To be afraid of falling off the edge, of being left outside, any kind of fear there may be that is terrifying and paralyzing. If one is not aware that being afraid is one of the most central issues to grab and learn to know why and what it is all about.

8 toukokuun, 201627 helmikuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

Fear for a woman and for a child is an everyday issue. We must be careful because there are dangers but we cannot live in fear. Danger is a sharp edge, falling down, sudden accident, a crash, an explosion, an attack, a stalker, a stranger, unknown, losing honor. Where are they those who threaten, what are they, those scary monsters, threatening future prospects, masked and armed enemies who hate? A black cloud, radiation, cancer, illness, losing one’s mind, losing friends, losing a job, losing hope, losing everything there is to lose. Fear in media fed to us is there for a reason, fear the emotion is dictating largely how we act and react, what we see and don’t see, how we feel and are allowed to feel. What happens next, what should we think and do. What are we afraid of and why, there is the safe inside space and the unsafe outside space, there is fear of life unlived, fear of death, fear of shame, being shamed and ashamed, fear of hurt, of losing, being forgotten and left aside, stomped down. There are so many ways to be afraid, how we keep silent, go with the crowd, tremble, stumble, stutter, shiver, feel frozen of fear, panic, scream, try to escape, run, go out of breath, don’t want to face the things that frighten us, how we show fear we must not show but we sweat, how we inflict fear, spread fear and terror, keep people in fear for their lives because everything is uncertain. To rule with fear is to bring horror for your people. One can be fearless when one is tired of being afraid, constant fearing does not make things change, to be brave and do whatever you think you can you should do, maybe little hesitant thinking what will others think, what will be thought of me when I do this, fear of being judged and abandoned, labelled, bullied. Can we smell fear?

Frozen Barbie: when empowered by looks your power is your looks your appearance. What kind of power is that?

24 huhtikuun, 201613 maaliskuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

What kind of looks is empowering? We can imagine that, it is something that impresses one way or another. It can be a uniform kind of look, overly feminine, overly masculine, something that is controlled but emphasized toned exaggerated, arrogant, vulgar and self-assured, confident to the maximum. It is giving a power feeling and instant impression of size, message and direction. That one feels one has got power to seduce and influence with one’s posture, habitus, body form, color, age, presence, things that chosen and are shown, bare or hidden skin, that we pay attention to as sexy, appealing, that we notice as interesting. The visual of a woman is that she is sexual, she has as a cultural and biological being and construct a complex relationship to sexuality and sex, how is she showing and manifesting her sexuality and is it her decision. She is sexualized plainly because she is a woman or a girl, mostly she can’t own and control her sexuality, define it or use it for her own ends.

Importance is on the visual of a woman because body is a turn on or off, it is her. An object of desire with subject attached to. Face being the key to that person who is an image and product. Sexuality is a play with roles, status, hierarchy, reality and illusion, it is to be liked and loved, accepted. That she is the kind to be liked and loved, maybe as a whole person, as the same as she looks, someone who is by definition beautiful on the outside is on the inside the same beautiful and whole, important. She is complimented for her looks first. Is the first thought of her always how she looks? That is the first thing women experience, are seen, talked about, are expected to be, beautiful and via that beauty be worthy of noticing and appreciation. Basically there is nothing wrong with the habit of telling people how good they look, when they have seen the effort and want to impress via looks. To be impressed by appearance is what happens instantly, we like or we do not. It is possibly never a neutral issue.

Iconic beauty queen and an image but she is a living person who says she is in control of what she does, how she performs and what she shows of herself. Someone who makes her living via her appearance selling her looks to be printed on ads and magazines, on the internet for all who wish this kind of content and get a thrill over it, a positive one. What is the positive here, the empowerment which is the abusing of people desires, insecurities, abusing the space for something selfish. What is it we are watching, what is it we have? What is the interest there other than sex? Our need to look at beautiful people empowers those who have the need to be looked at, admired for their looks, told how good-looking they are. Does empowerment move the other direction as well as beautiful people are idols for very big part because of their beauty?

