Gannit Ankori. Palestinian Art.

Gannit Ankori. Palestinian Art. London: Reaktion Books, 2006, 143 color plates, 19 halftones. 7-1/2 x 9-3/4. Paper, $35.00.

FROM THE OUTSET, THE MAIN problem with Gannit Ankori's book is initiated by the ambitious title Palestinian Art. Possibly a more appropriate title would have been Chapters from Palestinian Art or, and in keeping with art historians' tradition, a subtitle that would narrow the sweeping, all encompassing claim that is not fulfilled. A narrower qualification might have helped explain her specific choice of limited artists, as well as affirm her aim to avoid reducing the various individual experiments to a collective whole, as exemplified by her grouping of artists.

Perhaps with the expectation of a comprehensive meta-narrative suggested by the book's title, Ankori's organization of the book becomes confusing. Ankori might have benefited from referencing some of the earlier attempts to categorize Palestinian art, which were included in her bibliography. Earlier classifications of Palestinian artists divided them generally into three groups, within which diversity and multiplicity are maintained: artists of the occupied territories (now living under the rule of the Palestinian Authority), artists living within Israel, and artists of the diaspora. The basis for this grouping is that each group, while sharing many substructural commonalities with the other groups, faced its own added set of problems. (1) Ankori's categorization of the individual artists in parts II, III and IV are particularly problematic in their attempt to bridge pronounced lines and forge continuity on the one hand, while creating other imaginary ones on the other. While she makes no distinction between works created under occupation and others created in the diaspora, she certainly amplifies what she perceives as ambivalence in the relationship between "Arab-Israeli" artists and Palestinian artists.

The impact of the Palestinian Nakba of 1948 on Palestine and the Arab world as a whole cannot be overstated. The argument of a pre and post-Nakba rhetoric has been applied to various aspect of cultural, political, and historical developments in the region. Thus not surprisingly, and as Kamal Boullata has long argued, it had a tremendous effect on the development on the visual arts. Ankori's main premise, which she maps out in Part I (the first three chapters contested by Boullata), revolves around 1948 as a decisive moment in Palestinian history. Nevertheless, she often contradicts her emphasis of al-Nakba, as evident in the titles of her chapters, by claiming a sort of art historical continuity; a "thesis" that she "cannot fully substantiate" for lack of supporting materials. She states, "I suggest that in spite of the dramatic rupture that took place in 1948 and its undeniable and devastating effects on Palestinian society, pre-Nakba art exists as a vital cultural genealogical force and a significant historical foundation for the Palestinian art of today" (24).

The revisionist approach to what is decidedly the Western construction of art history, which Ankori employs, starting with her own earlier theories may have been necessary for an Israeli art historian. The existence of pre-1948 Palestinian art was never an issue for those of us researching Arab art. While there are undoubtedly continuities within Palestinian history, Ankori's narrative neglects to locate an Arab context for Palestinian art. She does not account for historical developments in pre-British mandate Palestine, the effects of the British mandate, the Jewish colonization, and all ensuing ramifications. At the end of chapter 1, Ankori notes two theories that "set up a discursive framework for the art historical discussion that follows"(21). The first, is the notion of "Dis-Orientalism" that pervades much of Palestinian art The second, is the argument that "the hybridity of Palestinian art and its mode of deconstructing the East-West dichotomy may be linked to other post-colonial cultural trends" (22). These two points would necessarily apply to much of the works produced in the Arab world. However, linking Palestinian art to "other post-colonial cultural trends" rather simplifies a very complex situation of post- and neo-colonialism, occupation, and nationless art. Moreover, one wonders if hybridity invoked by Ankori in most of her discussion of Palestinian art could be applied equally across the artists she represented, despite distinct differences in their biographies and spaces of existence.

Chapter 2, "The Shadow of the Nakba: Art before 1948," presents a short taxonomy of objects of art created in pre-1948 Palestine. Ankori deserves credit for the arduous task of compiling a comprehensive history of Palestinian art. As she attempts to map out art development before 1948, she acknowledges that most evidence in the form of objects of art had disappeared. Most of her discussion of examples, artists and meaning of works in Part I is merely reiteration of what a number of Palestinian artists, many of whom she cites, had articulated in published articles. Of significance, however, is her research in Israeli archives that documented the looting of Palestinians' belongings, including books and works of art. In fact contextualization of certain events in the lives of many Palestinian artists with references to Israeli documentations is quite effective.

Chapter 3, "Exile and Memories: Art after 1948," sketches an outline for the various tracks of developments, those that "continued and diverged from the art of the pre-Nakba" (47). She points out the dominance of the discourse of fragmentation, and the "dialectic between rootedness and displacement" (47). According to Ankori, the major aspect that dominated form and content of the post-Nakba era was the collective need for a national iconography. She ends the chapter with the conclusion that while individualism was certainly suppressed for the sake of a national spirit, particularly in the periods following 1948 and 1967, it was eventually reasserted. As opposed to the clear line of demarcation of pre- and post- 1948 Palestine, Ankori does not give clear points of transformation in the period that followed. The reader, however, can deduce from her discussion of the evolution of the artists she chose, that 1967 and the first Intifada were points of transition and transformation. This is particularly evident in the evolution of the work of Sliman Mansour who declared that the Intifada liberated Palestinian art from its subjugation to politics. In the words of Tayseer Barakat: "Politics made the role of art to be that of an interpreter and propagandist. Such were the characteristics of Palestinian art before the seventies [1970s]." (2)

Part II: "Earth and Sky," attempts to construct the post-Nakba narrative through two chapters dedicated to the discussion of two important Palestinian artists: Sliman Mansour and Kamal Boullata.

