"Papercut Masochist" from DARK CORNERS OF A LIGHT SOUL

Your show is called Dark Corners of a Light Soul. Where’d that name came from? You got a light soul with dark corners?

I definitely have a light soul but this collection brought me into darker areas of my life. I allowed myself to delve into dark, frustrating and neurotic places, the ones you never really want to get into. In a way the show is a de-peacocking; we keep a smiley face on for the world, wearing flashy bright color clothing to get attention, then arrive home, let our guard down, feel everything and the colors fade.

So this show is  darker than previous shows…

My work usually has a lot of lightness and colors that pop. This collection has taken on darker hues but I never loose sight of color even if it’s a simple drip or dusting.

"Self-inflicted Beauty" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

Your work is “mixed-media,” A mix of what?

My process is all about layering and mark-making.  When I use different mediums the process becomes endless. I love to use acrylics, spray paints, glitter, gold leaf, construction materials, magazine clippings and in my latest works, silhouettes from target ranges.

"Power Struggle" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

What’s the significance of the shooting-range target?

The significance of the silhouettes is representations of how each individual becomes a target. Whether it is through our own self-torment or how others treat us.  I wanted to bring awareness to people in order to show how the layers can be stripped away so our true selves can live.

"A Lifetime of Unspoken I Love You's" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

Your work is “street-art influenced,” how so? Any specific artists?

I wouldn’t say there is one specific artist who has inspired me recently but a collective. Since I live in the meatpacking district I am surrounded by street art, advertisements, and poetry that run along the buildings. All the pieces add up to a story conveyed that is universal and diverse. That is what inspires me to create a specific mark use of color to add another layer.

There’s a spiritual vibe to your work, is that the case? Do your Jewish roots play into your art at all?

I am spiritual. To me it is the energy that surrounds us everyday. The inspirations of the people and environment. I have a strong tie to my roots and traditions and Judaism always come through my work in some way, though what that way is, is tough to say.

If money were no object, what art would you own in your home?

Anything by Yves Klein, Jose Parla or Basquiat.

DARK CORNERS OF A LIGHT SOUL opens with a public reception Thursday May 17 (7–10p) and runs May 17–23 402 West 13th St. http://lindseywilner.com

It’s been a busy month in gay news: Obama and Biden support marriage equality, John Travolta supports happy endings, Bravo’s Andy Cohen is finally looking for a boyfriend, and now (sit down girls), Y-Love, the only African-American hasidic Jewish hip hop artist comes out as gay.

In an Out.com exclusive interview, Y-Love, nee Yitz Jordan, tells the gay magazine he “wanted to tell the world that he’s [been] gay for some time, but he was concerned that his ‘public reputation’ would be tarnished and the music career he has fought so hard to carve out in a seemingly intolerant community would be ruined.”

Jordan converted to Hasidic Judaism in 2000, attended Jerusalem’s fundamentalist Ohr Somayach Yeshiva, married a woman for a brief time and lived an ultra-orthodox lifestyle while becoming a rising star in the hip hop community, even winning an award for Best Hop Hop artist at Heeb’s 2006 Jewish Music Awards.

While Y-Love has now gone down the path of Matisyahu and identifies as ex-Hasidic, it’s fascinating that Jordan lived a Hasidic lifestyle, even marrying a woman – all by choice, knowing he was gay. I can forgive marrying a woman, but chareidi-misery by choice? That’s unforgivable.

With Y-Love now focusing on finding his man-basherte, and the release of his new single “Focus on the Flair” where he can be seen in drag and vogueing, we’re curious to see how his religious Jewish audience will respond to his coming out. Time will tell, in the meanwhile, we offer Y-Love much mazel in this new journey and remember there are resources out there on teaching ex-Orthos how to date in New York!

