6 Deceiving Deception
After thefifteenth century, the narration about competing artists shifted to
more innovative stories that often referenced the parable discussed in
Chapter 5. Whereas earlier narrations used painting as a trope for
Sufism, the new stories increasingly addressed the issue of rhetorical
deception, partly exemplified by painting. Their approaches resemble
Plato’s discussion inPhaedrus. Socrates suggests that no matter how
supposedly scientific, truth cannot express itself without an intermediary
that appeals to the soul, and thus is necessarily rhetorical. He locates
deception not in representational methods, but in the incapacity offixed
forms, such as writing or painting, to defend themselves or engage in
argument.^1 Similarly, the historian al-Maqrizi narrates anecdotes of decep-
tion informing wisdom, and chroniclers of the arts Mustafa‘Ali and Qadi
Ahmad delicately weave narratives revealing the denigration of art-as-
deception as an evil ruse. While distinct from the competitions discussed
inChapter 5, these stories reflect the same mimetic paradigms. In contrast
with the popular appeal of al-Ghazali and Nizami, the ability of these
authors to subtly reprise themes in new guises reflected the sophisticated,
elite discursive environments of their reception.
The reliance on competition in all of these stories about representation
invites comparison with the contest between Zeuxis and Parrhasius, related
in thefirst century and reprised in modern Europe. Interpreted as an
allegory revealing mimesis as deception and artistry as competition, the
story became central in establishing art-historical norms of disinterested
objectivity. This chapter uses Islamic discourses to pry loose the planks of
the resulting Eurocentric definitions of representation.
6.1 al-Maqrizi and the Politics of Competition
The historian Taqi al-Abbas al-Maqrizi (1364–1442) relates a competition
between artists in the court of Fatimid vizier Yazuri (r. 1049–58), said to
(^1) Plato, 2005 : 63 (275 d5–e1). 159