This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

Black Arts at Oxy

Compton Community Arts Center

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page is referenced by:

1970-1971 In 1970-1971, “black art” in Los Angeles was still quite young. Many of the young artists who were rising in their careers were only beginning to create their own works of art. Artists of this time, such as Noah Purifoy, Bettye Saar, and John Outterbridge, would later come to be recognized as pioneers and their work quintessential when discussing black art in not only Los Angeles, but the United States. One LA Times article tries to wrap its head around the concept of a black art exhibition in which the author poses the question: is it merely grouping together artists “whose sole affinity is the color of their skin?”. The reality for many of the young black artists during this time was that their work would be displayed in minority art galleries or labeled as “black art” when shown in the larger settings.

Aside from being segregated in the gallery setting, there was also a discussion going on about the distinction between east and west cost when it comes to black art. The same article from above complains that “westerners” were omitted from the show, most likely because the organizers, who were primarily from the East Coast, did not know them. Black artist recognition was therefore largely regional, and at this period did not extend to both coasts.

Not only within the geography of the United States was there a struggle over recognition across state lines, but also a controversy as to whether or not the galleries would recognize Black Art as Western art when it is inspired from the individuals’ heritage in the East. In the fall of 1971, LACMA installed an exhibit known as “Black Africa,” which housed art all inspired from the “dark continent” and how it has inspired so much art of the Western world. Despite the aim of the exhibition, some individuals still called the art savage and inferior to the art of the West and white people, unconsciously displaying racism.

It seems as though the most notable art by black Americans was not only seen as a “positive alternative to whatever else was going on in the ghetto”, but succinctly conveyed frustrations dealing with “the black man’s condition in America”. Black artists at the time were not solely making art for the sake of exhibitions and sales, but for their important messages resulting in experimental and entirely fresh work. By bringing common ideas and sentiments together about identity, heritage, and opportunity, the black art of this time started to become its own genre in addition to building community, as shown in a poster from Now Dig This!.

Especially noticeable after the Watts Riots in 1965, tension between police and black communities in Los Angeles was at an all time high. Leimert Park’s crime rate, like many other metropolitan and urban areas began to experience a rise. In addition, there were boycotts aiming for a higher percentage of black employees in certain fields, requests for better funding and education in black schools, and crime that was specifically hurtful to the black community. By March of 1971, black police officers created a program called the Oscar Joel Bryant Association to increase support of the LAPD in black communities.

Many articles relay an increased awareness in the economical inequality and racial bigotry against black Americans. Between 1970-1971, attention was being drawn to the silent racism that was hurting the various aspects of black lives such as work, education, and art. Some individuals thought, “The black artist today has an obligation and a responsibility to be the clarion of black life…Artists have for long periods of time had to paint to the satisfaction of critics and galleries rather than the very community that they were from.”

With as many minority gallery shows as were possible for that time, it would only be expected that the black arts would have a clear role in critiquing mainstream society as well as community building. Since art had such a personal level and aspect about it, art by the black artists was naturally more locally based, as it spoke directly with the artists’ life experiences from these specific communities.
Test page and social contexts for framing Asian American experience. Third, the por- trayal of Asian Americans as model minorities has historically been used as a wedge between minorities by implying that if Asians can make it, then all minority groups should be able to achieve academically, as long as they uphold the values of education, hard work, and a nuclear family that Asians supposedly prize. This focus on individualism and meritocracy inherent in the model minority discourse buoys the culture-of-poverty argument that runs in tandem with it. As such, model minority discourse ignores critical struc- tural factors such as class, race, gender, and schooling resources that serve to contextualize Asian American students’ academic performance, while ig- noring those children who are living in poverty, failing or dropping out of high school, and facing downward mobility (Fong & Shinagawa, 2000; Hune & Chan, 2000; Hurh & Kim, 1984; Kiang & Kaplan, 1994; Lee, 1996; Lew, 2003a, 2004, in press; Louie, 2004; Pang & Cheng, 1998; Park, Lee, & Goodwin, 2003; Weinberg, 1997).

In order to address the limitations of the cultural argument, researchers have focused on important structural factors such as immigration history, economic context, and opportunity structure to explain Asian American achievement. For instance, it has been argued that selective migration of post- 1965 immigrants—namely, those entering under professional status—favored those who are coming with a higher education level and from higher socio- economic backgrounds. That is, Asian American children’s educational suc- cess can be largely attributed to those who are coming from Asian families who were middle-class professionals in their country of origin (Barringer, Gardner, & Levin, 1993; Hirschman & Wong, 1986). Researchers have also underscored ethnic economies and networks as important means for Asian Americans to achieve social mobility. Although ethnic economies have been historically formed as a result of racial and social barriers, as well as lack of access to the primary-sector-market economy, researchers argue that this avenue allows Asian immigrants to gain important economic and social re- sources for first- and second-generation immigrants (Hirschman & Wong, 1986; Light & Bonacich, 1988; Portes & Rumbaut, 1996, 2001). While high- lighting the structural and economic conditions into which the immigrant groups become situated, Portes and colleagues note the significance of strong co-ethnic networks and ethnic economies, which help promote social mo- bility for immigrants and their children. Particularly for those residing in poor and isolated urban communities, strong social capital in the form of entrepreneurship, local churches, and co-ethnic networks provides impor- tant economic and social resources for first-generation immigrants and their second-generation children. It is argued, therefore, that post-1965 Asian immigrants and their children are able to achieve in school and gain eco- nomic opportunities as a result of their ethnic economy and ties to immi-