Kirjat värien mukaan

mitä vanhempia kellastuneemmin sivuin
valon värjäämät kaiken mahdollisen mihin UV pystyy
Sormin joilla söit kastiketta ja riisiä, katselin kun
ja ajattelin että,
tarvitsen kriisin tehdäkseni tehdäkseni tämän sen nämä
tarvitsen sotkeutuneet sormesi kämmenesi paperin johon pyyhit viiksesi ja hörähdät
koiran humalaisen takki auki ilman rintakarvoja, kysymykset, kuinka monta enkeliä mahtuu nuppineulaan ja miksi ne ovat siellä? Valehtelijan joka ei soimaa itseään vaan nauraa mielensä pahoittaneen
numeron-ei mitään asiaa
pullistukset takkien selkämyksissä joissakin kilpailuissa oman hyminäni kun kuljen
kun muut kuulevat
muistikirjani etten unohtaisi ja taas tunnen tylsyyden
jatkuvan muutoksen
minun on vaihdettava suuntaa pyörähdettävä kaaduttava nukuttava
sama uni kaksi kertaa
oltava töykeä kostettava kaadettava kuuma juoma syliin ja pöydälle
hävettävä lyötävä itseäni voitava pahoin
että olisin
naurettava että
kuljettava ympyrää ja pyyhittävä se pois.

Responsibility issues what comes to speaking, what is an attack and what can be tolerated: a personal take on communication between humans. Speaking is a performance.

We evaluate each other for how we speak. What do you say of that person over there, what do you say of yourself and what is the world like in your speech. What kind of content you produce, what kinds of pauses there are, phrases, language, style, what kind of text is produced and is thought through, what comes out when we speak, in what kind of voice. What does a voice do: it scares, threatens, is too silent or has found the perfect balance. Voice has to be firm and loud enough. It has to reassure the listener, but not too much noise please. Too much is a threat and tone of voice in which we speak has a meaning. Sometimes one has suppressed one’s voice that shouting may be the only way to express and make a sound, which has made me wonder the sensitiveness of how we must police our levels of voice. It is curious that to find a voice one can find it by raising one’s voice, by shouting. It scares people, so do it alone or in a group who understand your quest of finding a voice. The evaluation happens instantly and our conceptions of the speaker influence a great deal, what we expect of hearing, what do we think the speaker means and what do we think of the speaker. How open can we be towards someone else’s message and what does openness mean, is it that we agree to listen. Reactions are the ones we are hoping to get. We are open to listen, make note and respect or just pass? In how many ways can the spoken be understood is the same as how many ways can the nonverbal be understood? What are the things that interest us in a speaker, why is she or he appealing to us and what are the things we pay attention to in anyone? It is safer to blend in, go with flow, try not to irritate. To disagree can be daring nowadays. We must have a personal interest of some kind and we like to think the personal is correct, true and something to guard.

I have always been pointed out that I don’t speak enough which has clearly been a flaw. As a child I barely spoke at all. In terms of speaking, it is interesting to use myself as an example. Pretty girl does not speak, she just looks pretty. That can be a task that is enough. When women and girls speak out their minds, it may come as a shock. Since now I speak whatever I feel best, I also like to provoke and enjoy havoc caused, but it does not mean I would not mean what I say, I just speak my mind without censoring myself. If people’s ways of thinking get disturbed, I am thrilled to see what happens. Silence is a place of an observer, but it also is accepting one’s place and the place is not defined only by you, but you yourself remain evaluated nevertheless. Silence is a place of hiding, of suspicion, that there is something wrong with that person or there is nothing to say. Silence can be taken in many ways, what it means, so why not ask rather than make up something coloured and biased. Silence is appreciated in Finland and it is a weird mix of inability to talk and enjoying silence, not being bothered by it, but still many are. I can be very silent which for many strikes as scary and odd. Talking is the way for us to express ourselves, self-evidently, just like that, bluntly or very considerately. It is a matter of credibility, fun, entertainment, socialising and status, often that clearly is not speaking like it mattered, but as if there are compulsive reasons to produce speech to avoid feelings of emptiness, loneliness and feeling of being left out, for example.. It is not enough that you speak, you have to speak of right, accepted issues in a right accepted way, which when problematic is avoided, can begin to feel like a straitjacket and going round in circles. Why do I have to follow this system and rules of speech and why fear is something one feels.