Toward the end of last week, the New York Times published an expose on the Ultra-Orthodox community for ignoring a child molestation problem and for, in some instances, actually shunning and ostracizing the victims instead of seeking justice for them. How is this happening? Well, the Hasidic community reasons that by delivering the suspected pedophile over to the police for investigation, you are therefore transgressing Jewish law as a moser, or an informer. A moser cannot turn his fellow Jew in to a secular non-Jewish authority as derived by Maimonides’ extrapolation of ha’poresh mi’darchei tzibbur, or one who actively separates himself from the rest of the community. While I doubt that our great sage Rambam meant to protect the the lowest of the low, some Hasidic communities are nevertheless manipulating the learnings of our elders and in turn, sheltering these deviant monsters.

While I’m not entirely surprised that this sickening predatory activity is plaguing some shtetls (after all, there was even a Law & Order episode about it), I am saddened and shocked by the various reactions.  And I don’t mean the delusional justifications and rationalizations of the Hasidic community leaders–I mean, the Jews living outside of the Williamsburgs and the Borough Parks. Based on the conversations I have had over the weekend since these necessary articles appeared, I would like to suggest some potential responses to our collective propensity to sweep shamefulness under the rug.

1. “The New York Times likes to pick on the Jews.”

This is a complaint I hear whenever the Times covers Israel, Jews, Israeli Jews, the banks, and/or brisket. And in truth, it may have some validity to it. The New York Times known for its liberal slant can oft portray Israel as oppressor, even when it’s not warranted. But that’s neither here nor there, and it’s also something you and I can never prove. Yet when I discussed the two aforementioned articles on the Hasidic community written by Ray Rivera and Sharon Otterman with someone I knew well, he said something along the lines of, “Well, of course, when it comes to the Jews it’s a big story. But what about the Church? Why don’t they talk about abuse in the Church?”

If you do a search for the words “abuse” and “church” on the nytimes.com, you will find 431,000 results. If you were to however limit it down from the last 150 years to the last seven days, you will still get 19 results. Deflecting the attention from ourselves to another fundamentally flawed and troubled religious system will by no means make our problems go away. Child abuse is a problem regardless of the house of worship, and kudos to the New York Times for bringing this to light even if, according to many, the daily paper still may hate Israel.

2. “It’s not worth ruining someone’s reputation especially if the accusations aren’t true.”

First and foremost, shame on Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, the executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America, for having a response similar to this. And this is coming from a media outlet that once photographed Roseanne dressed as Hitler. Zwiebel, along with his extremely influential and powerful Orthodox organization, determined last year that Orthodox Jews should not report allegations to the police unless a Rabbi has given permission to do so. He also said that “you can destroy a person’s life with a false report.” Incidentally, you can also destroy a person’s life by putting your hand down his pants without permission. Zwiebel also added that “you speak it over with a rabbi before coming to any definitive conclusion in your own mind,” which implies that after an incident, it is important that you first consult with a rabbi so he may convince you that it was not molesting, but just tickling.

3. “I understand the secrecy. After all, if could ruin the  shidduch (impending marriage proposals).” 

It’s hard to believe but this was actually said to me, but it was. And it wasn’t said in an effort to implicitly justify the cover-up attempts–the person who had this reaction was simply channeling the Hasidic community’s emphasis on yichus, or legacy. If, hypothetically, someone’s brother or sister had been accused of being a child molester, this would affect the siblings’ chances of getting married. It’s sadly accurate in a community that weighs worthiness on, for example, what kind of China they set the Shabbos table with.

I think in an ideal world everyone would agree that one should not be held responsible for his or her family member’s actions. However, that is very much the case in the Ultra-Orthodox world. Families have and always will go to extreme measures in maintaining an uncontaminated facade like hiding their televisions in cabinets, keeping diseases or sicknesses obsessively secret, and in some cases, even protecting the identity of a pedophile. Maybe, though, once it would be known that someone’s brother was forcibly abusing children and as a result, his sister went years without a suitor, the community would only then react with less tolerance.

What I’m suggesting here is that if there had an old maid problem in Williamsburg, the rabbis would then maybe speak out against child molesting.

4. “We should be able to handle this within our own community. No need to get the police involved.”

