Ever since they were kids they all have dreamed of being on cover of Vogue.
You should have better dreams.
Kuukausi: elokuu 2015
Tough love, have you experienced it? That you have to make it completely on your own, make all decisions, deeds yourself, create a life from little or nothing feeling lost and abandoned? How do you find your strength there in a dark place?
I see it the idea of tough love an ideology by which to live for people who do not see nurturing and providing for other people a virtue but something that prevents personal development, sharing as something that prevents progress. It is very Spartan therefore ancient but it is practiced by lots of people still because there are lessons to learn about people and about life and to experience struggle is a strict and effective teacher. There are good things that follow this guide-book of harsh and unforgiving mentality. It is fascist maybe or near fascism, a rule where people are left to survive on their own, a kind of natural selection from which it is extremely hard to rise up but some people do still. If you do not survive you do not deserve to live, if you do not win and thrive you do not deserve respect. It is how I was brought up. I had to survive, or harshly put, die, to say it plainly and simply. Here people talk to graves not to other people, so I guess I’m being talked to when I die. I cherish the thought, as it is fucking disgusting it is something to laugh at. I have experienced as an artist, as a woman who used to be a girl that I must know my way myself, to shelter and protect myself as there is no one else to do it for me, so far so good. I have grown into a kind of tough love but in Finland I am not completely alone as the state provides for schooling, healthcare, infrastructure, housing, clean nature, equal rights, justice etc. My tough love experience still is not the toughest of all, by far. I really cannot complain, I would not dare to complain. I am very privileged.
It is the same to me as little boys who are sent to military academy in Russia (one example in Kronstadt) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt. What does it actually mean that there is the word love when the feeling is wiped away as we normally think love is to support, share, understand and encourage? Life is tough without such love which is supportive. Does it mean that we will still lack and lose something if we are wholeheartedly supported and cared for? That we will not be able to find life in its entire full meaning when we are protected, overprotected, sheltered and given all we may possibly want: Not getting what we need though as we think we know what we need, what a person needs is to see what there is to get, can somebody give me what I want, what are the easiest ways to get those things desired, what there is to learn, why learning is essential in being human and what to become in the end as there is no end. Those things we will never fully know forehand, we just have to try to see, experiment and learn from mistakes. Life is unexpected, surprising, ruthless, merciless, one could think it is loveless.
Manhood that attacks is manhood of weakness and insecurity.
It is most strange and it is simple as hell and it happens over and over again. I’m personally sick of it and men who highlight their superiority give me the creeps. but hey that’s just me, maybe and most definitely there are women who really are turned on by such posing of masculinity where weakness is to be female. When you have to point out your manliness via cars, position, money, friends etc. it is disgusting. Backstabbing females are the other thing I really loath. You are the true scum on Earth. Take note. Sadly for such people to admit failure and making mistakes is obviously a pain and it tells of people who are unable to grow. Admitting one’s flaws is way to progress. I know for you it is also extremely difficult to admit that you are losing. Defense mechanism is very telling.
Violence is to be escaped if it cannot be controlled and abolished. What else can women and children do when gangs of men see threatening and killing an answer. What is the question? What is the question to be asked as there are no answers other than those already in the air?
Question also is should extreme violence be answered with violence, with as much as we have got to protect those who do not want violence in their and other people’s lives? How do we stop epidemic of growing and expanding gangs and thugs who take over nations after they have taken over neighborhoods and cities? Gunmen and money men who do whatever they need to do to make their views and manners of doing business the only law, make their rules the rules of an entire country because administrators and politicians are corrupt. Nations full of people who have to serve criminals because there is no other choice, criminals who do not stop not even when they are stopped. There is always another one, other one to do the job that was stopped for a moment. Adding to the picture other nations around who have severely contributed to this lunacy along many decades and now refusing to accept immigrants and refugees from countries that clearly do not either want or are not capable of solving crises which last year after year. When there is no culture of democracy to begin with where do we begin? From the alphabet, from the very simple equations that make sense. Infrastructure to making a democratic safe state begins with basic things which are made indestructible, accessible and free. Grassroot first priority must be that there are clear rules which all obey. What is accepted and what is not to understand that there is a nation which needs and wants to make progress. Culture of fast fortune making and taking that fortune with force is too tempting when alternatives are scarce, and obviously punishments do not play any threat in a country where living fast is an ideal.
Clearly violence cannot be answered with violence, clearly, but aggression and death are languages that people speak and breath, straightforward monotonic order of arms, dealers and men. Yes, it is sadly the tongue of men and boys growing to be men since they have to become men who are fearless, merciless, greedy, childish in their needs, fulfilling their needs endlessly thinking that their manhood is majestic absolutely good and it has to be stated with certain kind of masculinity, marks of masculine power, vain bling. Culture of masculine, of macho is one serious threat to stability, health, security, progress, becoming and learning. For a true macho man it is impossible to honor women and children as thinking capable individuals who can have lives of their own, who can also become equal or even superior. Honor is in being a strong independent man who solves problems with silencing, threatening, killing, oppressing, enslaving etc. It is in traditions, religion, family, gender roles, upbringing, schooling, work, a division and putting the man on pedestal because of his gender, because of his role as a penetrating hero who masters his game of power. He is intoxicated by his manly odor and status to whom whores and Madonnas are very separate issues but all the same exploited. What/who is your leader in a free world where bossy men bully being unable of finding any other way to act? When men cannot change how they interact and make the world what hope there is? Actions of macho men are hopeless, totally doomed.
