If any one has ever wondered why in the spectrum of international art there are certain artworks from regions around the globe that seem to stagnate with each new creation, there is a simple but disconcerting answer. African art is the prime of example of this. No matter how many different African artists with varying types, sizes, and styles emerge, the Western world seems fixated on perceiving it all the same despite overt discernment. Why is this? Well, author Olu Oguibe wrote a wonderfully informative piece on how and why this came to be. In his essay called “The Culture Game,” written in 2004, Oguibe transcribes a dialogue between an American critic named Thomas McEvilley and an Ivorian painter living in New York named Ouattara. Throughout the line of questioning Oguibe accentuates the type of questions asked by McEvilley to which there can only be a limited and targeted response from Ouattara. He uses this dialogue to showcase the method by which the Occidental culture exerts their influence over the African culture to achieve an image we desire and seek to perpetuate. Ouattara is just like every other artist, trying to, through his art work, express his thoughts, experiences into coherent meaning in the form of an image. This requires autonomy and freedom of action and speech free from inhibition. Oguibe notes how McEvilley inquires upon subject matter through questions such as “Where were you born?” or “How many people were in your village.” These pre-determined questions are aimed at acquiring the preset image Western culture views African culture. By eliminating the opportunity for an Artist’s audience and ability to speak upon matters without any interference, the African artist is made silent. This is the basis for imperial control or cultural subjugation by which the Occident has asserted themselves. Silence is the key weapon to which the weapon to deter such oppression is voice. If one were to think of this relationship between one and the other, as does Oguibe in his essay, I order for the one to ensure control they must confine the other. That is exactly what this line of dialogue is doing. When Ouattara speaks out at one point wishing to change the subject matter to discuss his work, McEvilley continues with his line of inquiry. Why? Because if McEvilley were allow Ouattara the opportunity to talk about his autonomous ideas, these manipulative barriers would disappear. It is shameful that such things still persist in the 21^st century and in due time in order to achieve globalized equality the silence must be broken.