In week 6 we examined the significance of Mosque decor and Islamic architecture. The readings discussed how early on when western scholars began to examine Mosques and other decor of Islamic architecture, they reduced to being simply ornate and decorative. Essentially scholars referred to the decor as content-less (Ismail R. Al-Faruqi, 31). The western concepts of what is art or what can be considered figurative strongly influenced their studies. “[F]or an art to be something more than a mere art of decoration” it is necessary”in short [that] figurative representation as Greek and Western art understands and approves of it” (Ismail R. Al-Faruqi 32).
They saw the geometric shapes and patterns as pretty and ornate and devoid of any meaning. In reality, the patterns and shapes are filled with symbolism which the western scholars did not understand. “Islamic art communicates only through implicit symbolism. it does so out of the utmost care to avoid compromising God’s unity and transcendence by even the slightest hint that any one visual form can fully portray any divine quality or attribute” (J. Renard 128-129).
The comic was essentially a criticism of the simplification of Islamic decor by the western scholars. The picture in the art museum is an extraordinarily beautiful mosque filled with colorful patterns and shapes. The two figures there do not represent any specific scholar, but represent more the condescending tone taken by western scholars. The comic itself is also a simplified version of the the actual reasons why the scholars demeaned the art. This is purposeful because it flips the positions of the critics, putting the scholars in the position of being criticized and their arguments overly simplified.
The image was pulled from this website: