revolution in art

Come as you are

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Surely you know the lyrics, but what does it mean in real life, come as you are? You are welcome and accepted as you are by those who maybe have invited you or when you just appeared and said hello. Who feel invited in a culture and being complete creations of their own and part of culture? What is the problem and what does it mean to be part of a culture? Is that even a valid question anymore? I think more valid than most. To find the end of the problem often brings the solution. Cultures, people holding culture as their own, tend to resist change when they think they are complete and safe. How can anyone say they have made themselves and their lives, by themselves, and who are those people who are accepted as they are, as they are in any culture? Body and soul, mind and will, knowing oneself is to want something for oneself and be something, be special preferably but not too much. Isn’t it a fantasy and utopia to be accepted and have luxury of finding yourself? Today it seems so that we are to complete ourselves by training (we are guided online through and through) especially our bodies and our mindsets to fit in, what to want, what to be and how. Every part of us tell of us and are parts of us but we mould the image of us by what we see, to match what we have seen and be something more than what we are. So we are influenced all the time and we like to think we are free. We are free to choose, at least in Finland, up to a point. It is still like someone have made decisions for us because the fight one must endure and go through wanting to be you can be terrifying. It is always up to a point you can go astray. When there is that point where you must think it is not enough and correct what you have found or are given, begins going against. Free to be what we want, feel what we want, say what we want, thinking we are masters but underdogs.

Why should anybody accept me as I am, is the question obviously, to be myself is too outrageous and unacceptable, I don’t know why. To me it seems we do not accept ourselves as we are at all or others as they are whatever they are because whatever is not acceptable. That is key to development and progress: constant dissatisfaction, enduring uncertainty, dealing with no’s, disagreements and refusals and abandonment, not belonging and feeling something is missing can be a blessing. Life would be a lot easier if we were one and content. What would we be then? We need understandable and clear packages to feel safe with, people as objects which is one thing to fight against. Easiness to subjugate and think it is the right way. Everything which is off beat, is not known, is suspicious and must be repressed. Accept yourself as you are and do what you want to do is a human right? Many people want to party and bully and think it is acceptable and that represents freedom to them. It is the most difficult thing to do, be you within the norms, as you are in front of other people without hiding anything, at least for a woman and a girl, and when you are not as all males are supposed to be, a stereotypical male, difficulties are very likely to occur. Difficulties like not desirable enough, not manly enough, not straight enough. You must know what you are, you can label yourself, name yourself, stand your ground and accept yourself but what if no one accepts you? To believe in you and present yourself as you are as this creation of yours but you want to be wanted. So we must know what and who we are and how do we learn to know this? Strangely many know what other people are without knowing what they themselves are truly. To present oneself is like acting a part. We can’t be not as we feel but what we are expected to be and what are the rules for presenting yourself. Be funny even though you are not funny, be fluent even though you are not fluent in presenting yourself by the rules. It is confusing, so the best thing is to abandon the guidebook.

What are you and how do you become what you are? Defined by what you do and who do you know, who knows you, what we know in general and are interested in. How do you define yourself and where does you begin? Is it from desire to be and dreaming? What are the things that come first to your mind when you think about what you are? Is it something someone else has said for you to be and you believe it to be true or can’t shake it off even if you wanted to? Have you found truth of your own about you but can’t say it? Why is it the truth and unsayable? People we are surrounded by, environment, history, country and our biology telling what we are is the truth of some kind, reality I suppose. It is there and we should know it. For other people I am firstly my gender, I am almost completely perceived from that angle, what that gender does for other people. There is always something to gain and women are taken for granted, they provide the pleasure and comfort. It has been difficult for me to comprehend what it is that women are for since they are not nearly enough ever, they are partial but necessary, useful handy. They can’t be granted full rights to existence, full human rights meaning the same as men. That has been how I have been looked at, compared to men I am disabled but I complete the other, the other does not need to complete me. I have learned that this is the primal thought, how useful it is as a strategy and idea to live: resentful, and this other human called man to me is useful when he protects me and bonds with me, wants me, I suppose. Don’t you want to be wanted?

To feel what I am is what I refuse because irrational is the most successful way to go wrong and rules for women are irrational and without factual base. It is clear women are the unknown. There is also the song where a woman says you make me feel like a natural woman. What is that and how natural are we, hippies, trolls, fairies, natural woman, natural man, natural human in natural habitat doing natural things? Natural is something good but we refuse it because it leaves very little room for our contemporary desires and ambitions. Natural is dirty and manipulated is something more, it adds tons on you, artificial and something more to feel connected with and be personalised. Contemporary desires: we can be whatever we want to be and we feel let down when we aren’t having what we want, but we have the right to pursue what we want, I guess. It is a disturbing though to be able to pursue whatever.

To be true to one’s vision of oneself is to be ready to confront all other opinions and definitions about you, and there will be plenty. In crossfire how strong and capable will you be being yourself doing what you think is what you must be doing, being your own woman or man, gender and sex of your own, your creation after you were created by other people and a bundle of other factors like bias, traditions, expectations, sexism, chance, randomness and culture. How our own are we? When we have right to opinions and have a discussion we can find it out, freedom of ours is in the expression. It is about difference not necessarily belonging, if it is never belonging but being an alien because society and other people push us to be something and we want something else. We are pushed and pushed, dragged. To what we must settle and what is it that must not be accepted? To have liberty to be yourself is a curious case of freedom and limitations. What are limitations to desire? To me limitations have been set by other people, legislation and daring. If scared of consequences limitations are pretty strict and often rightfully so. I cannot wear that, I can’t go there, do what I wish for work, I can’t swear, I can’t disagree and question, there is a huge pressure by men and women for men and women, it is still minor issues of proper and major if it is about what is regulated. When I disregard rules for women I become despised very quickly. Lines for odd and the unknown are painted with warning signs. Word goes out, people didn’t like what I said because it contradicted their views, I spoke inappropriately ( uh I hurt your feelings, well I guess that was partly my meaning because you hurt my feelings) what nerve. How are your feelings more precious than mine and how is your life more important than mine? Let me know.
| Henna Timanttimetsä

cropped-muovi2016-007

Breath of a bimbo, death of a bimbo.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Interesting is how a person who is chased, followed, persecuted and hunted can be a perfect image and how much work does it take to keep that image up. Desired, stared at, a cutout, part played, a poster and a perfect product which has been prepared and designed by herself realized within an industry for many reasons, or maybe reasons are very simple and few. She wants to be this almost a nonperson but strictly hyper female, an entertainer with seemingly light presence but still extremely heavy impact. Peculiar mixture of feather floating in the air and tragedy of a culture, a woman, emotions following when this feather does not perform anymore, when she ceases to exist as a living person and becomes fully merchandised. A mere idol not in any case, she has a story which plays the major role. Where she comes from (excellent novel Blond by Joyce Carol Oates focuses on the story of an abandoned girl based on biography of Norma Jean Baker, partly imagined as she is). A money maker shaking as much as a mark maker who is controlling her image but is strictly under control monitored. As it seems to have been for Marilyn Monroe she was being carefully watched, observed like a specimen for something beautiful to look at but not appreciated as a thinking performing artist as she wanted to be, not given character roles as she thought happened to her. What was her character other than the posing delight? Roles for women weren’t something to be played with. To know what the expectations are and play accordingly. To do something special and artistic in front of camera was to be daring, broken, problematic, profound and mysterious. Scandalous for a woman was to act like a man, demand something better than, have dimensions and will of her own. Still Marilyn played roles of women who knew how to get what they wanted, how to reach out to their dreams. What kinds of dreams was she allowed to have? What was possible for her? Same kinds of dreams girls have today?

Why are you interested in a bimbo, I have been asked. I don’t think her as a bimbo. It is false and distracting. Sexiness and seductiveness do not mean brainlessness. To be feminine is still seen opposite to reasonable and rational. Why do I go back to her again? Her case is extraordinary in a frame where extraordinary meant to realize what was expected of her putting that to an expound still, a gorgeous living shell. To be more than the expectations but to do the expected and nothing more is hard thing to do, a tight-rope, a corset. No wonder she was followed. People waited her to make mistakes. Ironically this is an expectation for her to make her happen as sexual desirable icon to whom many kinds of feelings and thoughts are targeted. The moment when she could not stick to her artificial frame anymore, when she got drunk and out of control, when she could not keep it in her role, when her life didn’t go as planned but fell apart, when things, life and people could not be tuned to follow paranoid fascist rules and predatory celebrity culture. When she brakes the rules hell brakes loose. She represents danger as default and exaggerates this quality, becomes the whore she is, a failure who can’t keep up the speed, a sad figure who has problems, cries in front of cameras, weak human, a woman who is flesh and blood and is to be eaten.

