Why the Louvre’s new Islamic art wing won’t “bridge the divide”
Pledges to forge an understanding between the West and Islam feel shallow.
By Charlotte Simmonds Published 26 September 2012 10:03
This week the Louvre Museum in Paris opened up a new wing devoted to Islamic art. The structure, which cost a reported £80 million and took a decade to build, is fitted with a wave-like, gold tinted rooftop which has been likened both to a flying carpet and sand dunes in the desert. It has been granted a privileged position in the Louvre’s central courtyard alongside I M Pei’s glass pyramid, and will house the largest collection of Islamic art in Europe – a rotating selection from the Louvre’s 18,000 strong Islamic archive.
It’s all very exciting, but what, exactly, are the implication of this grand new home for the cream of the Islamic cultural crop? The new space is being billed as a symbol of tolerance in the face of growing unrest and misunderstanding between the west and the Islamic World. Sophie Makariou, director of the Louvre’s Islamic Art Department, said in an interview with the BBC: “We need to state that there is a distance between what the Islamic civilization was, its contribution to world history, and what is happening now.” She went on to call the exhibition space a chance to “give Islam back its glory”. French president François Holland, who inaugurated the wing on Tuesday, called it a significant project at a significant time.
And it’s not just those in camp west who see the endeavour in these terms. The gallery’s largest single donor – Prince Waleed Bin Talal of Saudi Arabia – made this statement: “After 9/11 all Arabs and Muslims have the duty and the responsibility to tell the west about real Muslims, about real Islam, and how peaceful our religion is.” Substantial donations have also poured in from individuals in Abu Dabi, Kuwait, Oman, not to mention the Moroccan Royal Family and the president of Azerbaijan. An international project with ambitious intentions, no doubt.
France has a long history of secularism, which has of late been invoked justification for cracking down on the country’s four million strong Muslim population. The 2004 ban of headscarves in public schools sparked protests, followed by further controversy over last year’s outlaw of the niqab in public spaces. In 2010, the mayor of the northern city of Roubaix initiated a row over whether the sale of halal meat in fast food burger chains let religion in where it didn’t belong. Then there's the recent unrest over satirical cartoons in the weekly Charlie Hebdo, and the banning of anti-Innocence of Muslims protests by the interior minister Manuel Valls.
In a sense, the museum's message is a harmless one – a politely reassuring statement of cultural collaboration. But in another sense it amounts to a failure to acknowlege the modern Muslim condition - an implication that only in the past did Islamic culture aspire to beauty, integrity, intelligence and refinement.
The Louvre has borne the standard for western high art since the French Revolution. Art from Islamic antiquity (the new wing will house work from the 7th to the 19th century), with its fondness for calligraphy, narrative painting and lush decorative textiles, ceramics and ornaments, conforms perfectly well to the aesthetic criteria of western art from the same periods. In previous centuries, eastern and western sensibilities were very much in tune. It’s the world today that the French seem to feel uneasy with – hence the appeal to an idealised past.
Ancient art is beautiful and important, no doubt. But for many young people today – those at the heart of the east/west debate - it remains inaccessible and elitist. The French youth might call the Mona Lisa an invaluable artefact, yes – but provocative? Topical? A catalyst for conversation? Hardly. Should we then expect Moghul mosaics to speak for the modern Muslim?
It’s comforting to imagine that misunderstandings and intolerance on both sides could be placated by a round of applause for what came before. But if all we can celebrate about Islam is its past, then we are ignoring the equally beautiful aspects of its present. The Louvre’s new wing is a worthy home for a collection worth celebrating. But it is but a small bridge over a chasm that continues to widen. An honest celebration of contemporary Islamic art and culture is still needed and major art institutions like the Louvre should be doing their bit.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















12 comments
It is probably the case when art imitates life. As in life so in art we are following an exclusive policy for islamic art. If there is anything called islamic art then why art by da vinci or van Gogh are not called Christian art. People like Talal and of his ilk (westerners included) have vested interests in the divisive muslim society and they rule by dividing world into west and muslim world. Time to wake up.
Prince Waleed Bin Talal of Saudi Arabia is eager to improve the image of Islam by funding to the tune of tens of millions of Euros this gallery. Once again, real life eclipses any attempted parody.
Perhaps if the Prince concentrated his resources and influence on changing Saudi Arabia from an intolerant, misogynistic fiefdom, and made it his mission to dispel hatred of Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, liberals and secularism within the Kingdom and in the wider Islamic world, Islam may begin to be respected and people won't fear Islam any more.
As it is, its just more of the same arrogant finger wagging at everyone else - the same naked emperor, the same elephant in the room not being mentioned.
For me Islamic art is about as relevant to Islam,as those grotesque statues Hitler liked so much to National Socialism..Muslims of the past conquered the most civilised nations of the ancient world and went on to reduce them to todays state.They enslaved millions and slaughtered millions esp. In the Indian sub continent.Muslims long for this past and even Westerners are now told this thousand year menace was something beautiful.It is a complete brainwashing but thankfully utterly ineffective other then perhaps giving fundamentalist Muslims even more motivation to return the 7th century when the world was right and Muslims ruled supreme.
This comment is the view of some demented sub-human who represents a minute percentage of your readership and is further proof that letters to the editor in the old days were a better idea as rubbish like this comment could be thrown in the bin.
This comment is the view of some demented sub-human who represents a minute percentage of your readership and is further proof that letters to the editor in the old days were a better idea as rubbish like this comment could be thrown in the bin.
Personally, I would like the divide between me and Islam widened as far as possible.
Any bridge built by such exhibitions will connect only the educated artistic elites.It will not mean a damn thing to those city dwellers throughout Europe and Britain whose neighbourhoods ,indeed worlds, have been transformed by alien beings whose lifestyles ,attitudes and laws differ so drastically from their own.
Calligraphy is wondrous, no doubt,but try to convince the parents of children abused in Northern England by muslim men adhering to Islamic mores and you'll find that such art holds little interest and no consolation for their hurt.
"children abused in Northern England by Muslim men adhering to Islamic mores".
Is that what they were adhering to? Islam? I hadn't realised Islam encouraged men to abuse children. Does that mean the Catholic Church does the same as well as English culture - since most paedophile gangs in this country are predominantly white, middle class, male and as has been reported recently sometimes English women as well?
Fine comments by desdemona and frederica. I appreciate and embrace all art, east, west, north, south and all points between. It's politics I often don't like. Not to be naieve: I don't believe mixing modern society and ancient mythologies is necessarily a bright idea.
As tends to be the case it is usually only the fanatical pro or anti anything voices and agendas that tend to be heard. Anything which is ''not that'' should I think be welcomed. And who's to say the exibition might not be extended to contemporary art in the future?
''Provocative and topical''? I think Muslims living in Europe perhaps have more than enough' provocative and topical' for their liking and wouldn't thank you for any more. At least an exibition of some of the most beautiful Islamic art might help dispel the apparent belief of some that most Muslims are illiterate hut dwellers mired in religious dogma who know how to pull a trigger and not much else. In addition it may give the 4 million Muslims living in France a feeling that their culture is valued and appreciated - especially after the banning of the hijab etc.
Does the Louvre do contemporary western art? I didn't think so. And if it doesn't, there's not much reason to expect it to do contemporary Islamic art.
I agree.