Art of Selfie, obsessed with looks? The obsession fascinates me, not the images that much, also the mass of them, production. Images for instance on Instagram seem very alike are composition, content and how poseing is done. It’s almost funny how little there is to tell in the end. What are images supposed to tell as they are curated? What is the motive? What are we to think about and what kind of judgments to place based on what can be seen? The prettiest angle found, points of views there to not aging, especially eating and clothes, perspectives to humanity, being artificial still and the unending love for self?
For a woman expectations are pretty fixed and even little deviation is seen as weird and easily rejected, doubted, under suspicion. Suspicion is you fake it constantly and lie. That is one burden on women, we are not to be trusted. This is also among women who do follow rules of how to be a woman the right way, act like a woman, look like a woman, get things like a woman, recognizable. What are the feminine things, the more ultra-feminine femininity is created via makeup, pushup and moving like a woman, one wonders who qualifies and how to fit in, how to exploit all of these to be admired and make a buck, men entering the woman-sphere and all, one must think these things. Is it a competition like on TV? Reality? But you begin to look weird, when you stretch your face too much, do too much plastic surgery and picture yourself only, what is that? I think that is weird. In search of perfect? But to me the question, what is a woman, in this day and age, is still numbing. What kind of purpose does it serve and what is it meant to create instead?
How artist presents herself/himself in the business of art, is an interesting loaded mix of expectations burdened with stereotypes, desires and needs hungry for fame. Image manipulation, destruction of self or megalomaniac sense of self, selling of self, creation of a monster or a good-doer is art in itself: constant recreation and exploring the new, trying to have it all and be seen. What does politics got to do with art? Artists are very political nowadays and there is a right path and a wrong one, but all think art is on the left. How that happened? Who do I have to impress is people who pay attention to appearances, if I am interested in impressing such people.. Who is I wonder?
Image manipulation by gadgets gives us options to enhance self-image, look sellable, be the artwork and maybe interesting or just to fit in, be accepted. Usually it is good for to look successful or smell like money and celebrity with future. Scandal is a good way to make news and it can be art as everything when said so. Celebrity culture as pop culture suck Fine Art in as the art is an investment, nice attachment to your persona and interior, an organism which is you, fitting in the ecosystem to look the look and being an interesting artist is heavily sought after status. What happens to quality of art and the thought of art in this process of manufacturing artists through yellow page media, visibility in social media, selling NFTs as art? Is all just digital mush or have a profound cultural importance, importance of quick transactions and constant newness, as faces get boring too? Do we get depth and innovation or glam surfaces, lack of technical skills or just technical skills, lack of insight and hyped nonsense, fast art, which is only over-priced bulk, jpegs? Bubbles to burst, numbers.
Success is measured in money also in art, is the grander the better, how much a name costs? It is what interests media, how much anything sells and what anything looks like, fit the mold, what is the mold? Looks like an hourglass. If bulk sells, it doesn’t really matter, what we call it, because sales is good? How long that lasts? In art also matters who sees it and why and where. It is almost an artform itself, sales of art and the artist as a person. For women appearance is a significant issue to think about when and always you will come by people who check you out, which is why I constantly ponder the issue of looks, it is so big a thing that I can’t really comprehend the magnitude nor significance of appearance in art, but it is the dandy, bohemian, rocker, dangerous in some way, floppy and fun representing the fast life, fleeting existence and creativity, the buzzword. How and what appearance tells what kind of art anyone makes and can it be seen on the artist herself/himself? I have been told this is the case. We are very visually curious, we are built to be. So it is biological too, of course, and meant to raise interest. Women do have harder time convincing credibility and ability, stamina even more so if you think different from the accepted narrative people in art like keeping alive. Appearances matter to this degree, keeping it quiet is easier and more profitable.
Looks has significant meaning as sex does in art, very poignant if wanted so and thrown at you. Many artists exploit this scare of looking extreme, enjoy the stir and being noticed. How do artists get noticed other than naked, by whom and what are the things that interest? They (the establishment) say, they want radical art to align with the assumed leftist-feminist leanings of theirs and the assumed in Fine Art is the facade. Do you really believe in the radical in Fine Art, really? I don’t. Radical challenges too much, for instance lofty positions and the assumptions you stand on are somewhat thin, so you may find yourselves in a weird place, out with the unknown and the unexpected which for curators must be hell. In music it is more celebrated than in Fine Art to do and look totally punk for instance. What’s punk behavior? Fine Art still remains slow and is going more and more conservative, reserved and narrow-minded in the meaning of what is accepted style-wise and experimentally etc. if experimentation is allowed at all. Trends matter. Social justice is a trend. Everything getting more expensive has its toll, everything is measured in money and ruled by the thought of what can be made in the future with the asset. Self-interest is very visible. Is that the spirit of art? And what are they scared of the most is being left outside out of work without security of the system. Outside of what, outside of art sounds like against art or art not found? The grace of celebrity in the white cube is art, it is the tactics of institutions to follow the money and the camera and is art itself? Oh dear, art doesn’t exist anywhere else and especially, if it isn’t noticed by the right people. Art is more like be chic in a magazine simulating punk but don’t step over the lines. Such is the impact of managerial class, the business world, social media and bureaucracy, which flourish in Fine Art. I assume the boxing of artists into wanted and unwanted is more clear process today.
Obscurity, the unknown, the class issue and in which city are you, comes handily visible and it is almost difficult to define with any other words than waiting for the counterculture to emerge like when the fuck and where is it. We need the location and who done it. People who say they love art like to use power in art. Do you love money more? What comes to style and looks, thinking of what is the so-called art of presenting oneself and how does the art made sync with the portrayal and creating of the image of an artist, must it and what is quality in all of this in the end, because it seems just frames and highly designed locations to match? Isn’t it again bulk and template? Easy to manufacture like an artist off the shelf with a name to collect? They do check you from head to toe because the artist is always a liability not the other way round. The element of the unknown has been the essence of Fine Art, discovery not the theater around the object. Do you want to feel secure and see art that fits the narrative of success and how it is defined today through financial winnings in the capitals of the art world? One question is the age of an artist, which all in all is fast: what do we think about aging artists and is art a game for the young and emerging like in a factory? Age is emphasized, youth and for women it always is a question. Or do you see much images of old people in art? Maybe the older women get a better chance, since youth for women is the time for not being taken seriously, but the time when women are enjoyed. Who takes this scene seriously, I wonder? When money is serious, always.
This happens to women more and more, evaluation by appearance and aging. Evaluation based on looks and finances somehow resonate with the ability to do art, think and renew oneself as an artist, am I wrong? Womanly art, womanly colors? How credibility is seen differs for men and women as men do bond naturally together, women can be seen as futile competition, but competition nevertheless. Do your thing honey, if you dare. What, to break anything? Competition of course is harsh. How many times can they say, you can’t? When there is silence, it is a sign of realizing to say anything else is impossible and so hard. How sad. I gather you do not have much to say to begin with, so I am better off.
Stereotypical image and lure in art is the muse and hero, light look on life and its pleasures and women are there for pleasure, to be looked at and made into art or used and discarded, also very lightly. How well women fit into the man-centred world and the thought, what is an artist, who is an artist essentially? The class issue is very much there as well. Many women have pictured themselves in their art as art (how are you art again?), fashion being part of their work, women’s work, which should also be asked what is women’s work as woman is not known anymore (woman is the unknown?), duties and the lot of women, so very often doing the work, which goes unnoticed but is vital for all society. She, the female artist and any woman, processes the female experience in the world, continuously. It is that heavy, also repetitious, recognizable, slowly changing with society. What is that change, who is the vulnerable again? Weak men online shouting they are women? The humiliation and doubting of her, how she is treated can be seen in her work. But yet, how important it is to make a difference between male and female artists anymore? Difference is because women are menstruators and cervix-havers? Men are penis-holders, shoulders, beard-havers, muscular door-openers? Nowadays even feminism serves men, the difference is there and it comes to play continuously organically and via organs we have. We carry organs and assume, even though it is rude towards the minorities. What kind of weight is given to the female voices, organs and what are women allowed to say and do they (the establishment) even see a problem? Flying around the globe to see art at art fairs and provide art to biennales is not knowing that flying is part of the problem contributing to climate change. The countering and questioning female voices remain silenced. There is a familiar ring to it. You do acknowledge sexism, harassment, silencing and misogyny in art? I do acknowledge there are people who really do not see themselves despite how much there are selfies. Do you even recognize what is what, when you don’t know what a woman is? How can we trust such people in places of power? What are you going to do about the stagnant state of Fine Art that serves money and constant consumption? That is what feminism is for? Buying stuff and having the look of feminism? Museum not paying a living wage for cleaning ladies is a wonderful example of art crap.
To see the day when womanhood is questioned to the degree of lunacy, who is a woman. I think I feel it in my bones.