Emily romanticizes Islamic cultural artifacts despite having no real connection to them as a non-Muslim person. She even suggests that Islam is part of “us”—that is, a part of Western culture that everyone should be freely able to use. But Isaac points out that Emily sounds like any other American artist who’s tried to “obliterate the ego,” or achieve spiritual transcendence, something typically associated with Eastern religions like Buddhism. Her attitude, as Isaac previously suggested, is Orientalizing: she sees Islamic culture (like the tiles) as exotic, mysterious, and foreign. Moreover, she feels entitled to represent them as she wants, through her own Western perspective. In this way, Emily’s art is exploitative: she’s garnering critical acclaim as a Western artist who’s essentially taking advantage of Islamic imagery, while actual Islamic artists who’ve used the same techniques for “a thousand years” haven’t been as widely recognized.