art world

Suopesäpallo, 1998, Suon estetiikka konferenssi, Ilomantsi

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Swamp baseball at The Aesthetics of Bogland/suopesis suon estetiikkakonferenssissa 1998

Suon estetiikka on edelleen ajankohtainen, se mitä ajattelemme suosta. Suo, joka kasvaa alle millimetrin vuodessa, on hidaskasvuisuudessaan kiinnostava ekosysteemi. Ajattelemme, että meillä on tätä runsautta niin paljon, että sen voi käyttää pois kuljeksimasta ja tavallaan hallita tätä kauheutta, joka luonto on totaalisesti. Vaikeakulkuisuudessaan ja upottavuudessaan sinne ei tee mieli mennä rämpimään, muuten kuin työn puolesta. Se vaikuttaa kaupunkilaiselle jättömaalta, jonka voi käyttää nykyihmisen mielen mukaan. Mikä on maapalan merkitys ihmiselle on myöskin ongelmallinen ajatus, jossa ajatellaan, että kaikella on oltava meille hyötyarvo, kaikki on meitä varten, koska osaamme ja voimme valjastaa olemassa olevia asioita omaan tarpeeseen, joka on loputon. Samaa logiikkaa käytetään monessa asiassa, jossa ajatellaan, että on olemassa joku, jolla on lähes loputon valta ja ne jotka kritisoivat kitisevät turhasta, koska eivät ymmärrä hyvän päälle eli hidastavat ja hankaloittavat putkiajattelijan elämäntehtävää ja -tarkoitusta.

Kun suo valjastetaan tuottavaksi, muutamassa vuodessa se on tasainen pelto, jossa ei kasva mitään todella pitkään aikaan. Mikä on soiden merkitys Suomelle nyt, kun voimme ajatella muita energian luontikeinoja? Mikä on sellaisen merkitys, joka on vaan jossain kaukana, mutta niin lähellä? On ajateltava, mikä on suojellun ja puhtaan luonnon merkitys meille tänään? Mikä on lähitulevaisuudessa kovinta valuuttaa? Tähän kysymykseen kun vastaa oikein, voittaa jättipotin. Se on varsin korvaamaton ja kasvaa itsekseen. Ihminen tarvitsee sitä kipeästi, kuten on tullut kovin selväksi. Miten voimme elää sen kanssa, tapahtuu kesyttämällä ja litistämällä, ajamalla yli. Tämä ei ole kovin harmoninen tapa.

Ilman luontoa me emme ole mitään ja meitä ei ole. Tämä asia kannattaa painaa hyvin syvälle kalloihin, koska kaikesta kieltämisestä ja vähättelystä huolimatta, olemme jo tulleet huomaamaan, että ilmastonmuutos, luonnon saastuminen, puhtaan veden saanti ovat elintärkeitä ihmisen ymmärtää ja osata ottaa huomioon. Ymmärtää näiden pieniltä ja vaatimattomilta vaikuttavien asioiden painavuus. Kun näihin osasiin tulee korjaamaton vika, olemme kusessa. Ne kettutytöt ja -pojat, puidenhalaajat ja huuhaatieteilijät, jotka ovat puhuneet luonnon ja eläinten puolesta, ovat varsin kipeällä tavalla olleet oikeassa. Mahtaa sattua riistokapitalistiin, fasistiin ja antifeministiin. Vähättelyllä ja suoraviivaisella ajattelulla tekee hallaa myös itselleen.

