Skip to comments.The 'Islamic Art' Hoax
Posted on 04/01/2012 1:35:44 PM PDT by WPaCon
Talking about Islamic art is rather like talking about the art of the Khanates. The Imperial Kingdom of Genghis Khan was the largest contiguous empire on earth. But just because different lands and cultures were conquered by Genghis Khan doesn't mean that there is a significance to grouping their art. The sphere of power of the Muslim Empire stretched from the borders of China and the Indian subcontinent across Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, Sicily, and the Iberian Peninsula, and on to the Pyrenees. There needs to be a further rationale for calling art collections from lands conquered or subdued by the forces of Islam "Islamic Art."
Then why all the impetus, which started in earnest some almost a decade ago, for all the "Islamic Art" openings at prestigious museums, from the Metropolitan Museum of Art to the Victoria and Albert Museum in England? The creation of departments of Islamic art at prestigious universities and museums? The support of prestigious foundations like Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art?
It is political correctness.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
‘Art’-?! Are you KIDDING me-?! These geniuses can’t even sharpen their swords correctly- witness those many decapitation videos they put up so prolifcally. Extermination is too good for them...
What do you call a Jewish merchant rampaging through Europe?
Is it like the “Islamic intellect” hoax?
I admit, I’ve been impressesd by their architecture and pottery, and some of their cuisine, as well. They’re still a culture of bloodthirsty troglodytes.
Without a doubt. If there were really such a thing as "Islamic" art, it would have had common characteristics throughout the geography of their infestation. Yet, we do not see anything like that. Arabic architecture is nothing more than what German, British and Indian architects have created in places like Dubai and Abu Dhabi, and Persian architecture is based on their pre-Islamic cultural heritage.
The Taj Mahal, their ultimate false claim to fame, is heavily based on Indian Hindu temple architecture:
For example, the Taj Mahal is very impressive.
To me, Islamic architecture and most other traditional architectural styles are more aesthetically appealing than modern and postmodern architecture.
The Mongol conquest of the Chin, and then the Sung, led to a period in Chinese painting that principally focused on horses.
In the Il-Khanate of Persia, the ceramic and brickwork showed a marked Muslim influence. Interestingly, although the first Khanate to convert to Islam, the Golden Horde did not show such an influence.
The Chaggadids, ruling over a large population of Muslims also showed Islamic influence to a great degree, which increased under the Timurids.
The Toluids, up to the victory of Qublai Quan over his brother Arik Boka, remained largely animist, and showed few outside influences in their art.
And built by Indians.
Islamic art is the same thing as Islamic peace
They don’t exist
While they chop up ancient buddhas and Christian artiacts
How about works of art like piss-Muhammad or Muhammad’s mother fashioned out of elephant dung
As I understand it, “islamic” art doesn’t contain images of people or animals.
My understanding is that it was designed by a Jew as Islam forbids the representation of animals.
The Taj Mahal is a gravesite for two humans - Shah Jahan and his wife.
As far as Islam is concerned, this glorification of a human gravesite is forbidden. Remember the recent death of that Saudi king? He was buried in true Islamic style, in an unmarked grave.
The Taj Mahal is the complete opposite of the concept, and in violation of Islam itself. Point this out to Muslims who sing about the Taj Mahal and watch them cringe.
The trident-like spire-ornament atop the Taj Mahal is what is usually found atop Hindu temples.
Your photo with the reflection reminds me of reading something regarding the supposed second site of what was to be the “Black Mahal”.
One interesting theory was that it was never really to be built but the black silhouette on still water was seen as a separate building in a spiritual realm.
The only Islamic art I have seen are the cartoons mocking muhammed. They are pretty accurate.
For the most part you're right; muzzies to tend to be iconoclasts. There are a few exceptions, the most notable probably being the Safavid Empire in Iran from about 1500 into the 1600s. Some of their manuscripts, both representational and abstract, rival pretty much anything done in the west, at least in a technical capacity.
There do exist discerning elements in geometry and form used in architecture by Islamic groups and Christian groups.