In a crowd of only men, it is weird to speak as the only woman. You stick out. In a crowd of working class (or not-so-much-educated people), one with education sticks out. It is even worse when you are a woman. What kind of issues concern me, what can I say in the end? Well I avoid the personal and like to concentrate on social and political issues, art and what else is there than the self..Female voice is an interesting one, what comes out of that mouth, what is it worth and what does it tell of a person. Blame there is is an interesting issue to take under microscope, as it exist in a way of a power tool. People like to invent things, analyse, read the person, often wrong. The person who does not take part in conventional manner, disagrees strongly or stays an outsider must be labelled. It is a place of constantly fighting against bias and wrong information. You have not tried enough to claim your place which place is claimed by claiming respect and there are rules. How do we get respect, what do we have to do and what do we have to be like to be worthy? How much respect is worth having in a lookalike world that seeks to be liked? It has always been a wonder to me as respect falls on others and escapes some of us. It is about system of values and changing that system of thinking.

When young, I found it so that my speech was meaningless, because of my age and because of my gender. I didn’t have a voice, I was invisible, but I existed, which is a place for artistry to come out. I found value in being a freak and a language I could speak. Those who do not speak, are stupid is the very often felt judgment, which is weird in a country that values silence. Today in cacophony of talk, those who are silent, seem to be a blessing. Everyone has an opinion and has to voice it. It is a very straightforward method which we call social. Again those who make the most noise are the most noticed and listened to people. My way of staying outside feels natural to me, although it is odd for most people. I have not participated in the ways people usually participate and engage, still I don’t think of myself as anti-social, quite the contrary. Silence is serious and not so much fun…Your fun is not mine either.

In human relations one’s space has to be taken, it is not given. When one is not interested in spaces that exists to be social, one should still try and engage, it sounds like a problem and an effort. Now that I don’t hesitate to speak, I speak of wrong issues and have wrong kind of opinions. Human relations and codes of communication are somewhat interesting, difficult to master, especially jumping to conclusion strikes me. It is so easy, so please try to avoid, if you can. You have to know human way of thinking to use communication skills correctly, that is social, but it is also manipulation. It is about psychology and authenticity, or ability to look like authentic and reliable. It is about learning ways of communicating, the correct ways, knowing how people think and what are one’s own goals, because there are always personal gains. I laugh too loudly, it is a flaw. I shout out when everybody else is quiet, it is weird. I think I like myself. lmfao


Mulla oli naapuri nimeltään Eila. Olin lapsi, Eila oli vanhempi nainen ja katselin yhtenä päivänä parvekkeelta keinuja,

nurmikkoa ja Eilaa. Hän oli pessyt pyykit, jotka olivat kaikki vaaleanpunaisia. Väri korostui nurmea vasten. Hän levitti pyykkejänsä ruoholle ja jätti itselleen kolon keskelle.

Maatessaan kolossaan, hän nauroi, katketakseen, ja kieriskeli kyljeltä toiselle.

Eila on mulla toisinaan mielessä, aivan kuin tuo olisi tapahtunut eilen. Onneksi kukaan ei soittanut poliisia paikalle, onneksi, koska näkymäni on arvokas, ja sen voisi joku varastaa.


It is a fairytale kind of spectacle or anti-spectacle in a spectacle, if that is a thing. Anti-spectacle in the sense of changing of the perspective towards gender, class, work and art, romantic is the spectacle, a pattern we expect. The spectacle we are used to seeing and thinking in terms of movies and in general how class, work, gender and art function and are, are thought to represent and be like. The American dream in this case where a beautiful young woman reaches out for her dream, a place in the sun and ends up getting more or ‘all’, a romantic relationship with a Man with a Porsche, who is also the owner of the factory where Alexandra, the woman in question, works at as a welder. One big plus of the movie is it does not highlight the work Alexandra does, welding is just work with men as co-workers, it makes the movie hugely more interesting though, and her the one who lives outside the box and is allowed to do so. She is not harassed by her co-workers, her abilities are not questioned. It is truly a beautiful setting, which her choice of work, most definitely would be seen weird still today.

To explore deeper into what the movie is all about is worth our while as it has been deeply overlooked as many romantic movies that are meant for women usually are. To pay attention to details, characters, camera shots, what is being looked at and told via tensions between women and men and why those tensions exist. What happens between the sexes, between women especially, what are sexes both expected to do, look and be like. Movie is a language as is dance as is sex, sexuality, clothing and gender. You have to focus on to read it all and actually think what are we looking at, what happens there and why all the time. It is not just an entertaining show where you can relax and forget what is going on, this is told via contrasts between sleazy bars, working men and art, how women are treated in different settings and how these settings differ, how women want to be treated and what do they desire of their lives to be. Movie is never just a movie that is meant to entertain, not even those that are made for that purpose, nor is music or the dance acts that seem to be out of place. Point is easily missed when the romantic is what stays interesting and in the focus.