Kun ajattelemme lyhyellä aikajanalla tuloshakuisesti, kuten on ollut tapana ja on edelleen, on huomionarvoista muistaa, että niin ajattelee suurin osa ihmiskunnasta. Miten muutamme tätä koneelta vaikuttavaa tapaa tehdä ja ajatella, jossa oma etu on määräävä? Tarvitaan esimerkkejä jotka selvästi osoittavat, että toisin tekemällä voi pärjätä ja että on olemassa toisenlaista rikkautta kuin taloudellinen. Talous on se mittatikku, jolla kaikki mitataan, raha. Painotamme taloutta ja taloudellista kasvua juuri luonnon ja ihmisten kustannuksella. Luonnosta riistämme arvon, mikä siitä irti lähtee ja se tapahtuu tehokkaasti lyhyessä ajassa, jonka jälkeen siirrymme toiseen kohteeseen. Ajattelu on niin yksinkertaistettua, että on kummallista, ettei toiston haitallisuus aukene siellä missä sen pitäisi. Samaa taloudellisen hyödyn kautta ajattelua tehdään kaikkialla missä hyödynnetään eläimiä ja luontoa. Ne ovat täysin ihmisen otettavissa vailla muuta arvoa kuin se, mikä niillä on ihmiselle. Miten arvo ihmiselle mitataan, miten jonkun arvo havaitaan ja saadaan käyttöön? Mitä ihmisen on hyödynnettävä ja mikä on hyvä jättää hyödyntämättä?

Ihminen arvostaa eniten välitöntä hyvää oloa, joka on koukuttavaa. Pyrimme elämään hyvässä olossa, karttaen huonoa oloa. Olemme paljon mielitekojemme ja kuvitelmien vietävissä. Voittajia ovat ne, jotka kykenevät käyttämään systeemiä parhaiten omaksi hyödykseen. Tätä kiiltoa silmissä pidetään älynä ja oikeutena. Sillä perustellaan turkistarhaus, tehomaatalous, yritystuet ja tehokarjantuotanto. Onko otettava kaikki, mikä on otettavissa, vai voiko jotakin jättää ottamatta? Kaikki tehdään niin tehostetusti kuin on mahdollista puristaa kuivaksi. Puristaminen on hyvä sana tässä kohtaa, tiristäminen. Niin paljon kuin ihmisen voimilla irti lähtee ja sitä kutsutaan edistykseksi. Meidän olisi ajateltava hyödyn ajatus uudelleen. Mikä on tarpeellista ja kaikkia hyödyttävää perustavanlaatuisesti, ei antamalla välitöntä mielihyvää niinkuin sokeri, vaan pitkäkestoisesti pitää kylläisenä. Oikeutus kaikelle on edelleen raha ja oma etu. Edistystä olisi huomata tekojen vaikutukset pitemmällä aikavälillä ja ymmärtää tulla vähemmällä toimeen. Se olisi todellista edistystä.

Terveisiä KHO:lle

“Kaikki nämä kaunokaiset henkäilevät jalkojemme juuressa viimeistä syksyään. Pientä kaistaletta lukuunottamatta koko Kaitasuo muutetaan rahaksi.

Niin että oikein kylmiä terveisiä (etenkin kihokilta) Riitalle, Mikalle, Vesa-Pekalle,Tainalle, Jannelle, Ollille ja Tuirelle, näille Korkeimman hallinto-oikeuden veijareille, jotka 18. elokuuta varmaan toisen kampaviinerin jälkeen päättivät myöntää Viipurin Turve ja Multatehdas Oy:lle luvan turpeenottoon.

Kaitasuon lähes 10 000 vuoden taival päättyy kaivinkoneiden möyhennyksessä mustaksi maaksi, jossa ei kasva mitään pitkään, pitkään aikaan.

Kyseessä ei ole mikään vähäinen mylläys Urjalan ja Humppilan rajamailla – turpeenottolupa on myönnetty 80 hehtaarille.” https://www.aamulehti.fi/hyvaelama/kavimme-katsomassa-milta-9-000-vuotta-elamaa-tuonut-suo-nayttaa-oikeus-myonsi-turpeenottoluvan-ja-kaitasuo-tuhotaan-200365873 

https://sites.google.com/a/rams.colostate.edu/rolston-csu-website/environmental-ethics/ee-chbk/aes-swamps-finnish/aes-swamps-finnish-a-pdf

Napanuora/Cord, SuoMen-performance, silently dragging roots back to the marsh/hiljaisesti konkeloiden takaisin vieminen suolle, 1998

Napanuora, Konkeloiden raahaaminen kasasta takaisin suolle, 1998, Suon estetiikka, SuoMen-ryhmä