In March, the Times notes, Satmar Hasidic authorities in Williamsburg posted a Yiddish posters in synagogues warning adults and children to stay away from a community member who they said was molesting boys. But the sign didn’t recommend calling the police: “With great pain we must, according to the request of the brilliant rabbis (may they live long and good lives), inform you that the young man,” who was named, “is, unfortunately, an injurious person and he is a great danger to our community.” This is a step in the right direction, but sadly, it is not very effective.

I know of one definitive example in which a serial child molester–I’m speaking of at least two-dozen individual accusations–left the country, rebuilt his life in Israel, and currently works with children. You would think for this not to be the case, considering the small Jewish geography we occupy, but it’s incredibly easy for a violator to re-root his life in another Jewish community and pick up exactly where they left off with a trail of unvindicated victims in his wake.

5. “It’s not as bad as “they” make it out to be.”

When it comes to harming young children, there should be a zero tolerance policy. I don’t care if it only happened once or twice. However, according to journalists Sharon Otterman and Ray Riveria “in recent months, a new program called Kol Tzedek, the Voice of Justice, has contributed to an effective crackdown on child sexual abuse among ultra-Orthodox Jews, saying it had led to 95 arrests involving more than 120 victims.” 95 arrests. 120 victims. Williamsburg, we have a problem.

6. “The rabbis understand things we cannot so we must accept it.”

The overwhelming response to the reposting of the Times articles on the comprehensive Orthodox Jewish blog Vo Is Neius is that the notion of moser should never apply in regards to abuse especially when considering “dina d’malchusoh dina,” that we are obligated to follow the laws of the land we occupy. These commenters and readers are for the most part observent G-d fearing people, yet allowing the police to intervene seems obvious to them. This shouldn’t be seen as a contradiction.

If, in eventuality, the rabbis’ devotees, the frequent shul goers, and the check-writing participants speak out and demand a zero tolerance policy, maybe the molesting business wouldn’t be so good. But by the communal passivity, rabbis remaining silent, and the continued blind eye, they are ostensibly supporting the continuation of it. And it may come to a point when the crying of our children gets too difficult to ignore even as the words of some rabbis try to drown them out.

Though he can’t recall the name of Israel’s Prime Minister or Secretary of Defense, Peter Berg offers some scathing critiques of their policies on Iran (“Israelis will die…”) in an interview that was apparently supposed to be about his new film Battleship. And who would know more about the tough decisions over waging war in the Middle East than a man who just directed a film based on a board game?

A board game…about war.

It’s hard to say what the best part of this clip is. When Berg pivots momentarily back to talking about Rihanna? When he talks about the subsequent deaths of Israelis after any Iran strike, and it looks like interviewer Jason Holt is going to punch him in the face? When he calls Holt a motherfucker and accuses him of dodging the draft? (Yes, probably the last of these.) And keep in mind that the whole interview is only one minute and thirty-four seconds long.

Note to Israeli media personalities: when you sit down with anyone to talk about anything, get ready for a lecture about Israeli foreign policy. Watch the whole thing below.

Heeb wishes a hearty mazel tov to cartoonist Eli Valley and welcomes him to our little family of Jewish satirists who have been condemned by the Anti-Defamation League for being brutally and graphically frank about subjects which the organization’s national director Abraham Foxman selectively deems beyond the pale.

In an interview with the Algemeiner, Foxman, who once said, “I think what Eli Belly [sic] does is fine,” now says that his latest comic is “offensive and obnoxious and crosses the line.”

The cartoon, “The Hater in the Sky,” published by the progressive Israeli magazine +972, depicts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goading President Barack Obama into sacrificing life, limb and dignity for the state of Israel. Despite the President making even the gravest of sacrifices – going so far as to allow his limbless torso to be sodomized by Netanyahu – the Prime Minister and pro-Israel hawks continue to doubt the authenticity of the President’s commitment to Israel.

“Cartoonists usually have much greater leeway of criticism because they are cartoonists, but even within that framework it crosses the line,” Foxman said.

When asked his feelings about Foxman’s remarks, Valley told Heeb, “I went over it in Photoshop this weekend because the lettering wasn’t entirely legible when reduced. I’m glad he liked the final version.”

