Immorality, the rule, rather than an exception.

It could be an interesting topic to go through how morals should be and are applied in art. Does high morals or more over lack of have anything to do with the current state of the art world? Current state being rampant sexism, discrimination, favoring of gentrification and institutionalized art and institutionalized look on art, favoring of famous and named artists on the expense of quality, progress, variety and multi-layered culture, on the expense of perspective to different kinds of realities. Art is generally seen as something pure requiring skill and talent, intellect and ability to think outside the box. Art is or should be allowed to push boundaries of proper, art officials and personnel do not take the part of the artist in this. They do not bend moral rules, break the law or do hazy business within art to benefit themselves and institutions which are to serve art and doing so serve the public. To stay on the level of politics where many decisions concerning art projects are made seems to be usual and practices of business are applied to art where artists must behave and act as businessmen, this often means morals of business become morals in art. What does this do to art displayed one can ask, or one way to look at the dilemma is to wonder how big money affects art and the art scene, where the interest lies? Politics and power which stay interested in art as a tool and means of propaganda, art as honey for tourists, tourists bringing income and prosperity. We can be of many opinions about trustworthiness of politicians and art projects connected tightly with political decision-making and aims do not look that pure, intentions stay on surface and art functions like plaster changing nothing there where change is necessary. That is in how deals and projects are dealt with, to decorate. What are the main motives for investing in art and how much those motives matter in the big picture, in the picture of art playing the part adding more than statues and grand museums? History of art is history of power silencing others placing proper ones on pedestal, mostly white males with connections.

What is interesting and impressive aesthetically must it be observed and looked via morals? Why something which is morally right is also right in art? Because art is used as object of power it essentially has to have high morale to stand on and will of its own which cannot be twisted to serve those who use finance and power in society. Morals refers to good and right and immoral is without morals even one without morals is making choices which demand judgment and thinking of how and why. Conflict in art context occurs when it is giving assumptions on art standing firmly on the right and good and therefore those who make art are admirable knowledgeable wise men and women to whom people can turn to and be given comfort, shown beauty and told tales of morally high aims or of low ones. Ethics is one of the most important issues art deals with and when art is not done ethically it loses its credibility. This applies to institutions, to those who work in art and for art, who say art does good and is good for all. Then we can start talking about what is good art, valuable and meaningful art, where lies value in art. It is the same asking what are good deeds and what are bad ones, what is gained with those deeds may tell something of the value of those deeds.

 

History of power: Guerilla girls tell

 

I heard the little bird sing.

 

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Morals at conflict, or is it interests? How much do we bend our morals to get what we want?

What is morally right? Who gets to decide right and wrong? Is somebody else’s right more right than mine and which qualities define authority in this matter? Do we have universal understanding of right and wrong? Do morals and ethics have to be taught as I think absolutely yes, or do we understand what can and cannot be done since early on? Perhaps it is more than clear our ideas of wrong and right, truth and justice differ substantially all over the world. Education has an important role as do gender roles and religion. How a well-functioning equal society is made has got a recipe.

Difficulties to understand and accept each other can be unbearable and challenging inside one culture, among people who speak the same language, live in same country. We can be of same nationality but we do not speak the same language in the sense that we can be of different class, different background, opposite sex, different age, have different scale of education and knowledge over the world etc. Differences there are between people can make us disabled in regard of what comes to communicating and understanding each other, agreeing or not, respecting differing opinions and world views, accepting and wanting or not to understand the other point of view, other kind of experience. To be able to see another kind of perspective one has to have will to understand and listen, that requires humility and admitting value of that other to be heard and be regarded as worthy. This has to do with morals quite a lot. It requires will to do good for someone else and be compassionate. From where we come from dictates big part of how we see right and wrong and what one can do about one’s situation and how to operate in society. What kind of culture of morals, lack of morals, category of morals, hierarchy, nuances there are and are they understood in the same fashion, what kinds of choices people make around to cope, survive and live and how those choices affect one’s life and lives of others. Is there disrespect towards correct respectful ways of interacting, is there honor in doing right which benefits many instead of few? Is it more a rule to find short cuts, lie, cheat, steal, hide the truth, the mishandled. To have society which is accountable and responsible for the people is more likely to grow people who are accountable and responsible, this is my claim, not far from truth. Importance of showing that society takes care of all its citizens is crucial, that society is for the people and the nation is a home where it is safe to live and prosper. Knowing builds trust and hope that politicians and officials do as they say, are working for the people and not for themselves, that promises are kept, laws are obeyed, rich are on the same line when it comes to finding justice.

Morals spring out from many things we grow accustomed to knowing, seeing, witnessing and experiencing, how relations between people function, how society works, how do we get by, how well society acknowledges that it is good to do things well, that there is honor in honesty, in such a manner wide-spread honesty and trustworthiness that all of society benefits. That it is morally right that inequality is cut down to minimum, corruption is not a good way for administration or government to function, that those officials citizens should be able to trust do their work lawfully, obediently and with backbone knowing that their work is important part of keeping society less criminal, less corrupted.

Modern feminism seeks equality with men. But in a dysfunctional society, that is nowhere near enough https://aeon.co/essays/feminists-should-not-be-content-with-mere-equality

Candyland

 

I like to think non-place is a place where people have to visit or live where they voluntarily don’t wish to.

Place is experienced emotionally and with our senses, partly made personally, one by one individually, place existing on personal and on public level within human reason and randomness for human activity and always with nature, in harmony or in disharmony. Places for lives of people to function for our benefit, we sensing, using, monitoring, analyzing places we go to, we like and dislike, live at, walk through, work at, see, avoid via movement, need and human consciousness we connect or disconnect with places. We have a need to make our marks to places we visit to show that we have been there or take marks or pieces from places, out of/from places with us to remember and prove having been. Imagining a place and experiencing, remembering, reliving, becoming part of a place, making an emotional connection/contact to a place and what that place is all about, what this place means to you, is for and why are you thinking about it, going there, staying there, why are we where we are and what kind of things do we pay attention to in a place, what make places of ours on emotional level, in negative and positive way. Can we own a place in negative sense, feel that it is ours and be part of that ugliness, belong there making something new out of filth, that an ugly place is part of us in all its ugliness, uselessness, coldness, disconnectedness and powerlessness? Is a desire of making a non-place connected to our need of making an impression of what we are, to show strength in despair, despite despair, what we long for but fail trying to forget what we are not, or is non-place made to not be used as we try to be useful and seem effective but be abandoned to remind us how alone and desperate we are? We want to impress by being at a luxurious place, beautiful and rare, difficult to reach, expensive and extraordinary and by doing so state the wonderfulness and specialty of ours but still it is only the surface of things when it is to show off and a place is an extension to our personality and identity as part of us but better than most.

http://www.dezeen.com/2016/03/09/interview-sophie-flinder-refugee-camp-calais-france-jungle-architects-planners/

The Origin of the Species

Did we see her get banged?

Did we see her get banged?

Did we see her vagina?

Did we see her vagina?