Can you say you are a professional without other people’s approval? Of course, in art.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

What is disapproved professionalism? I highly recommend a kind of disapproval which goes strongly against the establishment and status quo, against those who repeat old truths, truths of theirs. Something out of the ordinary is scary and fear is instant, out of the cult of professionalism, out of the book of solid truths, something to believe in strongly must be put under scrutiny. I strongly disapprove professionalism which sees through corruption, misconduct, sloppiness, carelessness, ignorance, arrogance, unwillingness to make progress, unwillingness to see oneself as student forever such outrage and lack of humility should be disapproved in larger scale there where power to make professionals is and people who can’t take criticism and learn from it. Pedestals oh pedestals, too much respected and feared, way too much.

Disapproved professionalism is something which has moved away from something known, corrupt and repetitious, away from something which sees itself as perfection that can’t be overshadowed, critiqued, put under microscope and be revealed as it is. Unprofessional is to behave badly against other professionals, without a good reason other than those feelings. To look down on and think you are so much better than is highly normal. You want to feel empowered and demonstrate this power position of yours with violence. Maturing is tough, admitting falsehood, doing wrong and failure is difficult, almost impossible. We all have met these kinds of people. They are the menace and sign of ruin of the power structure and themselves. Such thinking costs you, you narrow-minded fools. So never fall into the trap of arrogance and false pride. There is always someone better and other ways of doing. To find out which one’s are the best is a competition where there almost never are winners. To win is what professional competition is all about unfortunately.

To be proud of one’s work is what we should feel, be unashamed, whatever the work. For artist it is a battle especially when the most often thing to come by is rejection, contempt and hate. Art community should by default understand that artists face a lot of discrimination and negative positioning like the artist was the ultimate loser and threat. All you need is family which does not approve what you do. This can’t be too much emphasised. Be empowered and privileged is something many aren’t entitled to. Quality of work is another thing and what is it is the contents not how much your camera cost you and where you are BASED. Those who have reached position which gives them right to look down on do more harm than good. No wonder they are easily hurt, professional emotions are so vulnerable. Most damage they do is at schools. Which I have wondered why assholes and idiots get to teach.

Something which does different from the approved form of status professional? A connoisseur of practise, of thought, ideas and craft, how much does this have to do with feelings? We must feel satisfaction of doing something well and be rewarded for this. We need collective acceptance to be uplifted, respected and valued. This image and game, play or how should I call it, rivalry, fight for right to be a professional, is of course passionate and exclusionary, shutting out those who do not match credentials of the profession. Which is understandable. Sometimes, especially in art, such game of who can and who can’t get interesting proportions and this has got to do with gender a lot and where you come from.

Let’s dig deeper into professionalism, shall we. The credentials for professional vary and the idea is understood in different ways.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Is there something such as professional pride? Pride of doing one’s job as well as possible, as well as one is able and knowing what it means to do job at hand well, any job? I have come to learn that such pride is not what it used to be, when work was your signature, pride and measure of worthiness in the eyes of those who enjoy fruits of one’s labor. Are we so spoiled already that work is not who we are in the meaning that it only makes it possible for us to live and express ourselves outside work? Is that what being spoiled is, to have free time to express oneself and feel free? I think it is. How does this effect the way we work and do our work and most importantly appreciate as work? Work must make a decent living, be valued as craft and expertise, worker be valued as someone whose effort is noticed and appreciated. Someone who just has a job is not enough, we want more than that because we are fully what we do for work. Job must be something which can be valued as modern and an achievement, an extension to one’s personality, fulfilling ambition, one being able to show talent, capability, proof of all this existing in this one person.

Fair enough, we are entitled to this luxury, aren’t we. Be appreciated and be paid for what we are worth, what our work is worth, our labor input. What other things follow hopefully are plusses. We are entitled to search for fulfilment via work and be tormented when this does not happen. It is unfortunate when work does not involve exchange of money, it is possibly not considered work but something else, a service. Naming is important, exchange is too, interaction. Is what you feel important in this matter? Money is there in one form or the other, work as money possibly. To work and make can be seen as means of exchange, value is in what was made and done and how the exchange happened. Our values are largely bound to money as is our way of living, making money is valuable as such, having money, looking like you have money. How is that the biggest one value there is and why there does not seem to be enough ever? Money gives value to people and money only? Is how much the most used question and basis for understanding value? Value of work done where does it lie? Important seems to be who does the work: gender has an important role in creating value.

