LET’S Go BACK TO FLASHDANCE: THERE IS MORE TO THE MOVIE THAN THE PLOT. IT IS MORE CLEVER THAN YOU GIVE IT CREDIT FOR.

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.

Small dog with a big heart.

pencil on paper, 2015

Small dog with a big heart

pencil on paper, 2015

Hole

Is there someone Rodin didn’t fuck?

Does truthfulness convince?

Nets

Anniversary of Gossip, the gossip page. A lengthy issue to figure out what makes a gossip and why.

Say Bambi and you will melt hearts.

 

Jar performance
performance in gallery space

Importance of having free art colleges is the vital question at the moment, that making art will not become a class issue more than it already is.

What Makes an Artist? – Grayson Perry and Sarah Thornton | Tate Talks

It is the very basic battle, a kind of violent arguing and taking sides of how to know what is art and decide about it strictly, or could it just be as simple as you like it as art, enjoy it as art. The same struggle goes on with who is an artist and can be an artist. Is it money that makes the professional, is it quality, network, school and family? To know is to know professional quality and understand the standing of the artist, how complex it all is. One definition does not apply for all. Measuring happens very often by evaluating skill, the artistry itself is the measure of how good an artist one is, how much effort and sweat art has taken to make. This idea is prized widely, what does skill tell us. We want to be blown away by craftsmanship, price and size, effort and extraordinary rare talent. Idea of normal physical labor and validation of certain results can take too much hold. To ask to copy reality as it is seen is a normal question and can you do it. Something equals good. People measure art and the artist via how much what is being made is exactly a replica of what we see and know. For many that is valuable as art, familiarity, knowing, recognizing, seeing, understanding and that it is also difficult. Artistry is also on which pedestal the person is and is a matter of climbing there, visibility, media coverage, being noticed, written about and acknowledged by those who know. Is this a spot for manipulation? Fine art is a highly specific specified field where expertise is required and those who think they don’t know enough are scared they make fools of themselves, which scare exists there among all. Maybe that is why scene is so stiff, very difficult to approach, reluctant to change eventhough it is talking about it and difficult to get in to as it is made of people who measure art and people. Interestingly positions of power are held on to a long time which does not help, conventions and hierarchies rule. Position gained is not given away that easily. Position of power in art is an interesting topic for the reason that the field is so specific, isolated and demands a lot of knowledge to know and be an expert of. Those who have power are trusted and valued. How power is used then? It does not look all that good in terms of making speedy progress.

There are those who decide for borders, walls, expectations to be filled and labels to be put on a person, reputations and careers to be had and probably the crowd is too small and tight. Celebration and party is a closed area. Artist is a kind of grand title and an honorary one as such, although honor is a strange concept in this regard, in terms of art. Is it honourable to be an artist and what does it mean? To practise what you preach? Make wonderful objects, eye candy for buyers? Double standards and looking good are a matter of keeping the impeccable image and what is art for other than image/habitus purposes, usually it is an accepted thought art is good for our spirit and health in general. When we look good we are happy and content? The grandiose and size enclosed there is part of the myth of an artist which oftentimes and more and more is a burden for art, artists, for the whole system and that it is male. To be an artist is a loaded profession, a fairytale and a fable, which one must over and over again debunk, break and disturb. Packed with stereotypes and clichés that circle in people’s minds, artist is sacred idolized archetype, this used up poster has troubled me and caused frustration, when does it ever change. How does an artist look like, how is artist portrayed, where art is when it is art, how approachable it all is and what is fear of art, how weird the artist is, how sick. Problems there are ideological and stuck always involving status, gender, class, money, quality of art, form of art, origin, places of show, networking, ways of interacting and talking etc. It is a whole bunch issues and beliefs that are and will be problematic, hard to overcome, accept or understand why they hold on so tightly. What is the turning point? One definitely is that art schooling remains available for those who do not come from money and that it is not a shameful thing to be working class.