A Dynasty in Perspective
Dynasty in Perspective interrogates how rulers mold themselves to fit the frameworks imposed upon them, particularly in the context of colonial and imperial influence. The work examines the sacrifices leaders make to conform to industrialized, rigid molds that limit their individuality and humanity.
The sculptures incorporate unfinished sentences from significant Western travelogues and documents tied to Persia’s colonial history, including:
• Lady Mary Leonore Woulfe Sheil, second wife of British lieutenant colonel Justin Sheil, whose Glimpses of life and manners in Persia , published in 1856, reflects her British colonial perspective.
• Prince Alexis Soltikoff, a Russian artist and traveler whose Voyage en Perse (1851) offers a visual account of Persia.
• W. Morgan Shuster, an American appointed by the Persian parliament as Treasurer during Ahmad Shah’s reign, whose book The strangling of Persia (1912) critiques foreign intervention.
•The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which partitioned Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet between colonial powers.
This historical context informs the sculptures, which use industrial molds—specifically shoe molds—to frame and constrain faces, emphasizing the dehumanizing effects of colonial systems. These molds symbolize the rigid structures imposed on leaders chosen or controlled by imperial powers, questioning how they are forced to sacrifice their individuality to conform to these externally designed roles.
The accompanying paintings, created as precursors to the sculptures, employ naïve line drawings and vibrant colors to explore the direction of the work. In contrast to the paintings’ raw and expressive approach, the sculptures are starkly industrial, emphasizing the contrast between creativity and conformity.
This contrast serves a dual purpose: to critique the colonial system that selects and shapes leaders for colonized territories and to explore the personal cost of such systems. What do leaders lose in the process of fitting into these metaphorical and literal molds? What elements of their identity are sacrificed to maintain power within a system that demands their compliance?
Dynasty in Perspective interrogates how rulers mold themselves to fit the frameworks imposed upon them, particularly in the context of colonial and imperial influence. The work examines the sacrifices leaders make to conform to industrialized, rigid molds that limit their individuality and humanity.
The sculptures incorporate unfinished sentences from significant Western travelogues and documents tied to Persia’s colonial history, including:
• Lady Mary Leonore Woulfe Sheil, second wife of British lieutenant colonel Justin Sheil, whose Glimpses of life and manners in Persia , published in 1856, reflects her British colonial perspective.
• Prince Alexis Soltikoff, a Russian artist and traveler whose Voyage en Perse (1851) offers a visual account of Persia.
• W. Morgan Shuster, an American appointed by the Persian parliament as Treasurer during Ahmad Shah’s reign, whose book The strangling of Persia (1912) critiques foreign intervention.
•The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which partitioned Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet between colonial powers.
This historical context informs the sculptures, which use industrial molds—specifically shoe molds—to frame and constrain faces, emphasizing the dehumanizing effects of colonial systems. These molds symbolize the rigid structures imposed on leaders chosen or controlled by imperial powers, questioning how they are forced to sacrifice their individuality to conform to these externally designed roles.
The accompanying paintings, created as precursors to the sculptures, employ naïve line drawings and vibrant colors to explore the direction of the work. In contrast to the paintings’ raw and expressive approach, the sculptures are starkly industrial, emphasizing the contrast between creativity and conformity.
This contrast serves a dual purpose: to critique the colonial system that selects and shapes leaders for colonized territories and to explore the personal cost of such systems. What do leaders lose in the process of fitting into these metaphorical and literal molds? What elements of their identity are sacrificed to maintain power within a system that demands their compliance?
