|
Author
|
Topic: In Art does politics matter?
|
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292
|
posted 23 September 2002 02:25 PM
I don't know if this belongs in the feminism forum but there is a link that becomes clear.My signifigant other (SO) and myself attended an art show this weekend. The artist was sculptor, most iron, and quite talented. He had pieces ranging from the mundane to the bizzare and everything in between. But one piece, in particular, got our attention. A hand, covered in the sleeve of what was obviously a business suit and white shirt, held up a steel boot with spur and wrapped with what appeared to be chicken wire. Just from looking we both had very different interpretations. When we discussed it, I had sort of liked it. What I saw was the hand of the business community supporting the steel boot of war. But my SO didn't like it all. She saw the boot as feminine due to, I think, the spiked heel. And she thought it was a representation of a fetish and only thought to herself: "get over it." As it turned out, we were both wrong. The boot was feminine but the artist created the boot to represent feminism crushing masculinity (represented by the arm and hand). When we talked about it later we thought it interesting that we had such different interpretations of the work which was very different from what the artist intended. I know this is not unusual. But what was striking, to us anyway, is that the interpretations we had seemed to flow from our different political orientations. I thought, prior to this, that interpretation of art would more likely come from cultural, as opposed to political, perspectives (recognizing the politics is part cultural). What do you think?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292
|
posted 23 September 2002 03:31 PM
No argument from me, 'lance. We discussed that too. I thought it strange that men can be so hostile to feminism and that much of that hostility is really a fear that men are losing power. But what power? As an average Joe I have no more or less power than your average Jane. And in fact, men, for the most part ought to be supportive of feminist goals. How can it hurt my family if my wife earns as much as I do for performing the same work? Or how does it hurt me if my wife can earn more by training as a mechanic?So here is an artist, his biggest and most important client a female interior designer (who organized his first and only showing), whose most importnat clients, in turn, are probably professional couples who, if the wife was not also a well paid professional, could afford neither the designer nor the art. It is quite ironic if you think about it. [ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: WingNut ]
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402
|
posted 23 September 2002 03:34 PM
If the artist feels that way, then that's what he makes*. Ideas far more ludicrous have become works of art. And, of course, we not only don't have like tham, but are free to interpret them in a thousand other ways.Does politics matter? Sometimes it matters a lot. Often, not at all. I prefer content - political, emotional, intellectual, social; something - but it certainly isn't a requirement. *edited to add: If he's biting the hand that feeds him, i'm pretty sure that hand is able to defend itself. [ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: nonesuch ]
From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116
|
posted 23 September 2002 06:30 PM
Okay, high school then. You're not really making a great case for this guy. "The universe is like a pair of dice" sounds equally tedious to me, no matter how sophisticated the technique. Perhaps there is some insight or subtext enclosed in the work that we're not getting from your description, but aside from your praise, these sound like pretty clumsy visual allegories without real insight. I haven't seen the work, so... well, it doesn't stop me from shooting my mouth off, does it? It occurs to me that perhaps the curator misspoke and meant to say femininity rather than feminism, which would at least take the ridiculous political aspect away. But if he does intend his piece as a political statement, I suspect that HE hates and fears women because HE feels oppressed by them, and is hiding from himself behind some bullshit abstract notion that ALL men are oppressed by women. Again, if he could use his technical ability to confront a his own fears, then perhaps your SO would have responded positively to his effort as well, finding some artistic merit in the artist's honest misogyny. "Fetish" sounds bang on to me. Chickenshit too. But, again, this is all sight unseen.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402
|
posted 24 September 2002 10:20 PM
What difference does it make?
A talented and skilled artist (never mind that - even a clumsy one!) is going to produce work that pleases some people, pisses off some people and leaves some people cold.
If you didn't find at least one of his pieces disturbing, he was wasting his time.By all means, find fault; argue over it; get mad; punch him in the nose - if he's any good, he'd far prefer that to being ignored. Really. It's okay for artists to express politically incorrect, unpopular, ridiculous, even totally wrong ideas and emotions. Their function is to disturb people, to shake people out of a comfortable state of mind - if only for a minute. Their function (whether they confront their personal demons is none of our business) is to put us in touch with our own demons. Then we go home (with or without the piece in question) and continue to work on whatever we have to work on. The minute we start a on new, unaccustomed, train of thought, the artist's job is done. [ October 01, 2002: Message edited by: nonesuch ]
From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