My quest is to understand professionalism and how we understand what it is. For most the pay check is proof enough, the title, education, network and being busy, accomplishing and achieving, making progress such as getting more money and more fancy titles, getting ahead on career path. I have been wondering this issue because there seems to be a huge misunderstanding or collective mind-set, one-way path, what it takes to do one’s job well, what is achieving something, having a path, pursuing goals and why this pursuing goals which self-evidently belongs to choosing careers is important to take up and obey, choosing up one’s career. What is a career, who validates it, is it given or taken?

Interestingly rules for professional in business are tightly tangled with art which makes it curious to be an artist when to create something new constantly and being one’s own boss, at least for me, are at risk of becoming something else. Artist should be a brand, a product to sell her art. Ways of becoming a brand and product is very business culture obedient more and more. That is not good news for art. Something goes missing easily which is personality, uniqueness and following path of one’s own despite what happens, doing what I want to do contradicts the business savvy heavily for a reason. What is expected of you is to obey.

When art is an investment what are the expectations and when art pursues not fulfil expectations but move further what happens? When the interest lies in ways of presentation, what and how expensive one’s equipment is, who do you know and where you live, are based, as it is said nowadays, where are we based exactly, where do we base our priorities? What is lost in this kind of interest in showing off and thinking the tools make the art more than you ever can, professional emerges when one possesses the right kind of kit? Yuk. Freedom of making out of scratch, out of nothing without need to impress by things, places and domains, play a role in making something worthy nowadays. Sure to look nice even presentable is what you are looking for go for it, but to expect that be the professional way is corporal setting and harnessing, waste of something good and turning into mass product, likeable and following instructions for professional outlook to impress as professional. Who is the artist in this picture and why the need for grandiose and expensiveness is so important to make an awe, an effect, spectacle and produce value which is bloated ready to explode? Is it business as usual we should have?

Size of one’s studio, sizes of cameras, how does an artist look like, what is the street credible look for an artist, in which city to dwell, where to show one’s art and what kind of art to make? Large prints, monumental paintings, what is the it thing, if it interests anyone? Maybe the contents will tell the value??
I also ask because to come across people who consider themselves professionals due to positions they have been granted, things they deliver and give back do not often strike as well done, having done one’s homework kind of thing at all, quite on the contrary. Professionalism is one issue where trickle down effect goes wrong, something gets in the way, like lack of will to share and contribute. So where is the professionalism when you have to put yourself on the line, your career and what does it mean to do one’s job so that there is pride, ability there in the right way, not in the way that the work serves only you and interests of yours but something larger and as we do not live alone in the world, our work affects others too pretty profoundly.

The part art plays in creating screens in front of ideological constructs, politics, conflicting interests and problems so that issues won’t be dealt with but swept under the carpet, forgotten and washed since the cause is obviously good as art is in the picture. That truth is not visible but toyed with, manipulated in the name of good for all. PR and visualization at the expense of quality and equality. True interests of big players stay hidden and artist is merely a button.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

It is not news many people with conservative leanings have a tight relationship with art. To hang out and know artists is somewhat of a cliché in which posing and supporting is a merit to have. I have wondered why such culture holds on so persistently and why there are artists who allow art to be used for politics and a means for hype of public relations. Some artists are in desperate need for recognition and funds. It is almost a default and expectation for an artist to think and be in need, assumption of what artist wants, is for and must do is to lure money. What is the advantage there to be had for one with means and a cause to promote? Power of art is quite mighty because of many illusion made by Art History and how art is still portrayed as a saving force, struggle and possible win, a trophy. Social status, intellectual smoke screen, intellectual dishonesty, advertising and pretending go hand in hand, grandiose can appear pretty hollow. It may be an easy-looking path to be an art lover but what does it mean to really love art? Lovers of art are uplifted by art, moved but are the changed by it? Meaning of art is and can therefore be huge.

