EXHIBITION: Photos on display

the military. Although they were “not unsympathetic” to BLU’s protesting, they found it relevant to express how being a service member benefited both themselves and their family, notably saying that one has to either “sell [their] soul to a bank for student loans or to the Army for GI Bill” in order to afford higher education in the United States.

That being said, the service member expressed that they came to Brandeis to see different perspectives and “engage with different ideas” such as the BLU’s protest, the student’s respect for protest outweighing the variation in ideology between theirs and BLU’s.

Much like the opinions of this active service member, student responses were divided. Some found the BLU’s conviction and fortitude to gather and chant for hours in support of a cause they found important to them “impressive” while others found the display polarizing and disruptive. In a followup interview via email, the BLU noted that they “received a mixture of support and opposition” and found only a “small contingent of ideologically motivated students” who interacted with the Marine recruiters positively.

While some students respected BLU’s passion, those who did not share the same opinion had multiple reasons as to why that was.

In fact, some of BLU’s critics took no issue with their cause — protesting U.S. imperialism and the University’s complacency with the military — but instead, with the Soviet Union flag and communist symbols from within the protest, as well as the BLU’s harsh words for students that positively responded to the Marines: “losers” and “terrorists.”

A student found the protest to be a “boatload of ignorance” and that the protest could not be considered peaceful because the BLU called students names.

The same student found the Soviet Union symbolism to be “viscerally uncomfortable” because of the number of students with families “as close [as] grandparents” who associate the Communist flag negatively. The student felt that using that flag in a student area “[ignored] the experience” of Jewish students attending the University and claimed they received a dismissive response from the BLU when they brought their discomfort to the protesters’ attention.

In the same follow-up interview, the BLU explained their use of communist symbolism, writing: “the hammer and sickle, the flag of the Soviet Union, and other related symbols represent the many things accomplished under these banners.” They outlined some of these achievements: “the triumph over oppressive monarchies, the seizing of state power by oppressed classes, the advancement of women’s rights, the advancement of and material support for national liberation movements around the world.” The BLU explained its foundational ideology comes from Marxism, and they are open to welcoming anyone who aligns with their “basic principles and wants to engage in the struggle for progressive change.”

Furthermore, while not all of its members are communists, BLU added that “many identify themselves that way.” They then compared their self-identified communists to activists from the 1960s and 1970s and the Black Panther Party. The BLU said that they “[look] upon the history of an international communist movement with great fondness [and seek] to learn from its victories and correct its mistakes in [their] own journey.”

Even if not all students can relate to the discomfort that the sight of two Soviet Union flags causes on a heritage-level, the student also questioned the choice to disrupt student life, disdainfully noting the BLU’s use of a megaphone in a closed, indoor space such as the SCC. The student felt that the protesters made the student center too aggressive of a place to productively work — their perspective aligning with a student teaching assistant who had been holding office hours over Zoom. BLU’s amplified chanting and taunting forced the TA to pick up and hold their office hours elsewhere.

The demonstration ended with the BLU following the Marine recruiters out of the SCC after taunting their struggle to fold a table: “Look at you, barely defeated a table. No wonder you lost to Vietnam.”

The protest left the Brandeis community to ponder its implications — the definition of a peaceful protest, the right to free speech versus the right for all individuals to feel comfortable in a public setting, and even the military’s ability to advertise on university campuses.

CONTINUED FROM 1 series currently on display but decided to put all four series into direct conversation and allow viewers to see what reoccurs throughout the pieces. This interseries cohesion is evident in her signature usage of dramatic lighting over subjects that emerge from dark backdrops and largely depict scenes of family, faith, and tradition.

Prof. Harleen Singh (WGS, SAS) commenced the artist talk portion of the evening, which was followed by Baldwin’s official introduction of Behar. The artist began by explaining the title of the exhibition by explaining how the variant readings of the word “interlaced” are relevant to her photography. Behar shared how influences such as Judith Black, Imogen Cunningham, and Sally Mann are interlaced into her work, as each of these artists demonstrate the relationship between motherhood and photography. “Photography, much like motherhood, happens both in milliseconds — as you open the camera shutter — as well as in years and decades as you see a static record of what was and compare it with what is,” she said.

All of Behar’s photographs are choreographed, even those with human subjects. She spoke on how she collaborates with her children to tell their stories and hers. Instead of taking candid photographs, which Behar believes could interfere with their lives, she chose to construct formal images. “In doing so I create visual stories that are both a perfect document and a complete fiction of my current life,” she said.

Each of her three children appear in her series, “Homespun,” which utilizes yarn and threads to metaphorize their family life. She writes on her website: “Just as tension determines the body of a fabric, I use yarn, string, and rope to interlace a narrative. A textile carries its own qualities: tenacity, strength, and resistance. My images portray our fears, hopes, and comforts – the lives we stitch together.”

One large 27 x 36 inch piece called “Fringes” from the

“Homespun” series distinguishes itself as the only photograph on one of the gallery’s walls. Baldwin considers it one of the most striking pieces in the entire collection and decided to leave it as a stand alone piece to not only create a balance between the denser areas of the gallery, but also to recognize its exceptionally evocative nature.

Another one of the included series is “Tu Que Bivas,” an ongoing project that explores Behar’s background and contains elements of oral tradition and the passage of culture from one generation to another. Behar has spent the last 18 months doing research and talking with her mother and daughter to create a portfolio that studies their Sephardic roots.

Behar concluded her presentation by noting that with these photographs she wishes to investigate the fragility of life and capture scenes of fractured items intermixed with vulnerable moments. “There's decay and there's healing. With my camera, I stopped time with intent.”