In a bar where ambitious fit and talented dancers show their art, act for paying customers who are watching and are a bit amazed by the unexpected shows. Contrast is also to the other bar where dancing is not the primary interest of anyone, only nude female bodies, that move in a certain way. Women are dancing for money but in a show-your-ass-kind of way, but they still want to be discovered and dream of making it. What are people watching and why, who gets attention? Watching happens for instant gratification, simplicity of getting pleasure cheap and for fun. A bar is a world of something else than the workplace and not a place of thought, burdening oneself. Customers of the bar are not the assumed ordinary art lovers, but that is the point. Why should people be provoked to think more than is necessary, why not give them what they want? To whom is art for and why is it a class issue? What is art and where is art, who is capable of art and why it is a special occasion in a special place? High and low seem to be repulsed by each other, classes stay separated  like oil and water. The dance acts, art and artists, are really in the right place. Intention of the movie is not to depict a straightforward story in a manner of this is what happens: this is what we dream of happening to us. It is not a children’s story and it is not pink. It seems light, but is heavier when one starts exploring. That are the expectations and frame women are supposed to fit in, want, act upon and are shown in the movie, that those who dare, can change the game. There is social critique hidden there to be found.

To say Flashdance is a feminist movie is not quite what a true movie lover might expect. What do you think about the turn, that a seemingly light Hollywood movie is feminist in a very kick-ass way and about the structural difficult issue of choosing how to get ahead in life, on one’s own terms and talent, and not sleeping with the boss or buddy who has connections. What do you think about when after having seen and evaluated for example the scene where Alexandra goes and finds her friend who has gone to work as a stripper, moving herself in conventional stripper manner, she is grabbed off the stage by Alexandra and escorted out. In the scene Alexandra’s clothing and standing position compared to her friend tell a lot when friend the stripper ends up in a puddle on street wearing only panties and high heels and is cold. Money, she earned gets wet in the rain on the pavement. Alexandra’s loose pants and sneakers when she stands firmly behind the naked woman who has fallen down and sold her body for money to please men may seem easy and naive, but it is something very basic, a woman on the ground beaten down feeling there is no other opportunity for her.

After having read couple of critiques about the movie and clearly many have missed the point: When one is an art critic it is essential to see behind the expected, the image and be free of bias. What is the seen image telling us, what happens without words, what is the setting and who are the characters, what do they do. Do you need more clues, because explaining has to be done also in a very basic manner, obviously also for critics. When you are an art critic, don’t fall for the simple clichés. Such poor analysis destroys a lot, as does arrogance, assumptions and cynicism. Minimizing culture that is aimed at and is about women and girls is a normal practice. It is a learned reaction which comes without thinking. A black woman eating a banana in a scene where women talk about relationships, well sounds as cliché as anything, but it happens in couple of seconds, and is easily missed, but telling. To make it as you with your raw capabilities, without handouts and favours..

Flashdance, is a feminist movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashdance in which woman does work as a welder and pursues her dream to become a professional dancer, also in which women help each other, face sexual harassment and deal with it by acting out, consequences lurking there and threat of violence is almost a certainty. To oppose men means you have to be one and be prepared. Movie portrays different kinds of female roles, a gallery of different kinds of women. The expectations of what women should be like, playing with stereotypes with which women struggle and hold on to as coping mechanisms. They may be afraid to go against the machine or don’t know how to or should they, and those who do not fit in the accepted roles especially, seem to be out of sync or do what they need to do despite whatever. Interesting are the different kinds of female characters there, how there are systematic learned rules of behaviour that stick, codes for genders and how these codes are taken for granted. How women portrayed are in their places and obviously struggle and lack power. They try to move on up as do men, they have dreams. Men try to move inside women’s panties and sex is clearly a very basic tool of control and making it. It is the first thought, easy way out, a getaway car and motive. World of art is a dusty stagnant relic too, which needs heavy dusting. Alex, the leading women, is afraid to enter this monument of perfected trained fragile-looking fairy-like ballerinas and primadonnas. She want’s to make it on her own with her own credentials with her talent and does not need a man to do that for her.

Real life is stranger than fiction says this welder.


I have a friend who has a simple test for a movie: Is this movie as interesting as the same things would be, happening in real life? A lot of movies aren’t, and “Flashdance” sure isn’t. If this movie had spent just a little more effort getting to know the heroine of its story, and a little less time trying to rip off “Saturday Night Fever,” it might have been a much better film.”




Reviews and critiques strongly reflect the persona of the critic who is writing. For some reason in this case feminist perspective does not shine through. Wonder why.


Cheyenne ja vessaseksi lentokoneessa, nouseva tähti. Kaikki tässä on kasvainta isoon valtimoon saakka. Hän kovertaa kasvainta pala palalta. Mitä lähemmäksi aivorunkoa liikutaan, sitä suuremmiksi riskit kasvavat. Kuinka isoja riskejä olet valmis ottamaan?

