When the message is muddled.

When the message is muddled.

Sep 08, 2022


image An article in Newsweek Magazine (which I read on MSN.com) showed the above picture by an artist Peter Seaton.  The artist decided that he would display his thoughts on the conflict taking place in Ukraine.   He decided to paint it in that seething hotbed of all international discourse:  Melbourne, Australia.   

That such art can be made in a country that tolerates freedom of expression is statement enough.  I wonder how long such art would last on a building in Moscow rather than Melbourne.  

Art, like all forms of communication, can lead to controversy.  

The other question is: is it good art?  That of course is in the eye of the beholder.  I would have to suggest that all you have to do is look at the hand of the Russian soldier for the answer.  No wonder they are losing.  They can’t shoot their guns because they have deformed hands.   I wonder why he felt that part was complete?

In the eyes of the Ukrainian diaspora in Australia (and beyond) it is not good art and gives a muddled message.   I have to agree.  The message is confusing.  Hugging soldiers means what?   That war is stupid between two nations that shared some previous history?  At best, it implies some wishful ignorance about what is going on in Ukraine.  At worst, it plays into a story that Russia is just coming to hug their brothers (to death) and all is going to be well. 

Art of any form comes with responsibility.  And I mean that on the most basic of levels.  Share your message but do so with some understanding of why you are making a message in the first place.   

To (perhaps?) explain his mural, the artist decided to post his work on Instagram. He added a video clip of a mushroom cloud and the statement of "Love to people of Ukraine. I hope we can find peace and end this needless bloodshed." 

Again, this is a misplaced message in that love is only offered to the people of Ukraine?  Who is the “we” he refers to?  The world at large?  Russia?  Is he holding out on a secret that he knows to end the conflict?  Why doesn't he address the Russians?  Why the mushroom cloud? 

I will give the artist the benefit of the doubt and say that he wanted to portray a soldier from Russia approaching a soldier from Ukraine and asking for forgiveness.  I think again, he yawed off message in the way he painted the Russian soldier.  It is hard to tell if that splash of white near the eye is a tear or just an eyeball.  Either way there is no tangible sign of wrongdoing with the balaclava in the way.  No expression of grief.   Just a non-emotional dude still slinging his rifle.  My interpretation is that Seaton chose to paint the Russian soldier as an equal of his Ukrainian counterpart.  And therefore, makes (perhaps?) an unintended message that both Ukraine and Russia are equally culpable for this conflict.  Which is not the case. 

Perhaps if Seaton had painted the Russian with no rifle, a white handkerchief wrapped around that hand (since he can’t paint a good hand) symbolizing some sort of change of heart or better yet, surrender.  He got one point of symbolism right in that the Ukrainian soldier is bigger than the Russian.  It will take a bigger person to forgive the crime that has been visited upon Ukraine. 

We don’t get to see the Ukrainian’s face.   Perhaps he is grinning because he has just hugged his 1000th surrendering Russian that day.  

More than likely, he is not grinning.  


Enjoy this post?

Buy Martin McCormack a coffee

More from Martin McCormack