answer our problem formulation we work primarily with the theories of Stuart Hall, Edward Said, Erwin Panofsky . For the purpose of this project we narrow the scope of research and investigate how the aspect of otherness attached to Roma’s find its way and is represented also in art. 6 Structure wise, this project features an elaborate problem area, finalised with a problem definition and research questions, a theory section, analysis of works of art, methodology and a conclusion summarizing our findings. II. Project Motivation The idea about this projected stemmed by a discussion the group members had on the notion of otherness; what it is associated with, and how ideas and stereotypes on otherness are often conveyed and sustained through cultures, in the form of art. We decided to look into how Roma otherness is portrayed and sustained through art forms (such as paintings), because we see the Roma people case, their discrimination and marginalization as a relentless process that is still actual, regardless how politically correct societies we live in try to be in their regard. We wanted to work with understanding how concepts we take for granted as part of our ‘independent intellectual reasoning’ are actually a lot more dependant on our cultural upbringing than we realize. This way, it would be easier to see how certain process take place and how various meanings and values are created: what makes us better than the others. III. Problem Area and Formulation In order to make the reader familiar with the object of our research (Roma people) and notions/concepts we work with (otherness, cultural representation, etc), before outlining the problem statement and the research question, in this section we will present an historical background on Roma people and the definitions of the notion otherness we work with. This section will also argue how Roma people’s image as the other has been constructed by discourse. By understanding how this process takes place, we will be able to demonstrate how art aids establish and perpetuate stereotypes already cemented from social and cultural structures. 7 Before we delve in a comparative analysis of two paintings depicting Roma from a western point of view and from a Roma point of view, we outline also a section on terminology (the way terms we have used should be understood in this paper). Franz Liszt once said: ‘It is one which does not itself know either whence it came or whither it is going ... preserving no tradition and registering no annals. A race having neither any religion nor any law, any definite belief or any rule of conduct; holding together only by gross superstition, vague custom, constant misery and profound abasement; yet obstinately persisting, in spite of all degradations and deprivations, in keeping its tents and its rags, its hunger and its liberty. It is a people which exercises on civilized nations a fascination as hard to describe as to destroy; passing, as it does, like some mysterious legacy, from age to age; and one which, though of ill­repute, appeals to our greatest poets by the energy and charm of its types.’ ­Franz Liszt, The Gipsy in Music (1859) Franz Liszt wouldn’t be the only distinguished westerner to have defined Roma in such unflattering fashion. How did a whole people end up embodying a status of otherness, being outcast and marginalized from the mainstream? While we all are different, what makes us better than the others? It is intuitively assumed by most of us that identities are natural or innate, but according to many social and cultural theorists, among which, Stuart Hall whose theory we are working with, this couldn’t be farther from the truth. In the case of Roma people, we investigate how the social category they have been cast into, shapes the way they are perceived or perceive themselves. These perceptions find their way into literature, art and media, and perpetuate an image of this community, that seems to be far from their real essence/identity, as claimed by the Roma people themselves or the researchers that have committed serious amount of effort and time in studying them. 8 When talking about representation of otherness in art, we chose the Roma people because being a people without a country and highly controversial because of their reported lifestyle, their case is very actual and relevant. But, who are the Roma, Gypsy or Romani? According to In Other Words Project – the Web Observatory & Review for Discrimination Alerts & Stereotypes Deconstruction, co­funded by the European Commision (refer to the link in the bibliography), in European languages there are terms used by the non­Roma to designate Roma people in two main categories. The two main categories are: 1­ Terms with the an Egyptian root (in the Middle Ages, Roma were falsely believed to come from Egypt): Gypsy as used in English, Gitano in Spanish, Gitans in French. 2­ Terms with a Greek root: Atsganos which means “untouchable” in old Greek (Ibid). Rom is an autonym and means the man of Roma ethnic group, however Rom, now, is often used to define both male and female. The heteronym Gypsy has been rejected by Roma organizations as having negative connotations. They prefer the autonym Roma to be used instead (Ibid). Until 2005 the Council of Europe used the word Gypsies in its official texts, then, under official request of International Roma Associations (who found the term to have negative connotations, and linked to stereotypes) the term Roma was used instead (Ibid.) Therefore, in this project we use the proposed terminology by most European Roma organizations and use simply the noun Roma and Romani ­ when we to talk about Roma/Romani language, music, culture etc(Ibid.) The term gypsy/ies might appear to denote the way they have been perceived or described through history. 9 3.1 Roma People in Historical Context and Background ‘He who wants to enslave you," a Romani proverb runs, "will never tell you the truth about your forefathers.’(Hancock, the Pariah Syndrome: 2) When talking about Roma one cannot not notice the incidence of misconceptions surrounding their origin and lifestyle. According to Marian Viorel Anastasoaie, it was an official document emitted by the voivod of Wallachia, Dan the II, in 1385, that mentions the word tigani (gypsy) to denote Roma, for the first time. (Anastasoaie, 2014: 263). As mentioned earlier, it if often assumed that Roma people originate from Egypt, and that from there they migrated into Europe. According to recent genetic findings though, Roma people (which constitute Europe’s largest minority group) migrated from northwest India (Pappas, S, 2012). The British and European Roma people are believed to be descendants of "dalits" or low caste "untouchables" who migrated from the Indian sub­continent 1,400 years ago (Nelson, 2012). According to a study led by Indian and Estonian academics, it has now been confirmed that Roma originate from the Indian sub­continent, and the research has also identified the location and social background from which they emerged. As the researchers claim: … ‘the descendants of today's Roma gypsies in Europe began their westward exodus first to fight in wars in what is today Punjab, between 1001 and 1026 on the promise of a promotion in caste status’ (Nelson, 2012). The same study goes on to claim that the exodus towards North Africa and Europe suggests that they may have been early refugees from the spread of Islam into the Indian sub­continent (Nelson, 2012). But how did an entire population end up being associated with nomadism, theft, deviant behaviour and crime? How did the Roma gain the ‘status’ of the ‘other’, always residing at the margins of civilised societies? According to Ian Hancock (cited by Katie Trumpener, 1992) when the Roma left northern India, they moved through the city of Byzantium and settled in the 10 Balkans after 1100. In the 14th century Roma slavery was instituted in Moldavia and Wallachia which resulted with half of European Roma population being enslaved. Being recognized as Tartars, Turks or Muslim spies – feared for their skin color, unacquainted language and customs, Roma people encountered wide persecution virtually everywhere they traveled or settled (Ibid.) It seems relevant to mentioned here their official banning from Spain in the 15th century and furthermore their repetitious banning from England, France and additionally Italy and Germany in the 16th (Ibid.) 3.2 Roma as the Other Nando Sigona wrote with regard to stereotyping of the Roma: ‘Labels constitute for those labelled, as well as for those who label, the conceptual framework in which one’s own possibility of action in the given society lies’ (Sigona, 2003: 77). On these notes, we start below our account on how the image of Roma as the others was created. According to Radu P. Iovit˘A and Theodore G. Schurr, authors of Reconstructing the Origins and Migrations of Diasporic Populations: The Case of the European Gypsies, the socio­historical study of Gypsies/Sinti/Roma has been dominated by the “Gypsy­lorist” paradigm (Iovita and Schurr, 2004). This paradigm has recently come under criticism for perpetuating stereotypical images of Roma people. When it comes to establishing the exact origin of the Roma people, the task is quite difficult. As Iovita and Schurr argue, Roma are a people with no written historical records of themselves. Due to this, the article argues, Roma history has mainly been written and presented by western scholars of non­ Roma origin. The Gypsy­lory paradigm used thereafter has tended to present the Roma as a unitary isolated ethnic group with a common origin and inherited South Asian 11 cultural practices, which according to the Iovita and Schurr, have contributed to a long history of labeling and stigmatizing of the Roma. They quote Wim Willems (1998), to point out that such paradigm seems to be a part of western learning trend that ultimately exerts European authority over a constructed ‘other’ (Iovita and Schurr, 2004). We would like to emphasize that during our research we encountered many definitions of otherness, however we have mostly worked with Georg Simmel’s notion of the Stranger, Bauman’s definition of the Other, and Said’s concept of the Orientalism and Orient. While the first two have served mostly as an inspiration, it’s Said’s work and ideas we will be using primarily for our understanding of the notion. In his well­known essay the Stranger (1908), Georg Simmel sees a stranger as a wanderer who comes today and may stay tomorrow; the stranger does not belong to the host society; the stranger has an independence of moving and staying compared to the rest of the society (Simmel, 1908). Simmel’s definition states that the stranger do not know his/her own role in a society, in that, even though they he/she is physically close to the rest of the society, in a mental state, the stranger is far away. Simmel’s definition inspired further Zygmunt Bauman work. In Bauman’s view the strangeness was always tempting to the modern (in our case European) society. According to him, strangeness entails a sort of mystery and unfamiliarity, which can be appealing and alluring. Yet, Bauman presents another side of the stranger: he/she is perceived as the one who cannot be controlled, monitored and ordered, and is at the same time and an object of fear: (... ) the arrival of a Stranger has the impact of an earthquake . . .The Stranger shatters the rock on which the security of daily life rests. He comes from afar; he does not share the local assumptions and so becomes essentially the man who has to place in question nearly everything that seems to be unquestionable to the members of the approached group’. Zygmunt Bauman (1997) Postmodernity and Its Discontents 12 According to Edward Said, it is the Orient which represents strangeness and otherness and it takes a special place in European Western discourses (Said, 1979: 1). It is important, as Said states (Ibid.), to notice that that the phenomenon of the Orient has helped to define Europe, (or the Western world), as two contrasting position embodying images, ideas, personalities and experiences. ‘Oriental­ism offers a marvelous instance of the interrelations between society, history, and textuality; moreover, the cultural role played by the Orient in the West connects Orientalism with ideology, politics, and the logic of power, matters of relevance, I think, to the literary community.” (Said, 1979: 24.) Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It is not merely there, just as the Occident itself is not just there either. (…)The Orient is an idea that has a history and a tradition of thought, imagery, and vocabulary that have given it reality and presence in and for the West. The two geographical entities thus support and to an extent reflect each other’ (Said, 1979: 24). Like the Orient to the west, the Roma people too appear in European cultural heritage as the others: from the famous musical compositions of Frantz Liszt, to the art of Henri Rousseau, from the birth of Spanish Flamenco musical culture to French jazz guitar work of Django Reinhardt, the Romani culture seems to have had a lot of influence in European culture. And to draw a comparative parallel with the Roma situation, Said’s orientalism interpretation offers an excellent illustration. As Said argues: despite the Orient covering a vast range of different populations and a geographical area many times larger than Europe, they are collectively scrutinised and understood under the shelter Orient (Said, 1979). This kind objectification implies that the Orient is essentially monolithic, with an unchanging history, while the Occident is dynamic, with an active history’ (Said, 1979). Similarly, in the case of Roma, while every other population is considered to be heterogeneous, Roma people are often considered as an homogeneous group identifiable mainly by skin colour and their lifestyle practices (often, 13 stereotypically negative ones). Because theirs is not just a name­ ‘Roma’, but a ‘collectivized category of negative connotations’ (Kligman, 2001), If one resorts to statistics Roma are comprised of different tribes. According to a survey conducted in Romania by sociologists Elena and Catalin Zamfit, the biggest Roma tribal groups were: the Vătraşii (13.8% of respondents), Căldărarii (5.9%), Rudarii (4.5%), Spoitorii (3.7%), Mătăsarii (3.2%), Ursarii (2.7%), Cărămidarii (1.5%), Gaborii (1.4%) and the Florarii (1.2%). (Zamfit, 1992). Thus, because of the label