Compare the architecture of Spain under Islamic control vs Christian control.
Compare Alhambra in Granada Spain as a type of Islamic Architecture. (Alhambra is actually a good example of Islamic, Jewish and Christian architecture. The original construction circa 1100AD was Islamic, later added with the Jewish influenced Lion's Palace (12 lions representing the 12 tribes of Israel), and later added the Carlos V Palace by a Christian Monarch Carlos V beginning circa 1527 and completed in 1957.
Compare this to later 16th century architecture of northern Italy and the Church.
It’s probably as disingenuous to criticize ‘Islamic Art’ as not being a true form of art as making a similar criticism of “Christian Art”.
Alhambra and the Taj Mahal are beautiful works of both art and architecture no matter who designed, influenced or built them. Id like to one day see both in person. The mosaic tile work, which is Islamic, is the most impressive to me. And some of the textiles, rugs for instance that came from Islamic countries are truly works of art in and of themselves. But I also love many of the textiles that come from India.
Not long ago I passed by a very attractive Indian woman wearing a traditional sari that was indescribably beautiful. The deep and rich colors, the finely detailed embroidery and bead work and the way the differently weighted fabrics were draped and flowed; it was absolutely beautiful and very feminine and I couldnt help thinking how much Id like to wear something like that no, not every day but on a special occasion, I think I would feel beautiful wearing that. Id also love to be able to afford a really good oriental rug, i.e. such as those once made in Iran or Turkey one day; Id have no problem having one in my home.
And, looking at Islam itself, it is more accurate to say that "Islamic Art" survived in spite of Islam rather than because of it.
Ibn 'Umar reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said: Those who paint pictures would be punished on the Day of Resurrection and it would be said to them: Breathe soul into what you have created. (Sahih Muslim vol.3, no.5268)
The last paragraph may explain why Shia sect of Islam, influenced more by pre-Islamic Iranian (Persian) culture, post-Safavid dynasty (15 to 17 century AD), allows display of paintings, including that of Mohamad, and the Shia 12ers imams, whereas Sunnis don't.
Btw, Genghis Khan (the Monghol) was a brute; the Monghol savagery in Iran was infinitely worse than preceding Arab-Moslem invaders.
Examples, The Spiral Fire Temple tower is the architectural precedent of the Great Mosque of Samarra (photo at 3rd link). The round Domes we see on top of mosques in fact dates back to Sassanid architecture & dome-shaped structures inside and outside buildings in Iran (pictures below are based on Sassanid pre-Islamic architecture)
Also, pre-Islamic Persian Gardens (photos below are current ones in Shiraz, Iran), during the Achaemenid Dynasty (dynasty founded by Cyrus the Great) were known as pairidaēza (Avestan) - paridaida (Old Persian), and in Median *paridaiza- (walled-around, i.e., a walled garden)- the English word "Paradise" is derived from the original Avestan & Persian words.
The pre-Islamic style & architecture also heavily influenced those found in Southern Spain, e.g. Andalucia region and in cities such as Cordoba, Granada and Seville.
Picture: Perspolis in Shiraz - Iran
That's right. The Safavid who also brutally imposed Shia Islam on Iranians and made it the official state religion, in that respect were influenced by pre-Islamic Iranian (Persian) architecture & culture - posts 22 & 24.
Taj Mahal: Was it a Vedic Temple?
The Photographic Evidence
Genghis Khan understood muslims. That is why the only cities he utterly destroyed and razed to the ground and killed all the citys inhabitants were Islamic cities. With all other non-muslim cities, he captured them and added them to his empire while allowing the citizens to keep their religions and cultures.
Yes, very possible.
When I said it dates back to the Sassanid era (the dome shaped structures we see on top of mosques, post-Islam in Iran), it could actually go back to before the Sassanid period in Iran. The Sassanid is only one period, which is most significant at least for Iran, because it was just before the Islam-Arab invasion, hence their post-Islamic influence in Iran.