Phenomenon of a bimbo is culturally important as it is to partly exclude, point out what is interesting in women, put aside, hate, poke, use and discard as it is to despise people who look beautiful (sounds odd doesn’t it), are more than most and to keep alive the main function of women for many: to please, look nice and be nice, bring pleasure but not to do anything they are not supposed to. That is true despise, not admiration. Importance is in the interest, where interest lies, what things are paid attention to, why are we interested in certain people to the extent of mania and obsession, what are the things we pay attention to in people and why sexual arousal of mind is crucial in money making, in making movies, why we are so interested in sexy photos. Seduction and sex appeal play such huge role in entertainment, in women’s lives and in everything that questioning it is not irrelevant. Living in denial and having release in exposure. What is in idea of a bimbo, eternal the beauty? Everything. Everything to want, pieces of her, fun of hers, life of hers, to be wanted which is mistaken for love. Her loving the viewers. Bimbo looks for love, for sex, partners, gazes, admirers who watch. She feeds from cult of a bimbo entertainer. It is the presumption which is placed on all women. It is her evil side into which she drowns which drowning she enjoys. The bigger she grow the bigger the pleasure or disaster. She plays her role to the death. Such devotion and dedication is a talent.

To create a role to play in front of millions of people and play that being with every cell, every move, pose, every facial expression is practiced, carefully made up to sculpt a persona in detail. No life of a bimbo without calculative manipulation which matches up the role where bimbo uses her being, body and role to make money and fame for herself and for the machine which takes her, made her. To create an idol is to seduce, understand seduction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimbo ”Bimbo is a derogatory slang term for an attractive but unintelligent female. The term was originally used in the United States as early as 1919 for an unintelligent or brutish male.
As of early 21st century, the ”stereotypical bimbo” appearance has become that of an attractive woman, often blonde and with a curvaceous figure and large breasts, possibly wearing heavy makeup and revealing clothing.[citation needed] However, none of these traits are strictly needed for a person to be considered a bimbo. It is sometimes associated with men or women who dye their hair blonde indicating that physical attractiveness is more important to them than other, non-physical traits[1] and as an extension to the ”dumb blonde” stereotype.[1]”

Kengänkiillottajalle töitä?

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Kengät tekevät ihmisen, kengistään ihminen tunnetaan. Niillä näyttäydytään, niillä seisotaan ja kävellään. Kengät nostavat ihmisen maanpinnasta irti, antavat ryhtiä ja  suojaavat jalkoja, kertovat elintasosta ja elintavoista jotakin sekä arvoista. Kenkiä on oltava joka lähtöön, vaikka itse elin kauan vain muutamalla parilla ja samoilla talvikengillä kymmenen vuotta. Kenkäharrastus on siis melko uusi minun elämässäni ja se huomio etteivät ne enää kestä käyttöä. Alle kahden sadan euron on vaikea löytää hyvälaatuisia jalkineita. Kenkä on fetissi-esine, joita keräillään, joista haaveillaan ja joihin ihastutaan, joihin saa uppoamaan paljon rahaa. Uusien kenkien ostaminen on mukava tilanne silti. Kalliista kengistään mielellään pitää hyvää huolta. Minulla on jopa nanosuihketta, joka suojaa kenkiä kosteudelta, jopa. Ei tarvitse hinkata eikä lankata. Ainetta ei saa hengittää.

Kiiltävät kengät, juhlakengät, miesten kengät, nahkakengät, kävelykengät. Kengän kiillotustapahtuma menee niin, että mieshenkilö istuu tuoliin joka on kuin valtaistuin korkealla, jottei kiillottajan tarvitse hirveästi kumarrella paikassa, paikassa jossa liikkuu paljon ihmisiä kuten asemalla ja kengänkiillottajia voi olla vierivieressä. Kiillottaja hymyilee ja toivottaa asiakkaan penkkiinsä tervetulleeksi, ottaa kiillotuskankaan esiin sekä lankkia, poistaa harjalla hiekan ja ravan ja ryhtyy lankkaamaan rivakoin ottein. Asiakkaalla on luultavasti kiire. Kengänkiillottaja ei ole sama kuin suutari joka korjaa kenkiä. Kengänkiillottaja on tason ylläpitäjä ja kadonneen ajan työläinen, palvelija, itsensätyöllistäjä, jonka työkalut menevät pieneen tilaan ja kulkevat mukana, työläinen joka voi etsiä työtilan mistä vaan. Hyvin vapaan oloinen sarka, pop-up. Paljonko kengänkiillotus sitten maksaa? En tiedä, mutta itse en maksaisi paljoakaan. Ajatus on absurdi, että ohimennen kiillotuttaisin kenkäni. Se ei lienee naisten juttu muutenkaan. Sama kuin parranajo.

