Here’s the thing, I normally add analysis I’m certain of. Or others writings. For this one i can’t say I have a perfect analysis nor have I found much information about the painting.
Woth that disclaimer:
His style often involves surreal or symbolic imagery, mixing real and imagined elements, dealing with memory, identity, cultural trauma, and the effects of war and displacement. (Inferred from his general body of work)
Three important ‘figures’ here, firstly:
In Islamic tradition and literature, the hoopoe (“hudhud” in Arabic) appears in the Qur’an as a messenger.
Also in Sufi writings the hoopoe often serves as a guide, a wise bird that leads others toward truth or spiritual awakening.
More generally, birds are used as metaphors for transcendence, migration, spiritual journey, exile, longing or connection between earth and divine.
It looks left, opposite to the others — suggesting remembrance, resistance, or connection to the past. It’s turned gaze might symbolize the true direction of wisdom, looking back to heritage, memory, or moral grounding — while the human “leader” points elsewhere.
Given that Muayad Muhsen is Iraqi, and that the painting was done in 2017, it might be responding to Iraq’s recent history: conflict, displacement, destruction. The hoopoe—beautiful, fragile, resilient—could symbolize the country, the people, or heritage.
On a large canvas, showing a single elegant bird may create themes of isolation or solitude. If the background seems spare or minimal, that could highlight vulnerability.
Directions:
Western man: Points right Rationalism, modernity, imposed direction
Local crowd: Moves right Collective migration, following, displacement
Hoopoe: Looks left Memory, spiritual insight, resistance, truth
Dressing:
The faceless Western man:
The facelessness strips him of individuality — he’s a type, not a person.
He could represent the West as an abstract force: modernity, power, intervention, or colonial influence.
His gesture — pointing right — may signify direction, authority, or control: a figure who claims to guide or direct others.
Yet the lack of a face might imply detachment, moral blindness, or the absence of empathy.
The migrating crowd:
If they are local people, moving rightward under the pointing gesture, the scene evokes migration, displacement, or guided exodus.
The rightward movement may imply progress or escape, but under the guidance of a faceless outsider, it also raises questions:
Are they being led astray?
Do they follow blindly?
What is being left behind?
Elegant in the title suggests that the hoopoe is not just being shown as a wild bird, but as something with refinement or nobility.
The faceless Western man symbolizes outside influence directing local peoples — mirroring Iraq’s long history of colonization, intervention, and reconstruction.
The locals’ movement suggests enforced or misguided change, while the hoopoe’s resistance embodies cultural continuity.
The traditional guide and messenger (the hoopoe) has been reduced to an accessory on the Western man’s shoulder — its wisdom present but unheeded.
It looks backward, perhaps mourning or calling attention to what’s lost, while humanity charges blindly ahead.
The contrast may critique how “progress” is defined and who decides it.
The facelessness and directionality imply asymmetry in power and vision.
Now this is symbolist work. So there doesn’t not need to be one explanation. With all these ideas you can take any idea you like and riff on it.
Also this is mostly coming from composition and ignoring color etc. You can add any other ideas you have on top of any you like.
There isnt an objective answer. You can find one answer acceptable one day and a different one another day. That’s what I love about the vague symbolist art across mediums.
Remember this is just the idea of one random guy, if you disagree and have a different explanation, perfectly OK.
Thanks! Way more insight than I had on it. What about the pink triangle? I thought this stood out because unlike the suit and lack of head it was very non-generic. Assumed it was some sort of reference to modern homosexual men.
Personally I dont see how that would make any thematic sense in this case. Even though its a very good catch and a nice observation to relate to the Nazi era.
For my guess. Maybe it has to do with the triangle of death in Iraq, an area in Iraq which saw a lot of violence during the US occupation.
Pink for blood. Wearing it on his chest as an accomplishment with pride.
Members of the regular Republican Guards conventionally wore a scarlet-colored triangle insignia on both shoulders of their uniforms (sometimes backed with white material to form a white border around the edge of the triangle)
The Iraqi Republican Guard (Arabic: حرس العراق الجمهوري, romanized: Ḥaras al-ʿIrāq al-Jamhūrīy) was a branch of the Iraqi military from 1969 to 2003, which existed primarily during the presidency of Saddam Hussein. Initially a praetorian guard unit tasked with the sole purpose to protect the president of Iraq, it grew exponentially during the Iran-Iraq War, transforming into an elite force of the Iraqi Armed Forces. It later became known as the Republican Guard Corps, and then the Republican Guard Forces Command (RGFC) with its expansion into two corps. The Republican Guard was disbanded in 2003 after the invasion of Iraq by a U.S.-led international coalition.