”At the end of July, the OCNF declared a gender violence watch for Mexico State, in which 840 women were murdered between 2010 and 2013 and 1,258 women were found to have disappeared between 2011 and 2012; over half were between the ages of 10 and 17. And though the laws are tough in an effort to combat femicide in the country, the murders are not often investigated as such, a roundabout reflection of the systemic misogyny that creates such astonishing numbers of dead and disappeared.” http://jezebel.com/mexico-is-more-dangerous-than-ever-for-womens-rightsac1726236049utm_campaign=socialfow_jezebel_twitter&utm_source=jezebel_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
https://criticl.me/post/trumping-and-hyper-trending-how-we-are-hyper-trending-away-our-democracy-3804
LUX express
bag and balls of clay
Doing my ting in the suburb, LUX express
balls of clay in a bag, see what happens..
Valtakysymys on sukupuolikysymys
Kuka ottaa kunnian ja kenelle se kuuluu? Kunnia liitetään suuren taiteen ajatukseen, koska suuri taide kuvaa suuria asioita, elämää ja ihmisiä suuressa koossa mittavasti ja muhkeasti niin jotta tärykalvot tärisevät ja keho tytisee teatterin penkissä. Kuvataan ihmisiä jotka ovat tehneet kunniakkaita asioita. Kuvataan sotaa, herroja, ylimyksiä, johtajia, kunniakkaita asian miehiä ja naisia, ylevyyttä, mahtavuutta, ajatuksia jotka ovat muuttaneet maailmaa, muuttaneet jotakin suurta toisenlaiseksi suureksi, tunteita, menetystä, kuolemista, sankaritarinoita ja selviytymistä. Kun koko ja sukupuoli määrittelevät mikä on tärkeää jotakin olennaista jää pois ja se on taide jossa on muutakin kuin tarvetta pöyhistellä ja olla kaapin päällä. Kun haemme elämystä ja kunniakkuutta taiteen avulla on kyse samasta kuin maiden välisissä urheilukisoissa, voittamisesta. Kuka voittaa taiteessa ja mitä siinä voitetaan on näkyvyyttä ja asema. Taiteelliset ansiot voivat silti olla kovin ohuet. Kunniassa on kysymys koosta, uskottavuudesta, mitä voi piilottaa, jättää sanomatta, kuka häviää ja miten, kuinka olla kunniakas häviössä, mutta aina voittaa, aikuisuudesta joka tietää mitä kunnia on, kuinka kunnia saavutetaan, pidetään ja kuinka ollaan kunniakkaita loppuun asti ja sen jälkeen kun on kuollut. Miehellä on melkein itsestään selvästi kunnia, on kunnia olla mies. Naisen kunniaa täytyy suojella koska se on hauras ja helposti liattavissa ja nainen on vain osa miestä joten hänen kunniansa on muutenkin hiukan kyseenalainen. Kunniakasta on myös olla rikas, raha edustaa valtaa ja miehet ovat usein niitä joilla on enemmän rahaa kuin naisilla, puhun siis rahamiehistä jotka hyvin pitkälle johtavat maailmaa ja tiedämme myös millaisessa tilanteessa maailma on, miksi ja miten se on jamaansa syösty, mutta ilmeisesti tilannetta ei ole voitu välttää koska ihminen oppii vain erehdyksen kautta jos silloinkaan. Mitä pankkikriisiin tulee, meno taitaa jatkua samanlaisena sodista puhumattakaan.
Tähän aiheeseen pääsin kätevästi tiedosta että uusi Tuntemattoman sotilaan elokuvaversio ilmaantuu 2017 ulottuvillemme, ja kuinka ollakaan sillä on 7 miljoonan euron budjetti, suurin Suomessa koskaan. WOW! Ihan tulee jotakin mieleen mutta en viitsi kerrata miljoonatta kertaa mitä. Rahoitusmalli on olevinaan uusi jossa viisi miljoonaa on saatu yksityisiltä sijoittajilta ja loput toisaalta, säätiöiltä kuten Wihurin rahastosta. Yksityiset rahoittajat haluavat rahoilleen tuoton eli kuin päivä nousee Tuntematon sotilas on Suomessa varma nakki, varma tulon- ja huomionlähde siis, eepos joka jokaisen suomalaisen tulee nähdä ja myöskin usein televisiossa näyttää loputtomasti. Monta asiaa jotka pompsahtavat silmille kuin niin monessa muussa projektissa Suomen maassa yhä uudestaan. Yksityinen raha tulee miehiltä, suuret projektit ovat miesten, elokuvan tekijäkaarti on miehiä, sota on miesten jossa kuolevat myös lapset ja naiset, nuo sivulliset. Varma tuotto, varma kaato, varman päälle ja kättä päälle. Niin kaveripiirissä tätä ei ole sovittu ja suunniteltu vaan rahoittajat ovat kaveripiirin ulkopuolisia. Näin ainakin Helsingin Sanomien jutussa (19.8.2015) luvattiin. Mikään ei kuitenkaan yllätä kuin tuo varma yllätyksettömyys. Se on niin tasan satavarmaa että olen miettinyt mistä tämä maa saa energiansa jauhaa yhtä ja samaa ja pitää sitä maailman parhaimpana, mistä te löydätte tuon pöyhkeyden kuvitella että iänikuinen on hyvä ja sitä kannattaa kierrättää yhä uudestaan ja uudestaan? Suur-Suomi, suurin suomalainen sotilas, suurmies, suursota, suuri ohjaaja neropattimies.