Turn your world into a canvas, turn it into marble and you are the one with chicle, imagine yourself as a maker. It is such chocolate box romanticized image as is the grande artist who creates extraordinary visions to marvel and admire. To glue this vision on which is the dusty load from Art History used over and over again as it does not grow worn out: Divinity at play. Cult of genius lives on since it is appealing to many. To be an important visual artist is still a pedestal many wish to be on and many institutions like to abuse. Isn’t that the most important job for art especially for people who have power to use art to boost themselves, power positions and causes for which art is used as an extension to mark character and public image as art friendly and cities as cultural capitals and centers. Art signifies intellect for some, civilized and uplifting ground which supposedly lifts up, makes something new constantly and is looking forward, is looking into the future with new eyes, ideas and supposedly new kind of cash flow. Money stays in the hands of the few no doubt. Money and art go together in some cases like the crook and possibility for a blow up, too much talk, promise and a grin, yes we are so happy up here. It is often made to look like that art is for all people when it is to create power position and strengthen it. There are many reasons to love art and all kinds of love. Sounds cynical doesn’t it, and it is. Or what do you think when Guggenheim report to investigate is museum profitable in Helsinki is only in English and translated only when protested, that the museum is told to be experimental and focus on development of something, I’m not quite sure of what, Helsinki art scene? Well it sure does need development, more on the attitude and idea level which do not show to be as experimental and new in real life especially when bureaucrats do the shady-looking business behind citizens’ backs and wish to make it look like something new and dazzling. Yes it is a grande WTF.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guggenheim_Helsinki_Plan#Conflicts_of_interest

The rich patron the arts when public funding is not sufficient or otherwise lacking or for many reasons. It is almost duty of those with means, a good deed, a shield with which to fight against all evil, against banality to show extraordinary, against bad taste. Critics who may and will give unpleasant and so unearned criticism may point out what art is for. Substantial wealth created with suspicious ways and those ways hidden with help of playing a patron of arts seemingly a good thing is the normal that belongs to culture of charity done by the super-rich, ideology of trickle down is a good thing there like ever. Therefore I am as all should be very suspicious when the art and business world play the part of being on the side of good as a whole. Guggenheim is a good example of rhetoric in which imported culture is worth more than local G having an uplifting effect on a small operator, an international influence and contacts which supposedly are always a good thing.

Error establishing a database connection: Question since I am puzzled: Why did Nazis steal all the art treasures during WW2? Was art like money in bank or did they love art?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/30/business/economy/for-the-wealthiest-private-tax-system-saves-them-billions.html?_r=0

The peril of hipster economics

When urban decay becomes a set piece to be remodelled or romanticised.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/05/peril-hipster-economics-2014527105521158885.html

 

Art in Diplomacy and Conflict | Episode 34

http://covertcontact.com/2015/12/26/art-in-diplomacy-and-conflict-episode-34/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

to listen is worth your while.

What is art fighting for or is it the institutions that choose the proper fight for the context for the eyes of the privileged and easily traumatized?

| Henna Timanttimetsä

https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2015/10/youth-advisory-board-discuss-censorship-of-art/ “When we reach a point that art depicting toy to depict a terrorist threat is considered too dangerous for public consumption, one has to wonder what we are really fighting for.”

Censorship is the one that has always been there for me whether it is in form of self-censoring which women do instinctively, or the authority has done the censoring and called it curating or editing or just looking away. Usually it is disapproving without discussion and show of contempt for the artist. Something that must be only perfect has a perverse side to it. Art is not about depicting a perfect world, perfect people looking perfect doing perfect things and being great, only great and wonderfully glorified. World glorified, artist glorified, art something that matches the interior and appeals to aesthetic taste is a trend which is forcing itself still as we are given big names and stars, proper contents packaged, expensive gladly, not bad light on rulers, not politics, not ugliness, not cursing, business-likeness which has taken the art world is obvious. We are here to sell and please.