Empowerment is born via attention, a rush and energetic turn on, highly sexual experience, perverted and natural. The flow of images of people and fame that may follow, dreams of fame, possibility of fortune, getting inside a jet set, becoming popular, comments given, all kinds of comments that feed the fame, outrage, hate, dislike, criticism, especially the negative emotional, irrational and rational outbursts of reactions, story of a person which is a picture, story which grows as the fame grows bigger. She and he who are gazed, compared, envied, copied, imitated, desired, put as posters on walls exploding the internet. Human form of perfection which for the eye is symmetrical and appealing, as I analyse the mediocre hyped human form that is placed on highest peak of our attention, to catch our attention. Constant policing as contrast, in comparison shaming of her means she is oppressed, oppressed on so many levels it is almost impossible to break the wall of bias and expectation of what a girl and woman are supposed to be and do. To be in control is not care of thoughts and comment. Permanent state of chauvinism and sexism infiltrated stay set as model for all which is understood by all, things seen as funny, harmless kept alive and going because it is impossibly tight grown, stuck and glued on us, and we wonder anything and anyone who does not want the same.

What does it mean to be leftist? Calling of names or values?

4 huhtikuun, 201628 helmikuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

What does it mean when somebody calls you a cultural Marxist in the meaning of you are an enemy of your people and common good? It is devastating and incorrect. To be leftist is never against people nor common good. If that is what leftists do, they are doing wrong. To be called an enemy is something communists, Marxists and all defined on the left more or less usually encounter. It is no surprise since deep division between political parties and views grows the more unstable world becomes, the more violent the world gets. To set an enemy for yourself, to those whom you represent with your world view and values in real life or only in your imagination seems to be a basic method of choosing sides which method is to create imbalance, argument, reality and more division there already is. Who is against you, against your political views, plans, what there is to get, your values, your safety and position is your enemy in this conversation and game, real and virtual, where winners are the most loudest bullies who have the nerve and attitude to crush anyone who is in their way. To be leftist artist can mean that to work in the industry successfully one has to bend one’s principles and values, professional field which is politically on the right which people working in arts do not like to admit, may even deny any political inclinations and sympathy. It is so that many philosophers discussed within arts heavily question fascist ideas and way of life, what is right and where to stand. You can be in the mist and not know what is what, think and say the other, do completely different. It is confusing, as it seems. Can business ever be leftist? If one is willing to compromise in a field where pretending is a rule and setting the mood and image right are more important than what lies behind, more important than standing behind values such as human rights, worker rights and intellectual progress, intellectual integrity, one can succeed especially financially. To be leftist who stands behind what is right it means one has to be vocal about issues, give straightforward criticism to those who may not want it but desperately need it and object to fascist progress of thinking and rock the fascist state of things which is manipulative, conservative, greedy, hindering progress rather than supporting it, exclusive, arrogant and hierarchical. Left means all what is said and done must stand the light of day and all things said and done are done within the frame of good for all, for all people. Everything is political whether you deny it or not, despite of you.

To me leftist is uncompromising when truth must be found. Left is against fascism. It is never fascist. It is against exploitation, abuse, manipulation, oppression and rule of money. It does not get intoxicated by power. Being visibly leftist on social media has appeared to be similar as being feminist. One is immediately labelled difficult and against something that left is not against in the first place. There are strict pools for right and left and far-right is a clear bully who likes to label those it calls enemies. To be leftist means sticking to one’s ideals and speaking out despite bullies, trolls, haters and gamers who throw dirt, threaten and shame without second thought because there is this enemy side to which all human right activists for some reason belong. There is strict division between those who seek common good and peace and those who look for causing harm and gaining benefit for themselves, self-interest and loathing belong together.