The red triangle appears in the 1917 flag of the Arab Revolt, with the color red symbolizing Arab independence and unity. The red triangle also appears in the derivative Palestinian flag, which was used during the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine against British rule and Jewish emigration. In a 1938 photograph, Palestinian rebels are seeing waving a black, white and green flag with a red triangle, with a cross and a crescent, symbolizing interreligious unity, inside the triangle.
Some media speculated that the symbol originates from Nazi concentration camp badges. However, the Nazis used the inverted red triangle to identify prisoners with political views opposed to Nazism, not necessarily Jewish prisoners.
The red triangle has been described as referring to the Hashemites or the ashraf of Mecca.
Here’s the thing, I normally add analysis I’m certain of. Or others writings. For this one i can’t say I have a perfect analysis nor have I found much information about the painting.
Woth that disclaimer:
His style often involves surreal or symbolic imagery, mixing real and imagined elements, dealing with memory, identity, cultural trauma, and the effects of war and displacement. (Inferred from his general body of work)
Three important ‘figures’ here, firstly:
In Islamic tradition and literature, the hoopoe (“hudhud” in Arabic) appears in the Qur’an as a messenger.
Also in Sufi writings the hoopoe often serves as a guide, a wise bird that leads others toward truth or spiritual awakening.
More generally, birds are used as metaphors for transcendence, migration, spiritual journey, exile, longing or connection between earth and divine.
It looks left, opposite to the others — suggesting remembrance, resistance, or connection to the past. It’s turned gaze might symbolize the true direction of wisdom, looking back to heritage, memory, or moral grounding — while the human “leader” points elsewhere.
Given that Muayad Muhsen is Iraqi, and that the painting was done in 2017, it might be responding to Iraq’s recent history: conflict, displacement, destruction. The hoopoe—beautiful, fragile, resilient—could symbolize the country, the people, or heritage.
On a large canvas, showing a single elegant bird may create themes of isolation or solitude. If the background seems spare or minimal, that could highlight vulnerability.
Directions: Western man: Points right Rationalism, modernity, imposed direction Local crowd: Moves right Collective migration, following, displacement Hoopoe: Looks left Memory, spiritual insight, resistance, truth
Dressing: The faceless Western man: The facelessness strips him of individuality — he’s a type, not a person. He could represent the West as an abstract force: modernity, power, intervention, or colonial influence. His gesture — pointing right — may signify direction, authority, or control: a figure who claims to guide or direct others. Yet the lack of a face might imply detachment, moral blindness, or the absence of empathy.
The migrating crowd: If they are local people, moving rightward under the pointing gesture, the scene evokes migration, displacement, or guided exodus. The rightward movement may imply progress or escape, but under the guidance of a faceless outsider, it also raises questions: Are they being led astray? Do they follow blindly? What is being left behind?
Elegant in the title suggests that the hoopoe is not just being shown as a wild bird, but as something with refinement or nobility.
The faceless Western man symbolizes outside influence directing local peoples — mirroring Iraq’s long history of colonization, intervention, and reconstruction. The locals’ movement suggests enforced or misguided change, while the hoopoe’s resistance embodies cultural continuity.
The traditional guide and messenger (the hoopoe) has been reduced to an accessory on the Western man’s shoulder — its wisdom present but unheeded. It looks backward, perhaps mourning or calling attention to what’s lost, while humanity charges blindly ahead.
The contrast may critique how “progress” is defined and who decides it. The facelessness and directionality imply asymmetry in power and vision.
Now this is symbolist work. So there doesn’t not need to be one explanation. With all these ideas you can take any idea you like and riff on it.
Also this is mostly coming from composition and ignoring color etc. You can add any other ideas you have on top of any you like.
There isnt an objective answer. You can find one answer acceptable one day and a different one another day. That’s what I love about the vague symbolist art across mediums.
Remember this is just the idea of one random guy, if you disagree and have a different explanation, perfectly OK.
Thanks! Way more insight than I had on it. What about the pink triangle? I thought this stood out because unlike the suit and lack of head it was very non-generic. Assumed it was some sort of reference to modern homosexual men.
Personally I dont see how that would make any thematic sense in this case. Even though its a very good catch and a nice observation to relate to the Nazi era.
For my guess. Maybe it has to do with the triangle of death in Iraq, an area in Iraq which saw a lot of violence during the US occupation. Pink for blood. Wearing it on his chest as an accomplishment with pride.
or maybe this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Guard_(Iraq)
@[email protected]
Thats interesting, that interpretation would be an odd choice for the image unless ironic?
And nothing here shouts irony.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_Arab_Revolt 🤷
@[email protected]
Another very interesting fact. But again I don’t see how that would relate to this picture.
May just be it. But i dont get how
me neither, but that was all i could find while trying to understand
the painting reminds me of a scene from a film about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_massacre. Sadly I can’t remember the name