Part III: "Body and Home," presents two chapters that concentrate on another two younger Palestinian artists: Mona Hatoum and Khalil Rabah. The reason behind the separation of these four artists into two groups is not entirely clear. It seems to be either based on generational divide of simply on thematic choice.

Part IV: "Being Arab in Israel," highlights the different experience of Palestinians living under Israeli rule through detailed discussion of a number of artists. In Ankori's quest to dispel the homogenizing image of "Arab al-Dakhil," as Israeli-Arabs are sometimes referred to, she chose artists of various religious, class and socio-cultural backgrounds. One wonders, however, why she did feel the need to label the Palestinian artists living in Israel by their religion and socio-cultural designations (Asad Azi, a Druze; A.S. Kamil and Jasser Abu-Rabia, two Bedouins; Jumana Emil Aboud, a Catholic and Raeda Saadeh, a Muslim) and not the four Palestinian artists she discussed in the previous chapters.

It is difficult, however, to review Ankori's book without taking notice of the controversy and accusations that surrounded its publication. It was expected that Ankori's identity would be problematic. I, too, was surprised the first publication on Palestinian art in English would be the work of an Israeli art historian. But why was she not seen as an "enlightened" liberal Israeli asserting Palestinians' right to self-expression by acknowledging and "documenting" their art history? Ankori certainly goes to great length to express her appreciation and understanding of both Palestinians and Palestinian art through many personal anecdotes aimed at shattering the wall of separation between her as the "other" and Palestinian artists.

Nevertheless, the main controversy is not Ankori's identity but an accusation of plagiarism from the Palestinian artist and scholar Kamal Boullata. As a researcher in modern Arab art, I can attest that Boullata's writings and theories about Arab art in general were the nucleus referenced by many in the field as they developed their own. In response to an interview conducted by al-Jazeera website with Ankori, Boullata said "I am sure she did not mention to you that the core of her thesis on the history of Palestinian art (the initial chapters in her book) has been plagiarized from hard-won research I conducted and published over the last 35 years." (3)

While rightly contesting plagiarism, Ankori's Israeli identity seems to only magnify the issue. In his response, Boullata associates "the appropriation" of his intellectual property to the "pattern that one can trace throughout the history of Israeli culture." (4) The League of Palestinian Artists used a similar argument in a statement issued in support of Boullata's position. It stated: "Gannit Ankori's plagiarism did not only violate Boullata's rights as a writer but we consider her own writing as an assault on the very historicity of Palestinian art." (5)

Invoking the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was not limited to Boullata and the League of Palestinian Artists. Ankori herself exploited this angle in her long preface detailing her "personal eye-opening journey" (11) of discovering Palestinian existence and rights. Actually, the preface positions the research into Palestinian art as a personal "quest" and heroic achievement of Gannit Ankori, making it impossible to review the book as a disinterested and neutral manuscript. Reading the preface conjured up images of old Orientalist scenarios: once again, it is the gallant, educated and sympathetic Western outsider who rescues the natives from oblivion! This point is reiterated in chapter 2, where Ankori revised her earlier hasty and misinformed conclusion published in 1988 that "although several Arab artists are known to have been active in British Palestine before 1948, a distinctly Palestinian brand of 'fine art' was virtually non-existent at the time" (23). This was certainly a good publicity approach, as evident in the al-Jazeera interview with Ankori to promote her book: "In the process of seeking an alternative to the Zionist account regarding the creation of her own country, Israeli Gannit Ankori may have finally brought Palestinian art out of the shadows." (6)

Despite controversy and shortcomings, Ankori's book is a welcome addition to a field of studies that suffers from a severe dearth of literature on Arab art. Moreover, her efforts to present a balanced and well-researched alternative narrative to the stereotypical one must be applauded. After all, the identity of an author of researcher should not detract from a scholarly evaluation of the book. Finally, the strength of the book is the detailed discussion of the individual artists, their biographies and analysis of their works, which constitutes the bulk of the book.

ENDNOTES TO THIS REVIEW

(1.) See Wisdan Ali, Modern Islamic Art: Development and Continuity, (Florida: University Press of Florida, 1997) 108-113. Ali also specifies a separate category under "prison art." Prison art is the emotionally charged work of self-taught Palestinian prisoners-artists using materials smuggled into prison (handkerchiefs and crayons). Their work is smuggled out of prison as well.

(2.) Shakir Hassan Al Said, ed., Hiwar al-Fann al-Tashkili: (Amman, Jordan: Abd Al-Hamid Shouman Foundation, Dairat al-Funun, 1995) 42.

(3.) The full letter by Kamal Boullata in response to Ismail Elmokadem's interview, "Book Records Palestinian Art History," could be read on http://www.pkblogs.com/umkahlil/2005/12/ kamal-boulatta-gannit-ankori.html.

(4.) Ibid.

(5.) See http://bethlehemghetto.blogspot.com/2006/09/ palestinian-artistscondemn-plagiarism.html.

(6.) http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive? ArchiveId=17014.

Nada Shabout is Assistant Professor of Art History at the University of North Texas.