Roma, the differences between tribal features and lifestyles hardly matter. In her article Inappropriate Europeans: On fear, Space and Roma mobility ( Frello, 2014), Brigitta Frello argues that often, …’images of Roma movement are supported by stereotypical notions of Roma culture as characterized by nomadism, theft, and self­selected marginality’ (Frello, 2014). In her view, the discrimination and marginalization Roma people have been facing for centuries, has a lot more to do with their constructed image than their actual behaviour (Frello, 2014). According to Ken Lee, who as Frello states reminisces of Said’s view in Orientalism, Roma have been constituted as both outsiders and insiders in relation to Europe. Lee uses the term ‘Gypsylorism’ which, in his view would go to explain the construction of the exotic ‘Other’ within Europe — Romanies are the Orientals within’ (Lee 2000: 132 in Frello, 2014). Frello continues in Lee’s tracks when she uses the term ’Gypsylorism’ as a reference to the construction of Roma as internal Others, a process which is characterized by cultural stereotypes about Gypsies (Frello, 2014). Frello describes the Roma people as a ‘troubled’ category of movers. With that she means that on the one hand they constitute an internal minority, who as residents of an EU country enjoy equal formal rights with other citizens of the EU, including the right to free movement anywhere in the EU, and on the on the other hand, they are widely conceived as unrightful intruders’ (Frello, 2014). 14 Another account of how the Roma people’s image as the others, was created, comes through Gail Kligman’s article: On the Social Construction of Otherness: Identifying ‘the Roma’ in post­communist communities (2001). Kligman presents a comprehensive overview on the situation and image of Roma people in post­communist countries, especially in Eastern Europe (which incidentally happens to have the highest concentration of Romani population as well) (Kligman, 2001). Kligman claims that Roma people are, through discourse, constructed as the others; an image that does not only affect the way the non­Roma look at Roma’s, but also the way, Roma look at themselves. In many European countries where Roma live, their skin colour seems to connote genetically predisposed practices and ways of living, Kligman states; often Roma are referred to as the ‘Black’s of Europe’. (Kligman, 2001). In the societies where they live, Roma are often considered as a race born ‘other’. Many representatives of this race are left option­less in the discriminatory environment they live, thus turning into divergent and dubious activities in order to survive as social assistance alone will not suffice. This initiates a vicious circle that Roma people, regardless of their desire to ‘integrate’ where they live, can’t break. Even in the cases when they do get a job, statistics indicate they are the first to get fired and discriminated due to their reputation. This constructed image of the Roma has significantly influenced the way they perceive themselves too. Thus, Kligman argues that the Roma may internalize many of the dominant culture’s ideas on themselves in order to demonstrate their similarity with the non­Roma (as during communism, where they used to have jobs and homes and a normal lifestyle under those conditions) , or in case of hostility, differentiate themselves from them (Kligman, 2001). The stereotypes and the negative image they have been associated with by the societies where they live has put pressure among the Roma, who feel an inclination to assume and imitate a non­Roma lifestyle will probably provide better livelihoods (Brazilian Roma tend to differentiate themselves from Boghis Roma, who are allegedly involved in dubious activities) (Kligman, 2001). 15 This kind of divergences produces internal conflict, and as Kligman states, in this case ‘civilization’ undermines ‘authenticity’(Kligman, 2001). The Roma themselves though mostly (unlike the case of Boghi’s who are proud to be Roma and of their lifestyle), in many post­communist countries resent the identity ascribed to them and the misrepresentation of their culture. Being a Roma, in their view is not just an ethnicity issue any longer, it is a curse, a doom. In Kligman’s view the constructed ‘Roma category’ is not fixed or immutable. At times, even those who do not self­identify as gypsies/Roma are put under the same category just because they are poverty­stricken and that feature is ‘Romani­sh’. As Kligman puts it: ..()’In this respect, poverty has been racialized in ‘metaphorically’ inclusive ways, (i.e. like a ‘Gypsy’) and physically exclusive (i.e. skin colour) ways.’(Kligman, 2001). In Kligman’s research, most Roma do not see themselves as they are portrayed. While they do acknowledge the existence of Roma who fit the negative stereotypes, they believe that these collective representations hardly constitute a majority. In the end, Kligman states: ‘..() the extent that they recognize themselves in these stereotypes of stark ‘otherness’, they understand themselves to be victims of misunderstanding, intolerance and prejudice’ (Kligman, 2001). Having gained the necessary knowledge on Roma people historical background and how their image was created as the others, we formulate our problem as it follows: 3.3 Problem Formulation: How does visual art reflect and sustain the notion of Roma 'otherness' constructed by discourse? Research question: 1. In what ways has the visual language of paintings reinforced the Roma image as the others, in Europe? 16 The aim with the problem formulation and the research question is to understand and investigate how Roma people's cultural identity (constructed by discourse as shown above), misinterpreted and marginalized as of a lower order, has found its way in art as well. In the following sections our analytical framework is presented, together with an actual analysis of two works of art. In order to illustrate the findings from the theory, we decided to work with a comparative case study. We will analyze how the image of Roma is portrayed in arts from a western art perspective, versus the image of Roma portrayed in art from a Roma perspective. This will highlight how self­perception, identity and remote perception (of the Roma, in this case) are heavily influenced by society and culture. IV. Representational Theory In order to understand how the Roma image as the others is represented culturally and in art, we chose to work with Stuart Hall’s theory of cultural representation and signifying practices. We will use this theoretical lense in our analysis of the paintings depicting Roma. Representational theory is a cornerstone in cultural studies. It is through ‘shared meanings’ that we understand what a culture is about, argues Hall (Hall, 1997). According to him, it is through language that we make sense of our surroundings and things in general. But how does this process happen? His argument is that language serves as a ‘representational system’ which uses signs and symbols (which can be of a various nature, e.g. sounds, images, written words, musical notes etc) to stand for or represent to the others our concepts, ideas and feelings. (Hall, 1997). Thus language serves as a media through which ideas and concepts are represented in a culture. But before we continue with the process of representation, let us first present how Hall describes what a culture is. In his view, the concept of culture is extremely hard to define and there are many ways in which one can define it. 17 While a way to look at it would be …( )..’the best that has been thought and said’ in a society’ (Hall, 1997), Hall states that culture is not just a set of things, but rather a set of practices. He goes on to maintain that culture is primarily concerned with the production and the exchange of meanings, between the members of a society or a group. However, Hall attracts attention to the fact that this focus on ‘shared meanings’ might make culture sound too unitary or cognitive, and that in any culture there is a diversity of meanings on a specific topic and thus, more than one way of interpreting or representing it. (Hall, 1997). Hall, claims that the aspect of cultural practices is important in the sense that it is the participants of a specific culture that give meaning to people, objects or events. He argues that things or events in themselves have rarely any meaning that is fixed and unchanging, which goes to say that the same thing can have a different meaning, interpretation or representation in different cultural settings. According to Hall, the meaning we give to things, events or concepts depends on the interpretative framework we bring to them. So, culture is involved in all those practices that are not genetically programmed into us (Hall, 1997). So far, from the representational theory we get that the meaning is produced through language and cultural practices, but where exactly is it produced? Hall states that meaning is produced and exchanged in all the social and personal interactions we take part in, just as it is produced through the various mass media. Language (all kinds of it, whether written, visual, musical) is a signifying practice, Hall argues. Any representational system can be thought to work according to the principles of representation through language. Thus, in our project’s case, the paintings can be thought of as language, in the sense that they use images of the Roma people that represent meanings about this subject. In Hall’s view, the meanings are produced and circulate through language and culture. Representation seems to be of a secondary nature as it takes place once the meaning has been constituted. 18 Nonetheless, Hall argues that the meaning is not just something to be found in a culture. Often, the meaning is constructed. From this ‘social constructivist approach’, it can be said that representation takes part in the very constitution of things; Hall states, this way, culture is a constitutive process too. (Hall, 1997). In terms of how language and culture interrelate into the formation of meaning, Hall goes on to explain two main approaches: the semiotic approach and the discursive approach. While the first one is concerned with how language is a system of signs that serve as vehicles of meaning conveying in a society, the latter is primarily concerned with the effects and the consequences of representation. We will be relying mainly in the discursive approach, with our analysis of the Roma depicting paintings, as we have demonstrated that their image, their position in the society is a result of discourse. We argue that art mirrors society, thus the discourse­constructed image of the Roma people as the ‘others’, (mainly associated with disdainful activities or itinerant lifestyle and jovial entertaining fun), is perpetuated also in the works of art. V. Methodology The project will be of a qualitative nature and will use mostly secondary sources of data, composed of visual art and media. This project is moving from abstract statements to the concrete, hence the mode of reasoning will be the deductive one. One of the methods provided by German­American author Erwin Panofsky, will constitute to some extent the tool/method allowing us to learn and understand some general fundamental concepts when analyzing visual art. To base our analytical framework we chose the methodological tools of iconography and iconology which were developed by German art historian Erwin Panofsky. These concepts are sometimes used interchangeably (reference needed) and their meanings vary from different authors, hence we will here make a distinction, which is indeed inspired by Panofsky’s book ‘Meaning in the visual art’. 19 Following Panofsky we state that iconography is a description and classification of images. Iconography informs us where and when specific themes were visualized and produced (Panofsky, 1970: 57). Panofsky stresses that the method of iconography does not try to work out interpretation by itself, but it rather collects and categorizes the evidence, and does not investigate the significance of the evidence. Iconology is furthermore an interpretive method, as opposed to iconography (Ibid: 58). Iconology is the discovery and interpretation of symbols in paintings and other visual art. These meanings might be unknown to the very author and be unconscious expressions of particular (theological, political, philosophical, etc.) discourses (Ibid: 56). When analyze the paintings we will categorize the meaning into three strata: pre­iconographical description, iconographical analysis and iconological interpretation. These will be our three main methods which will constitute the base of analytical framework. Pre­iconographical Description (and pseudo­formal analysis) will focus on the primary or natural meaning.The tools for interpretation will consists of our own practical experience (familiarity with the objects and the events). Here we pay the most attention to the style and as Panofsky illuminates: ‘pre­iconographical description is the insight into the manner in which, under varying historical conditions: ‘objects and events are expressed by forms’ (Ibid.: 66) Pre­iconographical description is achieved by identifying pure forms which can be for example: a certain shapes of colors or lines, representations of natural objects such as musical instruments, animals, people, traveling house and so on. Their mutual relations we will be called events. (Ibid.: 53­54) We will designate primary meanings which will be noticed in the paintings, it will be done so, in order to proceed to the next method, which is not anymore a merely descriptive, but rather analytical one – the method of iconographical analysis. 