Aki Kaurismäen elokuvassa Le Havre päähenkilö on kengänkiillottaja ja kengänkiillotus on maahanmuuttajien ja muiden köyhien hommaa. Erikoinen valinta vanhan ranskalaismiehen ammatiksi, jotakin tekemistä, yrittämistä ja ihmisten kohtaamista epätoivoisessa maailmassa, jonka muutoksessa kaikki eivät kestä mukana. Kengänkiillottajan kengät puhdistaa vaimo. Ne ovat valmiit, kun mies lähtee toihin. Kengänkiillottajan ammattiin liittyy nostalgiaa ja elokuvallisuutta, epätoivoa, halveksuntaa ja hapuilua kun muuta oljenkortta ei ole. Kenkien puhdistus julkisella paikalla ja antaa kenkänsä puhdistettaviksi on perin miehistä. Joku kumartuu eteesi puhdistamaan jalkineesi ja annat lantin, lähdet katsomatta taaksesi. Kengänkiillottaja on kohtauksessa kuin kohtauksessa tärkeä henkilö. Hän kohtelee kuin kuningasta miestä kuin miestä. Korkean arvon olemassaoloon tarvitaan niitä jotka ovat vähempiarvoisia, niitä jotka tekevät likaiset työt, työt joilla ei ole arvoa mutta jotka huomaa, kun  niitä ei tee kukaan. Mies seisoo rätti kädessä, kädet lankissa, nöyrän näköisenä ja aina tyytyväisenä kun saa asiakkaan oli hän millainen tahansa. Hänen luokseen pysähdytään ja sanotaan että on kiire. Kestää hetken ja työ on tehty. Asiakas ehtii avata lehden tai katsoa eteensä kenties näkemättä mitä lankkaaja tekee. Yksinkertainen työ, yksinkertainen ihminen. Kuka sellaisesta olisi kiinnostunut, mutta hyvä että jotakin tekee. Jotakin on tehtävä. Liike ja ajatus pitävät elossa kuten raha.

Kiillotus ja lankkaus pidentävät kengän ikää pitäen nahan hyvässä kunnossa. Nykyään jokainen kiillottaa itse kenkänsä, näin luulen, jos viitsii. Paitsi ihmiset, joilla on palvelija sitä varten. En ole koskaan tavannut kengänkiillottajaa livenä kadulla Suomessa, mutta olen nähnyt sellaisen kengänkiillotuskoneen jossa oli pyörivä tela. Jalka asetettiin jalustalle jonka päällä pyörivä kiillotustela suoritti tehtävän. Kiillotuksen voi tehdä seisaaltaan. Samanaikaisesti ei voinut lukea esimerkiksi lehteä, koska on seurattava minne jalka menee. Jännä vehje, mutta kiillottiko se hyvin koko kengän, lähtikö ehkä sukka jalasta vai oliko tarkoitus kiillottaa vain kengänkärjet?

Kuka kiillottaa kenkiä työkseen nykyään Suomessa? Kerjääminen on paljon yleisempää, mutta se ei ole työvoimatoimistossa ammattinimikkeenä. Kysyn koska työvoimatoimisto edelleen ajattelee että kengänkiillottaminen on varteenotettava business, kerjääminen ilmeisesti ei. Kysyn koska työvoimatoimiston työnhaussa on vielä virallisesti ammattinimike kengänkiillottaja, samaa sarjaa ovat mainostenjakajat ja kengänkiillottajat. Aki Kaurismäellä jotakin asian kanssa tekemistä, onko elämä elokuvaa? Mainoksia nykyään jaetaan enemmän kuin ehtii lukea. Onko mainostenjakaminen palkitseva työ, ehkä liikunnan kannalta, ehkä klikkausten kannalta, ja mainostenjakaja sellainen tekijä joksi kehtaisi itseään kutsua, työ josta voi kertoa saamatta kummallisia katseita ja voi sinua tyhmeliiniä-mulkaisuja, tuleeko sillä toimeen-kysymyksiä ja mikä sinussa on vialla. Työllä on oltava rahallinen arvo, muuten sitä ei kukaan arvosta. Sanotaan ettei se ole työtä, jos ei siitä rahaa saa. Naiset ovat tehneet palkatonta työtä aina, he tienaavat myös yleisesti vähemmän kuin miehet. Kun työstä maksetaan sen tekemistä on joku arvostanut? On pystyttävä elättämään itsensä.  