As for Taj Mahl being a Vedic Temple, the key, imo, is that the Aryans whose culture influenced architecture, among other cultural aspects, in India as well as Iran, pre-Islam, belong to the same race or group of people, who long ago immigrated from central Asia to Iran and India, as well as in today’s Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and other central Asian countries. Therefore, similarities & common threads, including in architecture, do exist and overlap, way before the Sassanid period.
Interesting read about Aryans (the Avesta, and the Hindu scriptures, the Rig Veda) — http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/aryans/index.htm
Saudi Arabia and their money launderers worldwide, including their "Irish" millionaire, spent hundreds of millions promoting the islamic golden age worldwide.
Art culture is not exactly the most ethical and moral culture, and the most moneygrubbing. They give global warming idiots a run for their money.
True muslim art is more accurately "cartoons." 'Nuff said.
My post was about Islamic art in their architecture. IMHO, far more architectural works labeled ‘Islamic’, were previously Christian or Jewish architectures before they were seized by Muslims. E.g. the Temple Mount.
Alhambra, though followed the reverse trend. If one studies Alhambra they can learn to identify some trends attributable to that religion, distinct from others.
Wikipedia (linking to other sources there) says this about Genghis Khan:
He was famous for being merciless. Known for killing boys and men of captured cities; and kidnapping the woman and girls. To a question about the source of happiness he was known to have said: "The greatest happiness is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see those dear to them bathed in tears, to clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters."  A scientific support to this claim is made by mapping of Y chromosmes in Asia, showing a prevalence of 1/500 of all males being directly related to him. 
Actually, I particularly believe the last sentence in the above paragraph, not only about boys, but also girls in Central Asia, including Iran today.
There are more than a few Uzbeks, Tajiks, Afghans, Turkmen, and even those in both Republic of Azarbaijan, and the Iranian province of Azarbaijan, who could easily pass for half-blood Chinese, Monghol or Eastern Asian, because of their facial features, particularly their slightly slanted eyes (epicanthal fold). Some of them more obvious than others.
Whilst it could also be due to migration over the centuries, as well as weather conditions, I don't think migration or weather conditions are entirely responsible.
We agree. :) The whole Koran is the Bible turned up-side-down.
Wpa--> the architecture is mostly from before Islam --> for example the various arches etc. in La Mesquita are from Byzantine art. Cuisine -- that is pre-Islamic mostly....
"Christian" art is religious iconography or even one can call Gothic architecture as Christian because its thought process etc. was Christian in nature. islamic "art" is not possible due to the injuncts in the Koran --> unless one includes calligraphy. Islamic "architecture" on the other hands, to some extent yes in the later years when the synthesis of Indic, Iranic, Chinese, Arabic and Byzantine art forms came about, but derived from Islam, I would doubt
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
It is a wonder they can stack one brick atop another. spit.
And furthermore it ISN’T Mo Ham Med. It is ME HOME MUD. Get it right people.
A lot of the art is nice, artichtecure. Ottoman calligraphy.
Food? No thanks.
Most of the art is from ages past, how much beauty have they made in the last century?
Orham Pamuk, a Turk, won the Nobel prize for literature with an really great novel, “My Name Is Red”. It is a mystery whose subcontext is the the difficulty of Muslim artists reconciling their art with the tenets of their religion which forbids representational art.
You’re right, I’m unaware of any contemporary art from the Islamic world.
Lets google it
3 paintings shown there, all crappy.
Im unaware of any contemporary anything from the Islamic world except for violence, death, and destruction.
I guess I do have some small respect for the Bedouins. At least they figured out when you couldn’t dig a hole to crap in without flinging crap everywhere it was time to move on. Not like the rest.
I like some of the tile work in their mosques and some of the Islamic cuisine of the Mediterranean which belongs other peoples too. For example humus crosses national and cultural boundaries
But for the most part I Don’t see much culture
The use of alabaster there and in Granada was amazing. It made everything feel cloudlike.
The Islamic dome was stolen from the engineering and artistic design of Byzantine Christians.
Are those twelve bulls supporting a fountain?
So the Shia have no problem depicting Mohammad?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.