20 Iconographical analysis will shed light on the secondary or conventional meanings, which are constituted of images, stories, allegories and metaphors. The equipment for interpretation using this method include knowledge of literal sources and it will look into the meanings in which, under varying historical conditions, specific themes or concepts ,were expressed by objects and events. This method is executed by taking into account the fact that specific themes and concepts are recognized in images (Ibid.: 55) A woman with a colorful dress and dark skin may symbolize a gypsy woman, a horse wagon can illustrate the family living nomadic lifestyle and so forth. Iconological interpretation which will take its object of interpretation: intrinsic meaning or content, constituting the world of ‘symbolical’ values . For this method we will use what Panofsky refers to ‘Synthetic intuition’ conditioned by personal psychology and discourses, which will illustrate how particular discourses were expressed through art platform by artists portraying a heavily distorted version of reality. Iconological method of interpretation is apprehended by ascertaining those underlying principles which reveal the basic attitude of nation, a period, class, religious or philosophical persuasion – qualified by one personality and condensed into one’s work (Ibid.: 55). This method will help us to see how the representation of gypsies was sustained through the time or how did it change. The later could be done by analyzing pieces of art which were produced on different time periods. Though we worked primarily with Panofsky’s ideas we would like to state that we are aware of the limitations that came with his method. Thus, one of the limitations of Panofsky’s method is the clear distinction he makes between form and meaning (although he does ‘warn’ the viewer that the three levels of meaning are often not easily separated). Furthermore Panofsky seems to focus on the meaning that the artist intended with the work of art, leaving on a second hand the meaning that the viewer creates himself from the 21 work. And last, in Panfosky’s method art seems to be a passive product, more like a symptom. VI. Analysis of works of art works depicting Roma people Drawing on the knowledge gained from the theoretical perspectives we worked with, in this section, follows an analysis of two works of art (paintings) representing Roma people. The paintings belong to different historical time periods and locations and the choice was intentional. We wanted to see how the image of Roma people has ‘progressed’ through time. One of the paintings is from, non­Roma background artist, the other from a western artist of Roma origin. The choice of paintings aims to compare the image of Roma through a non­Roma perspective and the image the Roma have about themselves. The works of art in question are: Travelling Gypsy Family in Transylvania, 1843 by hungarian painter Miklós Barabás and After the Show 2011, by contemporary Romani artist Lita Cabellut. Before we continue with the analysis, it is in place to mention a few methodological concerns we encountered on the way. As Stuart Hall points out.. ‘()..It is participants in a culture who give meaning to people, objects and events’(Hall, 1997). In our case the challenge was to try and understand concepts and events from the perspective of the artists, who belong to different cultures, as well as different historical periods (many changes can happen in the same culture in different historical intervals, and such changes affect perception). Our own cultural background can and will influence the process of interpretation. Furthermore the 22 knowledge we have on the cultural background of the artists is limited and we cannot always corroborate the validity of the sources we used. From the two paintings we chose to analyse, one is from a hungarian, non­Roma artist (gadjikano, as the Romani people call those of non­Romani descendance), and the other is from a western, contemporary Roma artist. We analyse the paintings categorizing our impressions based on Erwin Panofsky’s concepts of Iconography and Iconology. Thus, we begin with a pre­ iconographical description of the paintings, which in Panofsky’s view..’is the insight into the manner in which, under varying historical conditions: ‘objects and events are expressed by forms’ (Panofsky, 1970: 66) Then we will proceed with an iconographical description which does not try to interpret the paintings in themselves, but rather collects and categorizes the evidence, without investigating the significance of the evidence (Panofsky, 1970). Conclusively an iconological description will follow which will present the understanding of the meaning or content of the paintings and the symbolical values they present. After having gained a deeper insight on the paintings we will try to make a comparative analysis between the ways Roma are represented the painting from the non­Roma, European perspective and that of the Romani artist herself presenting an image of her own people. Both analysis feature a section on the artist’s life and work background. This will aid our understanding (in a Hall point of view) of the cultural and historical circumstances that have shaped the artists’ ideas, and value systems in general, and their interpretation and representation of the Roma image in particular. 23 6.1 Analysis of Miklos Barabas painting Travelling Gypsy Family in Transylvania Artist’s life and work background Miklós Barabás (1810 – 1898) gained the craftsmanship of the painting from limners, room painters and theatre decorators from the town, hence his technique developed rapidly and already by the age of sixteen, he started to receive portrait orders. In 1829 he was invited to come to Bucharest. He stayed there for several years and worked on a number of portraits and images. His composition of figures and motives are set to appear appealing, also his paintings entail a number of elegant and little details which needs sharp observations ( – see
the link in the bibliography). Miklós Barabás was a pioneer of Hungarian national art, having the excessive support from the literary and political elite from the Reform Age. As the founder of and the active member of the art life in Budapest, Barabás name became associated with the beginnings of Hungarian genre painting. His painting Romanian Family Going to the Fair (1844) received great 24 success in the 1844 exhibition of Vienna Art Association and it was even considered the most beautiful and representative folk genre painting of its time (, (Veszprémi, 2002). For the purpose of this project, we chose to analyze the another famous painting of his, namely the Travelling Gypsy Family in Transylvania. This particular painting attracted considerable attention in the exhibition of the Pest Art society in 1843 and was praised, by the Hungarian critics as the first large­scale composition entailing realistic representation of contemporaneous Hungarian subject, being extremely true to life (Veszprémi, 2002). 6.1. a Pre­iconographical description We can see that the shapes in the painting are mostly organic ­ the shape of the mountains, and the people depicted in the painting. The point of view is of eye level, and the angle is straight, as the opposite of the painting by Lita Cabellut (following further down in the analysis), where the subject looks down to viewer. The background colour differs. Light and blurred in the right side and light but clear on the left side. People’s faces are portrayed through darker colour, especially the people who seems to be older than the rest. The colour of the clothes are colourful and eclectic. 