Sara Shamma

I came across Sara by sheer luck while going through a list of young artists. What caught my attention was the manner in which her paintings are created, being an excellent example of figurative, non-conceptualist art.

She was born in Damascus on 1975 from a Syrian father and a Lebanese mother and like the interview says, she began to paint at the age of 4. Her art has something special in the way she manages to recreate the human face through a well thought color pallet, in this way influencing the viewers emotions without the use of external or additional elements as is the case of other contemporary artists.
 
1. How did your life as an artist began? Tell us the first things that influenced you to go on this road.

I can say that it started since childhood. I started painting when I was 4 years old; I used to paint on the floor, the walls, the furniture…etc. I never had a problem to paint in my house, I was always encouraged by my family, I believe that the freedom I had in my family’s house helped in making me evolve into an artist. When I was 14 years old I knew that I will become a painter for the rest of my life.

2. How much did education shape you? Did you have a teacher, a mentor so to speak, to look up to?

I studied at the Department of Painting in the University of Damascus where I graduated in 1998, but I do not believe that education gave me a lot, I worked hard by myself, I read many books, painted many paintings and tried a lot of techniques, those things shaped me more than my teachers did.

3. How would you describe your works, what motivates you and where does your inspiration come from. 

I am inspired by everything around me, especially people and mainly the ones I love, also the music gives me big inspiration, I always paint listening to the music I like. I got married recently with the man who I always wanted and today he is giving me a lot of support and inspiration.

Her individual exhibition "Love 2009" held in Kuwait in December 2009

4. Is your art understood in the way you want it to be? 

If I meant to communicate a specific idea with my art, it would have been easier for me to write it down on the wall, but I don’t mean that, what I want or better wish is to put the viewer in that state I felt when I created the painting or when I looked to it done, actually I don’t want to put him in my same state, as I personally see my painting, feel it, different each time I look at it, and each time it takes me to a different world, I want my painting to take the viewer to unlimited places, worlds and states, I want it to move his imagination, to touch his senses and to penetrate his consciousness.

5. What are the main themes and how do you feel people react to your work?

There are always new themes, but humans are the main interest of mine, people are reacting in a great way to my paintings till today, I am satisfied.

6. Beside creating art, what other things interest you?

I like to listen to music.

7. Does an artist express a national/cultural identity or is he a ”global citizen” expressing the universal characteristics of humanity? How do you see yourself in this regard?

I don’t believe in geographical classification in contemporary art, I barely accept some classifications based on art movements, art for me is one, global, not influenced by any of the artist’s identities and nevertheless it is very personal.

8. What role does an artist have in a society?

I don’t think an artist can change the world, he can’t stop a war, but he can do a lot of things to make life nicer but moving the feelings and the imagination of the people, by touching their subconscious.

9. Do you believe artistic creativity is something you are born with or do you get the taste of it with time and practice? 

Both.

At “Sara Shamma 2007”, held at Art House, Damascus, Syria.

Website: http://www.sarashamma.com/

(I would like to add that Sara Shamma is the first artist to participate in what I hope to be a long series of artist interviews. More about her you will be able to read in the next issue of Awil-um Magazine which will be out at the end of this month.)

Truth is...

I've been asking myself this question all day, what is truth, what is the truth? It's one of the questions you either need to read dozens of books about or you don't have to read anything, because the truth is, in the end you don't know the answer.

We could start by saying that truth is absolute or relative. If there is an absolute truth about something we should know it and accept it, if truth is relative for everyone, then the concept of truth is something only we humans have, in the sense that it is something different for all of us, like musical preferences.

Relative truth

There could be a relative truth when it comes to human interactions and experiences, lets say that two brothers who committed a robbery go to prison for 10 years. After that period it is time for them to get out, one feels that this period was good for him, it helped him be a better man, the other thinks that he lost ten years of his life. We can't say that a general truth about convicts exists in this case.

Let's take this game on a global level. During the Cold War two sides, in some ways different, began to combat one another. Communists knew the truth about capitalism, and capitalists knew the truth about communists, but did they really? The truth about one ideology and another is different in the eyes of different people and if we try to be objective and travel a "middle road" we will find "another" truth.

There is also a spiritual realm which must not be forgotten. We have an easy example of Christians and Muslims and what they know about Jesus. One side believes he is the Son of God, while the other that he is a Prophet. Can you speak against the word of God? If we throw an atheist in the fight the picture is clear, truth is whatever you want to believe.

We can now see how experience, faith and belief can influence what we know to be true. In such cases it is better to show tolerance than to impose your side of the story. The sad thing is that wars are generally started because people lack tolerance and that they tend to want a world that is only black and white, nothing in between.

Absolute (Objective) truth

When I talk about "absolute truth" I refer to things we all know to be true. In this case I would like to concentrate on "consensus theory".

"That which is universal among men carries the weight of truth."

- From antiquity

The funny thing about this theory is that not all people agree with it, thus making it false. But let's say it is true, we can find the example of how Christ is perceived only by Muslims, in this case the theory is true, but if we extend the field to encompass Christians and Jews the theory falls, or no one knows the truth. Let's talk about simple objects, like a chair, when we say "a chair is made for sitting on" we attribute a function to it. Everyone agrees because all of us sit on chairs if we have any. But if we say "a chair is made for hitting someone in the head" people like the two robbers might agree, but some might not. Now we have attributed a function that is not (apparently) part of the original design, but nonetheless it is real.

"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth."

- Mohandas Gandhi

If an alien for example visits our planet and sees a chair and has no legs because he levitates, what will he think? He has no need for chairs, so he shows tolerance and accepts whatever function we give it. In this situation I wanted to show that we need to know the truth about things, and in some situations, consensus theory can be applied. But if he asks who is Jesus, then we have some explaining to do and eventually he would even use a chair after all the talking is finished.

Humans have the ability to use their senses and make judgments based on those senses. It is like an input-output relation. This is actually a very complex activity and it seems that as complexity rises the risk for errors increase, otherwise it would be impossible for me to explain the vast quantity of truths.

The color red is the color red for everyone, except those who have dichromacy for example. We use our eyes and we do not need to judge whether red is red. Even if we use different languages, the words change, but not their meaning. In a way, simple things that are part of the senses more than the mind, can be considered true by consensus theory, by definition, and other means.

Time to end

My objective was not to write a history of "truth", or a list of philosophical ideas about this concept, I only wanted to turn the wheels in the mind and hope something interesting pops out. I don't believe in the kind of philosophy you learn from books at the University, the real philosophy is inside all of us (well, not quite all), and it is called thinking, reading some Plato and ibn Sina (just examples) along the way should be part of basic education.

So, in the end, our perception of truth is the same, we just added some categories that look good.

I will end by sharing a riddle I came acrosse while doing research for this article:

There was an explorer on his way to a secret city. As he struggled through jungles inhabited by two intermingled tribes - one of whom always lied, while the other always told the truth - he came to a fork in the road. There a native squatted. The explorer was minded to ask his advice but, as the locals all dressed identically, could not tell to which tribe he belonged. The tribes shared a custom: they ate anyone who asked more than one question. How could the explorer formulate an enquiry so as to elicit a useful answer?

Do you know the answer?