Israel ‘nothing more than a mosquito’ to Iran (CNN)

Confoundment Keepers (MaNishtana)

Romney Dated Jewish Girl in High School (Forward)

Haredi Website Calls For Murder Of Secular Journalist (Failed Messiah)

‘Being overweight while pregnant affects offspring’ (JPOST)

WWII British report: Hitler developed ‘Jewish phobia’ (YNET)

Modern Manna recipe / Malabi – milk and orange blossom pudding (Haaretz)

The new face of Israel’s social protest (Haaretz)

Last night, Ticún Brasil, opened a photography exhibit at lower Manhattan’s FB Gallery entitled Orfeu Negro, based (loosely; let’s say “conceptually”) on the 1959 film Black Orpheus. On one side of the exhibit are photos of Brazil’s favelas taken by a young photographer Léo Lima who grew up in the favelas and has gone on to win awards in Brazil and study at one of its best art schools.  On the other side are photos of a naked lady painting herself with a brush… done by a French artist Konstantin Lunarine–who, I was told, happens to be a big fan of Brazil. The juxtaposition of the two was meant to show myth vs. reality. Or some such.

Upstairs showcases the work of children who as part of a Ticún Brasil program learned  about photography from an American volunteer and then were given a camera to go out on their own. The works are impressive not just because they provide physical proof that the children miraculously managed not to have the camera stolen, but also because they show an organic POV of a very different world that isn’t often documented.

Great, you say, but… what’s all this got to do with us Jews?

Good question. The first thing you would have noticed upon entering the exhibit opening is two mellifluous sounds floating and commingling in the air. The first, the danceable (even for Jews) beat of indigenous Brazilian rhythms provided by a live band. The second, the “dulcet tones” of the Russian language provided by live Russian Jews. The place was packed. And I’m not sure if there was a single Brazilian there. (I witnessed a cringeworthy exchange in which one black attendee was asked excitedly if he was Brazilian and then explained apologetically to the very disappointed Russian girl who’d asked that he was, in fact, from New Jersey.)

Ticún Brasil is an organization that hosts trips for young people interested in Jewish volunteering opportunities in Brazil and is administered by Russian Jews Alex Minkin and wife Elena Zavelev. I asked them the very first question that came to my mind: why Brazil exactly? They explained that it is already an sought-after travel destination for Jews, has the 10th highest Jewish population in the world (who knew?), and lacks that certain je ne sais quoi of European anti-Semitism. All in all, not a terrible place to go if you want to help out aging Jews at an old folks home while also soaking up the rays in South America in the middle of North American winter. Admit it, Florida is becoming a little passé.

The exhibition (which ends with a 6-9pm showing on Sunday) is meant on one level to raise money for good causes in Brazil. Mr. Lunarine often donates money from his works to Brazilian causes. But equally importantly to Mr. Minkin, the exhibition hopes to bring attention to Ticún Brasil‘s upcoming (November) volunteering trip. I personally saw him win over at least one recruit while I was there, so it seemed headed for success on both counts.

I headed out a little early–as the party going on next door made it a nearly impossible to hear or be heard, and the packed room made it a nearly impossible to stop sweating like an animal. As I left I thought the whole event reminded me of feelings I’ve had about the Jewish people in general: A little loud and uncomfortable, but very culturally interesting.

Presumptive (do we still need to say that?) Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was dealt a sucker punch to the gut today by the Washington Post’s Jason Horowitz. The devastating 5600+ word article chronicles Mitt’s years at Michigan’s Cranbrook School, a boarding school that sounds stodgy and WASP-y as its name; the only thing that would make it worse is if it were the Cranbrook Academy.

So what did Mitt and the rest of the villains from Caddyshack do while in high school in the raucous 1960s. Oh, you know, the usual kind of pranks: leading a nearly blind teacher into a closed door, impersonating a police officer to scare the pants off girl from another school and having has pals hold down a closeted homosexual classmate as he snipped off his bangs. Yeah, that’s the headliner:

“It happened very quickly, and to this day it troubles me,” said [classmate Thomas] Buford, the school’s wrestling champion, who said he joined Romney in restraining Lauber. Buford subsequently apologized to Lauber, who was “terrified,” he said. “What a senseless, stupid, idiotic thing to do.”