6.1.b Iconographic analysis This section presents the secondary or conventional meanings, which are constituted of images, stories, allegories and metaphors. We first identify several figures who are moving or traveling one way (from the right to the left). The background seems to be rural Hungary, more specific ­ Transylvania. The figures seems to be disconnected from each other, as the scene does not focus on one central action or one central figure, it moreover lacks an overall compositional structure that would keep everything together (Ibid.). Some figures are placed closer to the foreground than the others. We see some blurry 25 figures who are traveling, however they are not portrayed in detail, as opposed to the other figures, who seem to be portrayed in greater detail. A young man, who walks in the front is gazing back to a patriarch­like figure of an old man on a horse, carrying three babies. We furthermore identify a beautiful young girl, and an old woman smoking a pipe and tending to a pig. We finally identify a young bare­breasted woman taking care of a child. 6.1.c Iconological interpretation In this section of the analysis we concentrate on the intrinsic meaning or content and try to show which themes and ideas were manifested in Barabás piece, which as we will argue, helped to maintain and reproduce the image of the Roma people and their culture as outsiders or the others. As argued above, Roma people were and still seem to be marginalized and excluded from European conventional lifestyle. Miklós Barabás piece exemplify the large number of other representations of Roma people, which tend to visualize Roma stereotypically as a musicians, travelers or magicians – all set of stereotypes which have been reproduced throughout the time and attached to Roma people, generalizing Romani culture as different, exotic and mysterious. This process is carried out through the language, which according to Stuart Hall is a ‘representational system’ and it uses the signs and symbols to stand for or represent to the others our concepts ideas and feelings (Hall, 1997). Thus, the images in a painting like Traveling Gypsy Family serve as the language and the media that reproduce and sustain the image of Roma, which was and still is built on similar stereotypes. These representations though, are taken into account by many people as representing reality and being truthful. Images like the old man on the horse, the bare­breasted woman with the child and the old woman with the pig ­ all seem to be recurring again and again in pictures and texts depicting Gypsies in 19th­century Hungary and Europe in general (Veszprémi, 2002). 26 We want to highlight that this type of representation in Barabás painting does not represent Roma in the way which is close to reality; the painting illustrates the exteriority of Roma people instead, or in other words, they way they appear to be. To illustrate our point better we use Edward Said’s idea of Orientalism which is premised upon exteriority. Miklós Barabás makes the Roma speak, he depicts them in such a way that it reduces them to plain, mysterious, traveling people ‘put on display’ in front of a non­ Roma audience. To draw a relevant parallel between representation of the Roma and Orient, as described by Said, one has to be aware that, that the author who is representing the Orient or the Other (in this project’s case, the Roma) is never concerned with the Orient as the first cause of what he says and what he writes, or in this case paintings indicates that the author artist is outside the Orient (the Roma social category in this case), both as an existential and as a moral fact, hence the principal product of this exteriority is of course representation, Travelling Gypsy Family was hailed as the first real Hungarian genre painting with the ‘real’ Hungarian subject matter (Veszprémi, 2002). The traveling people portrayed in the painting and are of Romani ethnicity, not Hungarian. The nomadic theme keeps occurring in paintings portraying Roma, however here it leaves no room for interpretation, as the main theme of Barabas painting is constituted from the set of stereotypes. This allows us to identify that Roma people were looked upon as outsiders: useful as musicians or entertainers, objects of representation which, through platforms like art, theatre and music were used to portray the other (Ibid.). Represented Roma people in Hungarian or European art in general, tend to be looked upon, to be gazed upon on their strangeness and exteriority; these representations, which claims to represent reality, offer a heavily distorted version of reality instead, where the spectators are invited to form an opinion based on represented stereotypes instead of real knowledge (Ibid.) and as Said argues ‘(…) the exteriority of representation is always governed by some version of truism that if the Orient (Roma people in our case) could represent itself it 27 would; since it cannot, representation does the job (…) (Said, 1979: 24)’. The representations may seem amusing, however the voices of Roma are never heard. The last point we deduce from Barabás’ painting is that it highlights hegemony of Europeans in Europe as opposed to Roma, who are understood as non­Europeans, by the Europeans. While Europeans tend to understand themselves as rational, progressive and familiar of each other, Roma, on the contrary, are portrayed as exotic, mysterious, strange, and unfamiliar. Following Said, which on his own, borrows the idea from Gramsci, it is a hegemony, or a result of cultural hegemony at work which gives the processes of reproduction or cultural representations (Said, 1979: 7). Said’s idea of Orientalism goes in line with our idea of Roma image and how it was constructed, according to the scholar, the idea of Europe is a collective notion identifying ‘us’ Europeans against all ‘those’ non­Europeans, the others. We, moreover, argue that the painting represents the idea European identity as a superior one, compared to Romani identity and culture, which are depicted as backward and misplaced. Roma were the outsiders in 19th century Hungary and Europe; they could only play certain roles they were recognized into: selling their hand­made products, or playing music. (need a reference here). Gypsy musicians are often occurring motifs as standard images in the 19th century genre painting (Veszprémi, 2002) another occurring theme is portraying Roma as nomads (as it is indeed portrayed in Barabás painting. 28 6.2 Analysis of the painting After the Show, by Lita Cabellut Artist life and work background Lita Cabellut is a Romani artist, who was born in 1961 in Barcelona. She was born into a Sinti family and lived on the streets until the age of 13, after which she was adopted by a well­known family. It is in Spain, Lita was introduced to the masters Velazquez, Goya and Frans Hals and became deeply affected by their art and art in general. Lita attended drawing and painting lessons and had her first exhibition at the age of 17 in Madrid. (Cabellut, 2014). At 19 she moved to Netherlands, to continue with her artwork. 