It is a strange battle in which knowing definitions most strongly defend radical change despite the thrashing of the name Marx and all of the left. From where things originate is essential to learn. Names and definitions are the ones that get thrown at you mostly by people who do not know better. Marxist is the swear word to many. Marxism an ideology a curse to be abolished. Maybe it is enough a reason to be a Marxist. Misunderstanding, that happened in the past, still defines Marxism which is as it happened more against the people and justice having created inequality that it was not to do. Was Marxism invented by Marx himself? By the outcome definitely not. What does Marxism mean, when it can be manipulated to be fascist? Merely that there are flaws in the philosophy or how it is understood poorly or not at all, definitely there have been and are flaws in the conventions of governing and implementing ideas as they are without manipulating them. Origins of hate, names, ideas and wars win and spin, what and who wins? When rulers get rich but people do not the state of things is not on the left, maybe looking in the direction of the left as it is deported to concentration camps and prisons silenced and bullied. To be leftist means knowing the roots and meanings of terms and ideas used. Terminology is a battle field, ammunition, accusation and fault as is history. History is a sledgehammer but we do not learn from it. To know who stands on the right and defends right causes one has to listen what people talk, also listen to those with whom you do not agree. Marxism and communism having had the heavy load of atrocities, misuse and abuse, massacres, lies, exploitation of philosophy and ideas invented to make revolution of labor, of working people and human rights does not mean the essential ideas are useless, they have been implemented in wrong ways. Why are thoughts that were made to give power to those who do not have power, to those who are powerless without means to rise up, deemed bad and corrupt?

Crowds will have power when they learn to know how to use power of theirs collectively and correctly for good building peaceful society. What are those teachings and how does learning happen collectively? What is the corrupt part, I wonder. Where does it, a movement, a revolution, go corrupt and why working class should not have similar rights as the bourgeoisie, depending what those rights are? Enemy today is the venomous history remembered as a heavy book, a burden which it is. History which easily repeats the fire and force of Marxism used poorly and violently against those whom it is supposed to help. The heavy book forgotten because it is too long to study. Socialism and communism do appeal to those who are the most oppressed and may look for vengeance seeking their power which has been lost. To be wise with the power of working class can be found, reason is there when one does not give power to hate. Change can be hopelessly total destruction even compared to reality experienced and escaped, complete turnover is lethal when there is lack of compassion and knowledge. Subtle voluntary change exercised by all willingly sounds like a dream. It means there shall not be any politicians who would seek absolute power. Social reform does not happen quickly in places where there is no history of power of the working people used for them and by them.

Where rulers slaughter people of their own and are intoxicated by power philosophers are merely hammers in use to justify deeds done in the name of working people and freedom. It is a complicated question what left is today because it is without teeth in front of unemployment, corruption, chaos in the Middle East and future looking somewhat threatening.

Political left is seeking profound change in Europe as it is broken and divided instead of being united. Prejudice and stigma that there hovers above seems propaganda and something people who still think like it is the 1990s like to keep alive. The very basis of left still remains for those who stand on the side of protecting instead of destroying: human value exists without ownership, without money, money is not the ultimate measure of life, possession does not tell of human value, people live and must be allowed to live free and in peace regardless of the circumstances they come from and their background, regardless of status, wealth, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, political views and occupation. It is at its core an aim to provide good living for all, a political ideology about sharing wealth in a way that there would not be handful of people who are enormously rich and there would not be a mass of poor people who cannot rise up because they are so poor and would be slaves to those who own the most of wealth and means to produce basic products, means to provide work, means to influence in politics and have power in decision-making. That there would not be poverty where there are no means to help oneself to rise up the ladder. Society cannot be set sustainably in a way that those who are the most well-off will survive and flourish because of their gained wealth and only those would prosper. If to make it would be and is so difficult in most of the world leftism has got work to do. When the only way to get ahead is that one should be equipped to fit and have wealth world will not be stable, people will not have stable healthy views on society and what being a human today is. Society that expects certain things of success, those who succeed have succeeded in advance, loses something important something that we cannot anticipate but will regret. It is variety, surprise and innovation that does not appear because of wealth but despite it. For all there must be tools to reach out for their dreams and succeed in life.

The postmodern left and the success of neoliberalism

http://linkis.com/libcom.org/library/y9N9i

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/g2689/most-powerful-photos/?slide=50

Canadian university partners with foreign mining firm and its checkered, colonialist legacy

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/campus-notes/2016/03/canadian-university-partners-foreign-mining-firm-and-its-checker?utm_content=bufferca185&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Art hires bullies and incompetence: my well-educated analysis which is based on experience. Experience is bad which I have been wondering how I am so unlucky, or there truly is something seriously wrong but not enough leverage to make that needed change. Some parties do not look for change in art because stagnant state of things works better for them.

