This is In Conversation with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a subscriber-only newsletter from i. If you’d like to receive this directly in your inbox every week, you can sign up here.
On Sunday, we ventured to the British Museum to experience the Picasso: Printmaker exhibition. This showcase features a selection of prints from a vast collection owned by the museum. The exhibition has garnered five-star reviews from notable publications, including The Guardian, The Times, and The Telegraph, and has been described as “revelatory” and “thrilling.” Indeed, it is a remarkable display. I was surprised to discover Picasso’s exceptional technical prowess as a printmaker, with engravings that capture the passion, luminosity, and intensity characteristic of his paintings. In many respects, these compact black and white images evoke even deeper emotions.
However, there’s a significant caveat. The British Museum’s website informs potential visitors that the exhibition addresses “his complex relationship with women” and “his tumultuous personal life.” Excuse me? “Complex,” was it? And “tumultuous” for him? As a woman, I found myself contemplating the outstanding art alongside the exploitative, uncivil, and sexist imagery. I wondered how the women depicted—some of whom were his lovers and mistresses—felt while he was carving their features and bodies, and how they reacted upon seeing the final product.
Once again, we find ourselves grappling with a dilemma: should art be assessed solely on its own merits? Are those who focus on an artist’s beliefs and behaviors merely philistines or frustratingly “woke”? I consider myself both woke and deeply engaged in the arts and literature. Art for art’s sake? Absolutely. That implies creating without catering to the interests of the politically or religiously powerful. Yet, art that is disconnected from the artist’s behavior? Impossible, undesirable, and unethical. After all, Hitler painted, as did Spain’s General Franco. Can we appreciate their works without recalling their dark legacies?
Let me clarify: I am not equating Picasso with these violent dictators. He famously depicted the Spanish dictator as a deranged, mythical monster in his 1937 painting The Dream and Lie of Franco. Guernica, which I have personally witnessed, stands as an extraordinary testament to the suffering caused by war.
Nonetheless, to me, Picasso embodied a macho tyrant. The same goes for Gauguin and Dali, among others. Many of the most notorious offenders in the art world were men. One of the worst examples is one of Britain’s most celebrated artists, Lucian Freud. Last year, one of his many offspring, Rose Boyt, published a searing memoir titled Naked Portrait. It begins with the chilling line: “I just assumed I would be naked. I got undressed and asked him what he would like me to do. He said it was up to me. I lay down on the sofa and shielded my eyes… I didn’t want to look obedient in my portrait; I didn’t feel obedient… I was alert and ready to spring up at any moment.”
Moving Forward
Recently, Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, publicly acknowledged that its own ineptitude and the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu “helped pave the way” for Hamas’s operations on October 7. This explosive revelation was reported by Julian Borger, the Guardian’s correspondent in Amman. Shin Bet was aware of potential plans but failed to take them seriously. Netanyahu’s decision to allow Qatar to fund Hamas contributed to divisions and instability within Palestinian political dynamics. Moreover, under Netanyahu’s leadership, the longstanding agreement with Jordan regarding Al-Aqsa mosque was broken, and Palestinian prisoners faced severe mistreatment.
I have consistently articulated, on various TV and radio platforms and in my writings, that the narrative surrounding Gaza did not begin on October 7, 2023. For this, I have been met with accusations of being sympathetic to Hamas. Will this perception change? Unlikely. We exist in a post-truth era.
A Conversation I Had This Week
Have you ever heard of “cognitive household labor”? You really should. It encompasses the unquantified, often overlooked tasks and mental exertion involved in managing a household. It’s not just about who handles the shopping and cleaning; it also involves planning and strategizing. Recently, I found myself increasingly agitated about this concept.
After over 34 joyful years of marriage, one might assume that our routine was well-established and predictable. However, the reality is far from static. Love, trust, and desire intertwine with recurring complaints and familiar arguments. My partner manages the laundry, dishes, and vacuuming when necessary, but culinary tasks are predominantly my domain, which works well since I enjoy cooking.
Last week, though, I voiced my frustration that he didn’t continually think about meal planning or grocery shopping; I felt the burden of these responsibilities weighed heavily on me. This led to a brief conflict followed by a return to harmony. Surprisingly, our discussion proved fruitful. Since our talk, he has been texting me about dinner plans, offering to shop and even cook, resulting in a happier and less fatigued wife.
Yasmin’s Pick
Who would have thought that UN resolutions on climate change could inspire compelling theatre? I certainly didn’t, until I attended the Royal Shakespeare Company’s Kyoto at Soho Place theatre in London. The audience is seated around a circular stage, creating an immersive experience where the characters feel authentic. The production is dynamic and emotionally gripping, a true testament to the impact of the narrative. “Drill, baby, drill,” Trump declared before withdrawing from international climate agreements. Corporations like BP have resumed fossil fuel production, pushing our planet toward disaster. Nevertheless, environmentalists remain resolute. Those who witness this play will undoubtedly stand alongside them in the fight for our planet’s future.