29 Lita Cabellut paints large­scale portraits and is a very versatile artist. From her works, we chose to analyze, the painting After the Show (which is part of the series with the same name) that features a Roma artist. In order to be able to understand and interpret her work, we would have to be aware of the fact that Lita’s identity was shaped in two different ways and backgrounds. Thus, first comes her life experience as a Roma living in the streets, only having experienced the kind of live, the average Roma would, in the Spain of mid 60s, and later on, comes the most significant part of her life (in terms of time length), spent with the prominent Spanish family who adopted her. Not knowing the artist’s life in detail it would be plain speculation to try and establish which formative period affected her artistic psyche the most. Stuart Hall argues that culture is primarily concerned with the production and the exchange of meanings, between the members of a society or a group. but in Lita’s case two cultures seem to ‘clash’ and it is difficult if not impossible to establish which one ends up forming Lita’s believes in terms of perception, and self­perception in this case of the image of Roma she portrays through her painting. Is her representation of the Roma a perpetuation of the image instilled in her by the cultural conditioning she experienced as a child (living in the streets), or is it an act of rebellion and resistance to the stereotypical representation of Roma by the cultural landscape she experienced as an adult (adopted in a well­off, non­Roma family?). From our interpretation of the painting certain indicative clues seem to emerge and are presented in the analysis that follows. 6.2.a Pre­iconographical analysis As mentioned above the pre­iconographical description will deal with giving an overview of the physical aspects of the image, the visual elements and aspects such as color, shape, line, texture and overall impressions related to the painting in question. 30 In the work After the Show, the main shapes in the painting are organic (as opposed to geometrical) and are associated with the human form. Fine lines appear all over the naked torso, arms and face of the subject giving it an antic view and cracked earth effect. The form of the painting is three­dimensional, with curvilinear strokes. The main form is that of the entertainer positioned in the middle of the painting. The space in the image is abundant, and a lot of depth is created by the dark brown colour used for the background and the light, muted colours on the subject (the entertainer). The element of space gets even more enhanced by the point of view the artist has chosen for the painting, meaning the viewer having to look up on the subject. This creates a sort of distance between the subject and the viewer. The dramatic feel of the image is enhanced by the clever use of highlights in the subject’s face and body. As for the element of light, it appears that is comes primarily from the upper left side of the painting, giving the subject a glowing effect. 6.2.b Iconographic analysis This section of the analysis concentrates on what the painting displays in terms of evidence and how we can categorize it without trying to offer an interpretation on the painting in itself. In After the Show, Cabellut depicts a half nude, Romani entertainer who stands in the center of the composition and looks downwards on the viewer, with his arms crossed in the chest. The head is embellished by a turban that contrasts the entertainer’s dark hair, as the arms cross on the chest, with the right hand visible resting in the upper left arm . In the waist the entertainer dones a colourful robe that nicely wraps around his figure, though not much of the robe can be seen. The background is a very simplistic dark brown which puts the subject forward in the eye of the viewer. 31 6.2.c Iconological analysis This part of the analysis we found to be really interesting for the simple fact that we would have to analyze and work with understanding the meaning and the symbolic value of a work of art depicting Roma (the object of our research) from a Roma perspective, in this case Lita Cabellut, the Roma artist. In this stage of the description we tried to focus on the painting represents in terms of being a product of the artist’s personality, forged by the cultural background and heritage she derives from. This becomes even more clear when one considers the words of the artist herself who states: ‘I do not just paint, I tell stories. I never choose men or women to paint, I choose heros; I choose people with courage and bravery’ (Cabelutt, 2014). In this stage, we did not think of the painting as just a work of art. As Panofsky puts it, we tried to use ‘synthetic intuition’ to try and identify what values have been ascribed the painting by the artist. We wanted to identify what the elements of composition and the iconographical features of the painting were an expression of, or a symptom of. As argued throughout this project, Roma people have rarely, if ever had a say in ‘forging their own image’ often being already cast in rigid stereotypes. Thus, studying this painting was a very curious process. Lita Cabelutt is a Roma herself, and though her lifestyle changed dramatically after her being adopted into a non­Roma family, she makes sure to let her origins be known also through her art. In the painting in question, just like other non­Roma artists before her, Cabelutt chooses to portray one of the images Roma are identified with, that of the Entertainer. But, the way the portrait is executed emits a different feeling compared to other Roma entertainer images portrayed by non­Roma artists. Starting from the title: After the Show, indicates a sense of professionalism, not the amateur performances in the streets (in the hope of getting some coins, or in a leisurely get­together among Romas). The painting depicts a proud artist who owns the stage, his origin and his act. In an interview with the artist she is quoted to say: ‘I only choose to paint those who I admire and respect in all aspects’ (Cabellut, 2014). 32 Cabelutt was born in the mid 60s and as a teen who wandered the streets she is well­aware of the image her forerunners had in those days as well as now. The work is in a sense an act of rebellion against a labeling society, that cast people into boxes and shelves, denying them the opportunity to express their true nature, by limiting their options. In the painting we chose to analyze, the play of the iconic codes, the intertwining of shadows, lights, the scale, the form, the shapes and colours are all intentionally used to convey subtle meaning, interpretations that draw the viewer in the painting and tell him a story. The choice of the dark background in our interpretation is not a mere curtain went down on an actual scene; it is an indexical sign of turmoil, symbolizing the dark, culturally and socially conditioned environment the Roma find themselves on a daily basis; as the entertainer in this painting, an honest living alone will not do to wipe away the negativity of the connotations associated to the word and social/ethnic category known as Roma. It is interesting to notice how through a deliberate uneven point of view (the entertainer, and the viewer are not in the same level), the artists depicts the distance between the viewer and the entertainer; a distance which could very well be interpreted to depict the difference between ‘the other’ and ‘us’. But, while randomly is is ‘us’ who look down on the ‘other’, this time art has shattered the well­cemented roles cast by society and culture: now, it is the ‘other’ who dares to distance himself from the way ‘we’ see ‘him’ and looks down on ‘us’. Cabellut, states that the large scale of her painting and her choice of portrayal does not intend to portray icons or give her subjects the status of icons, instead, that is aimed, at attracting the viewer and let him/her see the magnitude of the soul of the subjects she paints. In this case, the viewer is ‘asked’ to actually drop the culturally tinted glasses and actually prejudice, just seeing what there is. Obviously seeing in this way, using Panofsky’s synthetic intuition is not an easy process. One has to be aware of history and specific historical circumstances, cultural symbols in order to avoid as much as possible the trap of extreme subjectivism. 