Mitä taiteen tukemiseen tulee, tuoton varmistelemiseksi ei kannata tukea taidetta, tuottoa harvoin tulee miljoonittain paitsi tietysti varmoista nakeista, ehkä. Taidetta ei ensisijaisesti tehdä rahan takia. Jos raha on ensisijainen taiteentekemisen tarkoitus, voimme kysyä millaista laatua ja vastinetta saamme, miksi taidetta tarvitsemme ja teemme. Minulle on syntynyt kuva taiteen tukemisesta Suomessa, että tuetaan projekteja joista saada varmasti tuotos, tuote joka on markkinoitavissa ja myytävissä, koska kuinkas muuten se taidetta olisi eli luotetaan varmoihin tekijöihin eli nimiin jotka pääsevät esille. Alan ymmärtää miksi maan kulttuuri on jumissa ja taitaa olla sitä vielä melko kauan aikaa. Kun tuetaan taidetta tukijalla ei tule olla oma lehmä ojassa. Hollywoodin apinoiminen on ilmeisesti tullut jäädäkseen, koska täällä ollaan niin pieniä että on oltava mahtava, ettei näyttäisi niin pieneltä.
Holding on to entitlement. What can be called a minor human error?
Definitions by which we move on: we must know on what kind of ground we stand, what there is to know about the world around (we should be interested), we must define ourselves what is it that we can achieve as ourselves finding the best in ourselves, what we are compared to environment and other people and what we can do with knowing where we come from. We are defined by others for the same reasons, goals and looking for meaning; where those others stand in relation to us. Knowledge is the key to any entitlement, any relation and standing, at least this I hope. What do we know then? What kind of resource knowledge we have is and what kind of knowledge is available? Mission gets complicated when we begin to evaluate what is worth knowing, what do we want in the end and where do we move with the knowledge we have, what does it do to us and what do we do with it.
Something one is entitled to, to know, to learn, to speak, to work, to grow, to live, to breath, to feel, to move, to explore, to find, to lose, to sleep, to rest, to imagine, to invent, to play, to be a child, to be what one desires to be. What can we say we are entitled to are those mentioned and things people have to know themselves without putting anyone down but to lift up. When we feel entitled is when we enjoy having something, is it extra or is it because we are humans and therefore can and will? What is too much entitlement? We tend to take many things for granted, things which are granted to us as privileges in a world of crises and wealth distributed unequally but something we truly need like education, continuous schooling and work. We have an obligation to educate ourselves and our children, find a way to make a living and place of living. To say to have a life is to live a fulfilling life with joy and curiosity. How many can say that? We should be entitled to be able to feel joy, feel joy of living as we are privileged to be living this exact time on Earth. Still it seems to be difficult for many to be content, grateful and have feeling of joy for what one has. Is that the basic dilemma of human existence, discontent, unhappiness and emptiness? Not having enough ever or not having what that other person can have, not being able to be happy for someone else and not being able to be content for life as it appears to be.
Problem can be that one cannot let go of the old because it was the entitlement to that person, a possession, to let go and have others have the same entitlement and problem of sharing something good, especially material good, material comfort, not riches but security.
Art as political action: who is watching? Life as political action.
What does it mean to be an activist? It is actively force society to think itself again and again. What does it mean to be an artist and an activist; is there a difference and what can be the result?
Video of a panel discussion on net art, how art scene is a monitor itself that does not have access, does not grant access, does not allow flaws or understand meaning of flaws in doing art (this is my view, how academic and bourgeois point of view blocks away innovation and creativity by wanting to define all under titles, authority and labels), what kind of language art has, is suppose to be, who can create, is a creator, who understands art and why there can be a kind of one way to understand.
Fear of missing out? Missing out of what? Left out of stream, active openness? What is open for us, from where we are out or in?
We can again ask who is an artist (it is the one who says so), who is recognized as an artist and an activist? The one who leaves a mark (visible or invisible, conscious or unconscious? Acknowledge or unacknowledged?) What do these labels, statuses, professions tell and where do they place us?
I see that social media challenges all of what has been seen and monotonously legitimized as art, who is seen an artist, what is art, art as a based continuation to art tradition and what the scene is and is seen as forming the inside and outside.
COMPENSATION FOR EFFORT