Käyttävätkö ihmiset kenkiä joita täytyy kiillottaa? Keinokuidut ja lenkkitossut ovat vallanneet kenkäbusineksen. Miksi noin vanhahtava ammattinimike pitää pintansa virastossa, vaikka on varsin selvää ettei alaa enää ole? Työvoimatoimistolle ei ole muu selvää kuin, että työtön on roska, josta on päästävä eroon keinolla millä hyvänsä ja aivan sama mikä joku ammatti on nimeltään. Millaisia metodeja kengänkiillottamiseen on ja tarvitaanko siihen ammatti-ihmistä? Millaista työtä nykyään on tarjolla? Sandwich Artist saa Subwayssa paikan, juontaja on taiteilija, juonsi hän karaoke-esitystä tai markkinoita. Siinä saa esiintymiskokemusta. Olethan innostunut tekijä. Olemme kenkiemme kuluttajia ja kenkiemme kiillottajia, siis jokainen on kengänkiillottaja, mutta tuleeko sillä toimeen, elääkö sillä ja ovatko ne samoja asioita? Kun yksityiskohdat lakkaavat kiinnostamasta millainen tulee kokonaisuudesta? Kun bulkkituote myydään taiteen kohottavalla voimalla mistä on kysymys? Eihän taide ole nykyään kovassa huudossa, mutta taiteen nimi ja ajatus silti antavat arvoa tuotteelle, joka on joka paikassa samanlainen, kuten Subwayn patongit, ja ajatus sama kuin missä tahansa hampurilaisketjussa.

Kiiltävät kengät antavat hyvän kuvan käyttäjästään. Hän on huolellinen, säntillinen, pitää huolen omaisuudestaan ja ulkonäöstään. Lika ei saa näkyä. Odotan aikaa, kun prostituoitu on laillinen ammatti. Prostituoidut käyttävät ammattiinsa sopivia jalkineita. Vähintään 10 sentin korkoja, jotka kopisevat, korkokenkiä, saapikkaita tai saappaita. On näytettävä viettelevältä lyhyessä hameessa ja kireissä housuissa. Peniksen kiillottamisesta kai jotakin tienaa.

Born saatanan huora

Kuva | | Henna Timanttimetsä

Saatanan huora

 

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.

| 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/

Mixed messages, do you know what I mean?

| Henna Timanttimetsä

What is art consumer supposed to think when making of an institution reveals to be one case after another strange of mishaps, strange errors of thought and intentions appear to be more or less suspicious? Is there room for thinking when criticism is unwanted and clearly the institution is wanted to be set without questions asked? Critical views against and for and about quality of art must be freely discussed as must be deals done by officials and representatives which deals obviously have got political ends. Does art exist without politics one may ask? Anyway who could be against art? It is fair to ask how art is produced, what and why something is trendy or famous and stays that way, what is the progress made within art and how does it show? Why does art itself has got an image of a good-doer, a charitable well-spirited voice waking up and bringing light into darkness? Partly that is what art does in places where the normal is grim. Art has potential to lift up in many ways, uplift the maker and the viewer. Does it lift up the institutions that work with art, is art for art and institutions for themselves? Of course. Art has value of a tool, if you ask me, as it should and must since it is not above people but for people. When art scene does something it usually always is a cause which is a good for all promoting human interest in general, whatever human interest may be, interest is and can be defined in many ways but we assume cause is something like human rights are for everybody, environment must be preserved, public spaces should have more beautiful art, art heals etc.

When there is confusion, denial and clear misunderstanding of what is racism, sexism, discrimination, hate speech, exploitation, class division and where goes the line to abuse in there where artists are to work, then one can wonder how do these people who work in art understand what is good art, what are suitable working conditions, how ethics is applied and how art should be implemented in the world today because it is a very different world than for example ten years ago, still change happens in art very slowly even though it claims otherwise. In situations where sexism, discrimination and racism are widely tolerated but unseen and are spoken against via art, that there is institutionalized way of interacting which includes sexism, discrimination and racism, it is too risky and difficult to make a difference to speak out. It is a fact that art is elitist, to be an artist is elitist but that elitism disappears when one refuses to work with fascist dishonest system. System in which without recognition artist is unknown. Art is therefore done for the system to recognize and artist to establish one’s position must play by the rules of the system.

Art spectator can expect to see the surface without much depth.

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/arts-and-books/how-words-shape-our-world ”He argues that all ethical outlooks share a common structure in which we experience a kind of call, divine or inner, which requires us to seek with varying success to overcome our limitations and blindness. To be open to this call requires that we can recognise “something as right or worthy, and this recognition cannot be dispassionate.” Emotion and empathy are thus central to moral reasoning.”

History of power: Guerilla girls tell

| Henna Timanttimetsä

 

Let’s get back to Flashdance: There is more to the movie than the plot. It is more clever than you give it credit for.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

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.”

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/flashdance-1983

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085549/reviews

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/09/entertainment/la-et-cm-flashdance-musical-review-segerstrom-20130509

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.