So art on menstruation, female genitals, sex, pornography, bombs, terrorism, art world pretense and phoniness, cleaners, garbage, dirt, prostitution often are banned, scrutinized or at least artist’s mental health is questioned and her intentions. Those topics may be more suitable for male artists too, but still daring. He is so daring and brave, she is just odd and dangerous. To say the word clitoris aloud is difficult, so I am interested why so, to watch pornographic images which are on the net for all to see displayed in art context cause a stir. Scandal is why art scene is so conservative, still sexist and prudish, still perverse. I also wonder what kind of people art is for and what is expected of art, why these expectations do not match with desires of an artist to explore openly, discuss and show what world is like.

For artist to do what is expected is dangerous.

To think why society exists, state has citizens and society is for them

| Henna Timanttimetsä

If art is seen as mechanical part of society with duty to fill, money to make with, interior to decorate, glory to have by there will be those who will oppose it, artists who will challenge such system of good and bad, winners and losers, rich and poor, laborers and profit makers. An artist as someone who has to make art to fit the system is selling cheap, to fill in requirements given to make art suitable there will be something left out, unseen and forgotten. Why people do art, why there is need for art, what kind of art do we want to make and to what kind of need does it answer, who defines what is art and who is the artist. These questions will be asked over and over again as there is a system that makes it compulsory to find the grande artist, value art as possession, as there is system that makes profit via art often without the artist. Sometimes it seems art is valued but artists are not as people who also need to be paid for their work. In capitalism we do not live to make charity, to make other people rich, give value to institutions, cities and countries.

Appearance oriented world and can it be fixed.

| Henna Timanttimetsä
World is to be fixed in a manner that women and men whatever they may look like would be appreciated for their personas, their work, for themselves as whole individuals.

How does this happen this fixing, would of course be a matter of conscious learning and acknowledging priorities. What do we appreciate in people and what they do, what is important to pay attention to. If our priorities are looks, posing, clothes and accessories, possessions etc. we can complement people for those things and they can probably feel good about themselves for a while. This kind of situation is the one to pay attention to for the reason of what do we value in other people. If you are about to compliment an artist, talk about the work of that artist, art in general, or scientist who is a woman, it is absolutely vital to pay attention to the work of that person. I myself do not like to pose in front of my work which is usually asked for an artist to do. I like to talk about issues concerning my work and why I do what I do. It is a strange way to present art as a trophy and an artist on pedestal. Such is a relic of a culture which I wish to be changed. Yes people want to know what the artist looks like, maybe we could start change that culture of adoring an image of a person. It is difficult to explain why this is important otherwise than via personal experience where me as a woman artist am not acknowledged as an artist because of my work, which for me is the most important thing I do in my life. This is also difficult to understand as you do not know me and I am not going to tell you my history, but when I tell you that my work is my most precious thing should believe it. When you want to compliment my photographs do not compliment my camera. You do not compliment my pencil for my drawings, I hope you do not. It is a conscious decision that you make to what things you pay attention and think other should pay attention to too.

So when I say I do not wish to be photographed, don’t argue and say that all artists do this and we do this way as it is always done this way. I have my way, you respecting that I appreciate. All other artists do what fuck they like obviously.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/10/compliments-tinder-charlotte-proudman-offended?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

Size of art: The things you can tell by choosing size. Playing with size is to play with our eyes, perception, attention and ways we are used to looking at things.

| Henna Timanttimetsä

Importance of art, what is important art, where lies the interest when we look at art depending on what are we measuring when we measure art, what we look for, why art is there to be measured. We measure the price, fame, skill, connections, where the artist is based at and so forth. Why all the measuring and paying attention to surface is so important especially in art, or is it just the problem of this branch only? Obviously not. Seek to impress and making it get desperate when competition is heavy. Is it the social side behind desire and lust for grandiose there to be understood? Is it just pure greed and need for power? Art has to be placed or left out as are artists in or out? Question of size of art and what gets attention is always interesting. As an artist as I write about attention can mean it is I who wants attention. There is always the self-interest, suspicion, egoism which are attached to art, social aspects of doing the whole of art, business, publicity and talking about art. Big possibilities lure spineless crooks who wish to make the best profit there is possible to make.