33 VII. Conclusion The project set out to investigate how the image of Roma as the others is represented and perpetuated in art. While we started with many preconceptions on what constitutes otherness and how it is established and perpetuated, we gained a lot of insights that contradicted our preconceptions. Thus, as we learnt through Stuart Hall’s theory that, identities and self­perception are non innate and neither are they static. They are highly influenced by cultural and social conditioning. Language (all aspects and forms in which it is manifested, written word, images, musical notes etc.) serves as a media through which ideas and concepts are represented in a culture. Language is the basis of discourse, which on its turn constructs social and cultural norms that affect/shape identities. In the case of Roma, discourse has created and maintained, through centuries, a negative stereotypical image that is proving so difficult, if not impossible to eradicate, marginalizing thus a whole population. Art, being a form of language in itself (communicating through images), mirrors society, and in doing so, it perpetuates the dominant ways of thinking and meaning production in that society. A social order that identifies Roma with deviant lifestyle and negative lifestyle practices will undoubtedly affect Roma representation in other platforms, such as the art one. Often it is assumed that art reflects reality, but if reality is permeated with stereotypes, then art is also sustaining and perpetuating stereotypes: that of the Roma people as outsiders, strangers, and others, in the case of this project. We learnt that without critical thinking skills it is easy to fall prey to subjectivism and assume one’s ‘truth’ to be a ‘universal’ one. Discourse and knowledge production have often nothing to do with evidence as such, and a lot more with power relations, a victim of which, Roma people seem to be. Hall argues that the world is not accurately or otherwise reflected in the mirror of the language that interprets it (in our case the language of images). Thus we interpret the world, and the way it is represented through codes that translate concepts into language or the other way around. And as we know, these codes are 34 a by­product of social conventions. Thus, the image world we will see and understand will be highly dependant on the culture and society that has produced those codes. In the case of Roma people, with a dominant western value system little place is left for the others to produce or forward their ‘truth’. VIII. Reflection on the process of project writing and points for improvement. A project is not just a paper that needs to be written, it is just as much a learning process, out of each, one emerges wiser. And the knowledge gained has to do not only with the subject matter, but also with knowing oneself as far as interpersonal and time­management skills go. We chose to work on this project attracted by the topic to be researched. The most interesting, ironic and ‘contradicting’ part of writing a project is that the more one learns, the least one feels one knows. As the more knowledge you gain, the more you understand how much more there is to be learnt. Our initial challenge was trying to narrow the topic of research down, with the multitude of literature existing on the subject of otherness representation in art. Further on the writing process, the inability to meet in person, somehow slowed down the writing process. This influenced the amount of data and information we could use to render a complete historical background on the Roma. We feel, with better time­management skills we would have been able to present an historical account of Roma people not just by western, non­Roma researchers, but from a native, Roma perspective too. Due to the framework of such a small project we also feel that drawing conclusions based on such a limited analysis one risks to rely on generalizations, subjectivism and unsubstantiated assumptions. Had we had the possibility to work with interpreting more works of art, and looked further into the background in which they were created our conclusion of the project would be more solid and concrete. 35 IX. Bibliography and references ­ Frello, B (2014): Inappropriate Europeans: On Fear, Space and Roma mobility. ­ Soziologie, Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1908 [Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation] ­ Nelson, D (2012): European Roma descended from Indian 'untouchables', genetic studyshows­R
oma­descended­from­Indian­untouchables­genetic­study­shows.html , last accessed, the 17th dec 2014. ­ Said, Edward, 1979, Orientalism, Vintage; 1st Vintage Books ed edition (October 12, 1979) ­ Said, Edward 1993, Culture and Imperialism, Vintage Books, New York. ­ Panofsky, Erwin 1970, Meaning in the visual arts, Peregrine, London. ­ Kligman, G (2001), On the Social Construction of Otherness: Identifying ‘the Roma’ in post­communist communities. ­ Rose, Gillian 2007, Visual Methodologies, Sage Publications, London. ­ Hall, Stuart 1997, Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, Sage Publications, London. ­ In Other Words Project: http://www.inotherwords­­analysis/termin
ology/terminology­concerning­roma ­ last accessed on 10­11­2014 ­ Cabellut, L interview,­5/in­conversation­with­lita­
cabellut/ last accessed, 16th dec 2014 ­ Cabellut, Lita: Image: After the Show­content/uploads/2014/09/After­the­s
how­04­280x2001.jpg last accessed 17th dec 2014. ­ Anastasoaie, M, (2014): Roma/gypsies in the history of Romania: An old challenge for Romanian historigraphy:
36 ­
mania_An_Old_Challenge_for_Romanian_Historiography last accessed 17th dec 2014 Sigona, N (2003): How can a Nomad be a Refugee? Sociology 37 (1). Veszprémi, Nóra, “Barabás Miklós, Petőfi Sándor és az Utazó cigánycsalád: Egy közös motívum a 19. századi magyar képzőművészetben és irodalomban.” [Miklós Barabás, Sándor Petőfi and the Travelling Gypsy Family. A Common Motif in 19th­Century Art and Literature] Művészettörténeti Értesítő 51.3–4 (2002): 265–286. Veszprémi, Nóra (2007)­and­what­t hey­hide­on­the­representation­of­gypsies­in­hungarian­painting/ written by ­ access at 15­10­2014 Iovit˘A, Radu P. and G. Schurr, Theodore (2004): Reconstructing the Origins and Migrations of Diasporic Populations: The Case of the European Gypsies. Bauman, Zygmunt, 1991: Modernity and Ambivalence. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press Bauman, Zygmunt, 1997: Postmodernity and its discontents. New York: New York University Press. 37