In case you’re keeping score, the incumbent candidate just came out for same sex marriage less than 24 hours before this article hit the Web. While that’s certainly going to be the most talked about aspect of the article (Romney’s camp is already trying to find classmates to act as character witnesses in the court of public opinion) Horowitz and researcher Julie Tate paint an exhaustive picture of the young Romney, including this bit about Cranbrook’s religious makeup:

There was a significant Jewish contingent, and several of those students said they never sensed any obvious prejudice. During Romney’s tenure, there were also Middle Eastern exchange students, usually from Kuwait.

Phwew! For a second there I was worried that this bratty incubator of the rich and famous might also have fostered a bit of anti-Semitism. Hell, they even had a church on campus that sounds straight out of the final episode of Lost:

The campus’s elegant Christ Church had a Star of David, an Islamic crescent, and Yin and Yang sign above its wooden door. The Mormon Romney joined Jews and Protestants on Cranbrook’s Church Cabinet, which focused on community service.

So you see, Romney was just fine with the Jews. As long as you weren’t gay or had a weird haircut. One more?

Faisel F. al-Abduljadir, a Kuwaiti student spending his senior year at Cranbrook in part to improve his English, said the teachers and students went out of their way to treat him with respect, showing consideration for his celebration of Ramadan and bathing requirements. But he acknowledged being “angry” about a caption under his picture in the senior yearbook that read, “Take a left at the next Synagogue.”

How droll… Now, I’m guessing it was one of those jerks from Cranbrook’s “significant Jewish contingent” that added that caption (insert controlling the media joke here), so I don’t know if we can hang it on Romney’s neck per se. The entire Washington Post article tries to show you the world that gave us Mitt Romney, so now we know.

Look, none of us wants to be subjected to this kind of scrutiny for the dumbest, most pointless years of our lives. Then again, none of us attacked our classmates with scissors and then ran for president forty years later.

If you want to read about someone in a powerful position having disturbing sex with an underling, put down your copy of Fifty Shades of Grey. There’s something much sleazier available: the John Travolta masseur lawsuit.

In case you aren’t chained to the 24-hour news cycle, here’s a rundown: a Hollywood masseur has alleged that John Travolta propositioned him for sex during a massage, and is suing for $2 million. Is that the standard Happy Ending fee? I guess it is when assault and sexual battery are involved.

There’s now even more material to fuel those Travolta gay rumors for another ten years or so because the full lawsuit is available online and it basically reads like a trashy homoerotic novel written by an elderly court reporter.

During the massage, John Travolta allegedly kept

purposely sliding the towel down that covered his buttocks to reveal about half of gluteus area.

When Travolta allegedly started feeling up the masseur, this Puritanical virgin (who rubs people down with oil for a living) didn’t like it. Travolta

apologized, but then snickered to himself like a mischievous child. Defendant then touched the shaft of Plaintiff’s penis, and seized on to it. Defendant quickly tried to rub the head of Plantiff’s penis as he tried to pull away.

It gets weirder.

When the masseur steadfastly refused to apply some Grease to Travolta’s penis (couldn’t resist), he lost his shit.

Defendant began screaming at Plaintiff, telling Plaintiff how selfish he was; that Defendant got to where he is now due to sexual favors he had performed when he was in his Welcome Back, Kotter days; and that Hollywood is controlled by homosexual Jewish men who expect favors in return for sexual activity. Defendant then went on to say how he had done things in his past that would make most people throw up.

And Travolta’s alleged tirade continued that

[when he started his career] he wasn’t even gay and that the taste of ‘cum’ would make him gag. Defendant also said that he was smart enough to learn to enjoy it, and when he began to make millions of dollars, that it all became well worth it.

