Interrupted Lives: Human Migration in War and Peace

The Boyden Gallery presented the works of Keiko Ishii Eckhart and Amze Emmons during the Fall 2009 session of St. Mary’s College of Maryland. Both artists addressed the migration of common people. Both used similar mediums: graphite, acrylics and cut outs, although Eckhard used silkscreen, and very well at that. Eckhart sought to study migration patterns based on her personal family history. Her historic perspective was shared by many Japanese families during pre-war and WWII political policies. Emmons, however, used a variety of urban situations to demonstrate his belief that all spaces, and the division of these spaces, are political. The Boyden Gallery added another aspect to the human migration experience by including an interactive Google Earth installation, allowing show attendees the opportunity to map their own migration.

Eckhardt's studies were based on the effects of the war between the United States and Japan when working class immigrants were caught in the middle. The story she told incorporated many official documents, records, and personal journals into her pieces in order to confront her family’s migration nightmare. While her great grandfather opted to remain in America, ending up in a Japanese internment camp, the great grand uncle had returned to Japan in time to survive the bombing of Hiroshima. Both individuals were dramatically caught in the tangle of world events they were powerless to predict. Eckhard proficiently illustrated the influences these forces exerted on the futures of themselves and their following generations.

Emmon’s work dealt more current situations; homelessness, urban transportation, and urban plights. He used pencil and acrylics as if they were strong watercolors to present his migration issues. I’m not sure about his point of view concerning migration except that he felt it was about appropriation and re-appropriation of space, and most of my understanding of his point came from his lecture. Barriers were a big element in all of his pieces and he did manage to capture a ghostly emptiness of city dwelling. To me, however, much of his worked seemed sloppy and unrefined. He may have lost me as an audience as I was preoccupied by the unfinished quality his work. I do not think any single piece he offered could have stood alone and I believe it was the sheer number of pieces that carried his theme into the show.

It seems to me that Eckhard’s work would, and should, have been more political than the social issues presented by Emmons. This is simply because she is looking at a war between huge powers, while Emmons is addressing more common urban issues like transportation and homelessness, which in our experience is more economic or even weather driven. Eckhard’s work felt personal. She captured my attention and projected me into the work where I could feel the pain, fear, and frustration of world changes and migration insecurities I may never have addressed without her. I found Eckhard’s work more esthetically pleasing than Emmons. Her sense of color was more appealing to me. Her colors were more earthy yet delicate than the bold, primary colors used by Emmons. His presentation, possibly by design, was more primitive in many ways.

The Google Earth installation which was added to the show “for audience participation” was fun for anyone who had not ever tried it before. I think it could have been improved if the migrations of all the individuals who mapped their personal migration could have been accumulated with all the others. It might have been a good demonstration of how much Americans, or at least college students, move about. It could have been titled “Peace time movements of the St. Mary’s College population” and strengthened the shows intentions to present migration during war and peace.