Someone who seeks to be talked about, is that an artist? As an artist I seek that my work is talked about not me. When my exhibition is photographed do not take photos of me but of my work. I do not seek a personality cult by being an artist but rather have something to say than posing in a picture. This has been very difficult to grasp for many. Though at the moment I find internet art much more interesting to do and explore for many reasons. It lacks the stereotypes, assumptions and conventions of traditions of  fine art. I find that appealing, refreshing and new.

Same size problematics goes with architecture, thinking the bigger equals the better. The better and something good in the world of today is matter of magnitude, impact, conspicuousness, ability to make stature that impresses. To be impressed in an instant, to get an awe, be taken one’s breath away by something that has required skill to achieve is a goal by which art in traditional sense is seen and meaning of making art is to prove skill, professional and trustworthy, valuable in a world where machinery, factories, technical thinking prevail over everything as true signs of intellect, human abilities and are seen as male. Big size as a masculine feature is an all covering giant with its shadow to impress conquering attention and to win is like winning in sports. It is not unusual to own and aggressively protect that tradition in art by diminishing countering opinions. Dominance is the only way to do things in this kind of mental atmosphere. Anything small is pathetic and cute, seen as to be won, big is self-evidently good and acceptable, heavy and solid. What a horrible weakness that is to all of art and artists to seek massiveness in every way. It is to diminish and kill anything else which everything else would mean variety of points of views and ways of making.

Value of art according to G

| Henna Timanttimetsä

140 000 000
20 000 000
5 000 000
2 000 000

Round figures, something we see often in news fly by. Do we get numbed by the overdosing of numeric info, graphs of how much? What things cost make what they are worth or is it the other way round? How things are seen and handled, priced, talked about, saved or discarded. Wars are expensive, but education is precious, healthcare is too expensive. Museums are meant to shine like diamonds of the cities, priced temples of civilization, education, art, creativity of people. What else? What else do museums of art represent? Commercialism, consumerism, luxury, grandiose and status, power and what is valued? Can they critique themselves? Are they able to keep up with the change (do personnel equal the museum, bad management equal bad museum concept, bad working environment?), mold themselves for the needs of art (needs of people), not needs of museums or is it the same thing? Are art museums art embodied and creators of museum complexes, brands, franchise doing service for art? There is an awful lot of strange interaction, planning and shady promises hanging in the air which all look somewhat crooked for many reasons. Millions are peanuts for some, fairly abstract and large for many, but it is a daily routine to go through what things cost. What art costs is the shadiest of all. Small things make big things, but for some reason spectacle is the only thing that is the honey to attract tourists, art tourists. This is what is assumed. How do you measure when there is no limit but unlimited options to own and exploit, hidden and without showing true intentions, what is what, to make more money to make more value for brands for owners for rulers for player for money men with the help of tourists. Is it a question of heroism, progress of art? I doubt it.

It has been all along Western civilization has been exploring foreign cultures this civilization has refused to understand and know those who it likes to explore and exploit bringing progress and development thinking it is something better and above. It is us and them, those others whom we don’t even want to understand. They are so different. To say of not understanding culture of interacting in our country, our society, our system functioning to benefit art life and variety of it, how we maintain system of ours, how we think things should be done. To say of being naive and not understanding how we do things in Finland is more than odd for people whose nation is planning a trip to Mars. You do not understand foreign countries nor people is at the core of arrogance and stupidity of you nation. Monetary value calculated, planned winnings, honor and imperialist attitude of yours are the flaws of yours you do not want to change, because you do not see them flaws but strengths, your eternal way of life which must not be disturbed. Short-sighted ideas and plain force is nothing but surface, expensive and futile leading to chain reaction of failure with no end. It is good to learn from mistakes made. You fail to do even that. And you dare to say those who object your fucked up project are against art. Fuck you. Your anti-progress, anti-democratic system and thinking sickens me.