So this masseur would have us believe that John Travolta owes his role as a drag queen in Hairspray to getting on his knees for closeted gay Jews in the 70s?

I kind of believe it.

I’d like to say it’s a little eerie and somewhat prescient that only a day before we would lose a formidable individual like Yauch I was already celebrating his cultural impact on society, but more importantly, the impact he had on Jewish kids of the 80′s and 90′s, but in reality, it’s neither eerie nor prescient–when you’re a Jewish music journalist, the Beastie Boys come up in conversation just about every other day. MCA, along with “Mike D” Diamond and Adam “Ad Rock” Horovitz, served as our primary examples of coolness, creativity and irreverence while still maintaining an uncompromised Jewish flavor and spirit. They were hard partyers, culture busters, and masters of the middle finger. This may also explain why when I first bought the Beastie Boys’ debut Licensed to Ill, I didn’t understand it. At the young age of eleven years old, I couldn’t yet comprehend rebellion, partying, or the notion of being ill, and the trio’s early career brashness and brattiness were not qualities I wanted to appropriate as my own. Coupled with the fact that these three guys seemed unlike any of the Jews I had encountered firsthand made it exponentially more difficult for me to identify with them and to become the super fan.

Nevertheless, I ordered all the successive albums from Columbia House, because in those days, everyone did, but the Beastie Boys essence only clicked with me after the release of 1992′s Check Your Head. At this point, MCA, Mike D, and Ad Rock were beginning to shed their frat-like misogynistic ways thus developing into genuine role models, which, only then helped me relate to them. Growing up in the deep New Jersey suburbs, attending Jewish day school, and even spending my summers in an all-boys camp, the Beastie Boys had finally become not only the coolest people I knew, but were also socially conscious advocates.

Fast forward to nearly a decade later and I’m walking into the Beastie Boys studio on Lower East Studio to meet with Ad Rock and MCA for a Heeb Magazine cover story. I wish I could remember the small little details of the day like what Yauch had been wearing or the first thing he said to me when I shook his hand or whether we really had an instant rapport or perhaps that was revisionism in play. But in all honesty, those moments are a blur. Not because it’s now eight years later and my memory isn’t what it used to be (although, that probably is also a factor), but because at the time, simply put, I was freaking out. In the inner confines of my mind, the teenage Arye was too preoccupied with high-fiving the modern-day Arye, both of us trying on fake mustaches and re-enacting the “Sabotage” video, busting into spontaneous robotic dance moves just like the Beasties had in “Intergalactic,” for me to truly absorb the moment. I can vaguely recall sitting across from the hip-hop legends, witnessing the banter firsthand, trying my hardest to keep my cool, all the while fantasizing about this interview lasting forever, but our day spent together seems like a haze.

One of the things journalists rarely talk about directly but always somehow allude to in a finished piece, albeit passive aggressively, is how we really feel about the subject of an interview. And more often than not, the people we most anticipate meeting are generally the biggest letdowns. It’s almost factually Newtonian–what goes up always comes down hard. Whether these artists sense our deep-rooted appreciation and react inversely to the scent of uncoolness, or whether the people we worship have allowed our collective worship to inflate the ego to the point of having contempt for everyone, it’s heartbreaking despite it being our job to involve them in conversation. Which makes it exponentially more wonderful when one of your childhood heroes turns out to be completely and utterly approachable.

I can recall one distinct moment that day when Yauch, giving me a tour around the studio, showed off an illustration by his daughter Tenzin, then five-years-old at the time. In retrospect, having recently become a father myself, I understand how utterly human and personal that moment was. There was no weird Jack White-like detachment, nor was there a feigned pretentiousness. This man, known to many as a Boy, showed me around the group’s headquarters, identifying certain notable memorabilia, and regaled me with stories of back in the day, but seemed most proud of the scribbles of his little girl. Granted, my teenage self cringed that MCA had somehow become a dad with graying facial stubble, but the modern-day me took great pride in knowing that it was possible to not outgrow a hero. And in some instances he can even grow right alongside you and stand an example for as long as he walks the Earth.