30 maaliskuun, 201624 heinäkuun, 2019 | Henna Timanttimetsä

When one first begins studying sculpting and your teacher is sexist chauvinist, strongly biased male to whom pedagogy seems to be an unknown concept, one gets a pretty good idea of what to expect when one graduates. So it all is educational after all. There are no illusions whatsoever of what lies ahead and how slowly things change in the arts, which hugely relies on tradition, what comes to gender roles, social and career mobility, position and power of institutions and money, what is good art, what can be shown and said. Mostly art looks back so keenly because it likes the male heroes. Needless to say I have argued and questioned a lot at art school and was deeply unliked because of that. Old fashioned are also ways to do business, put up exhibitions, funding, how artists and artistry are seen and treated, how much there is preconception and thinking you know even when you do not know shit. That is of course when you need the consultants. You can always rely on knowledge of a consultant but artist is an underdog if he or she is not well-known and well-networked. What else is there other than self-interest and all one can do is work for only one’s own benefit, why else do it. Business in which one has to be an expert and know a lot there are many doing the work who do not have the needed capabilities: understanding, courage and knowledge, capabilities to spark change, unbiased, only talk is what happens, which does not change anything, just like politicians do.

As curious as it sounds when you start looking at the issue of what kind of people are drawn to business of art, it could not be more clear: it is made to those who strive to win, be best at posing or at least look like they are good at something, mostly the latter. The importance of image cannot be emphasized enough. To work in art you have to have a big ego to stand behind your work, be confident enough to stretch as far as possible with ideas of your own, try out ideas which you believe in and very often only you, fail or succeed, and accepting the result to move on with all the enthusiasm possible. What kinds of results we accept as a community and in what kind of environment we want to work plays a big part of how to choose one’s perspective, on which side to stand and look into the scene where one is to create, be creative. How creative is the art world? What is the scene where art is shown or made to exist and why is it so narrow and unwelcoming? It is not new that narcissism is a regular trait for artists and in the arts in general and need to be admired for one’s position, networks and art must be one thing probably. All want to have the fame, which is one thing essential in art, admiration, grandiose, infinity, eternal art and eternal unforgettable artists, heroes. Artists are admired when they get fame and fortune. Fame is much talked about as it is the gold pot which might be found when one is talented and lucky enough. What is luck, how one gets lucky and what is part of talent there? It is a weird business where money circulates, art gets centered to certain places and artists have to be presented in certain places to have a name, be seen by right people and be noticed within the system. So to be stepped over is not irregular, to be sexually harassed either, minimised, discriminated, talked about in ill manner happens regularly. There are things to be expected but still they strike always as surprise because one wants to believe in kindness and good intentions. Cynicism is the first impression I get, always. It is no wonder, I am always up against a crowd of fanatics who think they know better and are better because art is about finding the truth, being good and admired, and those who are on pedestals think, they have found it and are deserving of their status.

There are those who like to repeat over and over again one idea, imprint it where ever they can because it is theirs and it represents the good they have come up with, themselves, something unchangeable, an era, an -ism, history, tradition, spectacle, experience after which tourists are expected to travel and spend money for. When we starve the idea of art into movable modules that function as branded palaces for money, it is art for money and art for business’ sake. It is tourism that dictates and the tourist is offered an art awe grandiose to witness and experience, remember, photograph, be educated by. An art awe is.., sensation, uplifting, knowledge, learning, the act of looking and feeling the once in a life experience, time to touch, something grand again, special, new or old and spectacular, always bigger and more expensive. To find the spectacular it has to be imported. Interesting is when new art is made it often is made in the marginal and by those who have rebelled the establishment, education, hierarchy and traditions, those who have made the most interesting art and have had the lasting changing impact on art are the dissidents. Always there is a clash and crush necessary for that necessary change to happen. The procedure of producing art is machinery of media coverage, expensiveness, size, names, what catches the eye, mind and heart. To preserve quality and process of the creating progress and the new which can be exciting, cynicism is not good at all.

Artist, captor of light http://www.words-to-use.com/words/art/

Immorality, the rule, rather than an exception.

20 maaliskuun, 201614 helmikuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

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.