Upeita maisemia, parhaat matkat 2017,
Karibia, Napoli, Azorit, New York, Wales,
safarille sitruunapuiden ja pastellitalojen saarelle.
Syö, nuku ja shoppaa.
Mikä kiehtova pikku olento,
mitkä kiehtovat muodot, mikä kiehtova ihminen, kuvia, valoa, hoitoja, hallittuja muotoja, muodottomuus on leijumista, hillittyjä sävyjä, keveyttä, tajuttomuutta, hartautta ja ekstaasia etsien, etsimistä, jostakin normaalista lopulta rauhan löytämistä ja hauskasta onnistumisen tunteita, ja olet kuin syntynyt onnellisten tähtien alla, koska olet paras sinä juuri nyt. Kaikki on hyvin nyt, ei hätää, hengitä syvään. Se miten meitä pidetään elossa mielikuvin, onko se oikein sanottu, meillä on etappeja joita kohti pyrkiä ja sitten pettyä kun ei saavuta, ja kuinka haluta, on elää, kuinka elää ja mikä on se juttu. Kun ei ole halua, ei ole elossa. On tunnettava samuus ja saavutus.
Kuvaillaan perusteellisesti sitten kun olemme viisaampia, se mitä tuli.

Olen supermegagiganttisademetsässä pommien pudotessa oksilta puista kuin hedelmiä rikkoen ympäristön montuiksi. Rikkooko seksipommi liiton?
Tee minusta saksanhirviuros, tee minut ihmiseksi, tee minut onnelliseksi. Miten sinä teet minut?
Kuinka resonoit näihin pamahduksiin, viriileihin miehiin, mataliin ääniin, ennakoimattomuuteen, helppouteen. Pari senttiä pitkä ja painaa painaa pari sataa grammaa: miten löytää parhaiten ääntelevä koiras tässä kakofoniassa? Miksi robotti? Hyvä kysymys. Onko se helppo, onko se kiva? Naaras ei voi vastustaa roboa. Hyi, sairasta. Naaras yhdisti äänen ja visuaalisen ärsykkeen. Äänipussi laajenee samaan tahtiin äänen kanssa. Nyt puhutaan sammakoista. Naaras muutti mieltään. Läheltä piti. Se etsii seksikkään äänen lähdettä. Harvinaisen epätoivoista rakkautta, mutta epätoivo ja töksähtely on normaalia.

Kohtaa aggressiivisen uroksen Temptation Islandilla dum. Hän pitää katseen tiukasti kiinni uroksessa, Suomen hottikset. Satoja tunteja videokuvaa, materiaalia miten nämä eläimet viestivät toisilleen. Alfauros ja toinen naaras pohtivat valon kieltä. Mikä on sen lämpötila? Uros raapii itseään todella komeasti ja innokkaasti. Otsan ravistaminen on kutsu: minä todella haluan olla kanssasi. Pian parivaljakko katoaa jonnekin pariksi viikoksi ja myöhemmin selviää, että naaras on raskaana.

Voisitko sukia minua? Koiras vastasi ja naaras vastasi, väläytän sille. Naaras on kranttu, mutta suostuu. Tunnen koiraan tuskan, tytöt ovat vaikeita miellyttää. Meillä on koko ajan ollut yhteinen kieli. Kiiltomatojen parittelu, naaraat ja koiraat käyvät valoin dialogia keskenään. Valoilla on siis kysymys vain parittelusta. Jokaisella lajilla on oma valokuvionsa. Pelkästään tällä niityllä on viisi eri lajia. Aivan kuin olisi lentokentällä, monimutkaiset soidintanssit.


Kaikki tai ei mitään

Liikkumattomuus vaivaa, pysähtyneisyys vaivaannuttaa. Niin, ja äly. Ihmisten järki ja mi-mitä siitä on jäljellä. Älyn moninaiset ilmenemismuodot eivät pääse oikeuksiinsa, on niin paljon epäilyä, hierarkkisia asetelmia, pätemistä, liikettä, businessta, ihmisiä jotka ihmettelevät toisiansa eivätkä ymmärrä luultavasti itseäänkään.

Kun ihmisen mieli on niin monimutkainen ja kuitenkin tahdomme yksinkertaistaa sen? Vai onko tuo yksinkertaistaminen välttämätöntä jonkunlaisen samuuden, yhdenmielisyyden ja käsittämisen saavuttamiseksi? Että on olemassa outoja, helvetin kummallisia ja outoja, joita ihmismieli tekee, tai siis saa ihmiset tekemään käsittämättömiä, ja joiden kaikkien edellä mainittujen välttäminen on välttämätöntä jotta järjestys ja yhteinen ymmärrys säilyisi. Ensin täytyy määrittää outo. Käytös joka ei ole soveliasta, iankaikkinen samanlaisuus johon ei mahdu, mutta on puserruttava siihen.