As there is a clear trend to photograph one’s body wearing very little, the rising outrage is against the nude in art, but not in social media that much, where soft porn is a normalcy and a way to sell oneself. Is everyday soft porn prostitution?

2 elokuun, 202031 heinäkuun, 2020 | Henna Timanttimetsä

What is appropriate art, what should art be like and who is to decide? Who is the critic and what is the quality of criticism are to be questioned, as when all opinions must be voiced and are, who are listened to and what is said? The nipple (that must be freed?), breasts (nowadays breast are very commonly out, except the nipple), vaginas, asses (that are out as well), penises, fat are common in fine art to see, but they do cause moral outrage especially in fine art, probably even more when photographed and when the artist does it herself of herself questioning the sexism in the arts especially. Museums and galleries are becoming more family friendly places to visit to lure visitors and in the process art shown must be family friendly too? What family friendliness in this context means, censoring, teaching and moralising? What does art teach, what is the visitor to learn from art or about art? What kind of place does pedagogy have in art and showing art and should it as for example Guggenheim proposed to be the case in Finland 2016, when it was selling its franchise product for us, to have pedagogical spaces for kids in a commercial museum? How pedagogical can a commercial museum be and what kind of pedagogy does the art world provide? Does the art world learn here or does it take the place of a supreme teacher? Pedagogy provided in cynicism, marketing, painting, becoming famous or what is beauty?

What does family friendliness mean in today’s world, in the art world, in art, in marketing and why be family friendly other than making a buck, just be ever so nice and listen to Jingle Bells? Does it mean more gift shops, snacks and pop-ups, fast-food, fast art, naivety, shopping, blocking unwanted influences and opinions and spending time kind of existing and creating of a place of culture, where one can become cultured, more commercial places for consumerism, where we can also sell ourselves? More is beautiful and more lucrative and more popular is good? Is there a trend to make art family friendly to consume as much as possible photographing oneself and be seen in and what is that art like there? Glittering, shining and ultra-positive? What does it mean to make art family friendly for art as a whole, for places of art and for the artist? Thinking, what is friendliness in this context? Artist should manipulate her art to not disturb and not create awkwardness as women should manipulate themselves to please the eye? Weird is scary and horror is not art? Is the artist family friendly as a profession? Hearing that there should be warning labels for fine art on websites and in places of art for not to scare children/adults and not cause trauma, offence, uncomfortable feelings is for me as an artist a flag and creates a pressure for need to appeal and gratify. I don’t make art to please, for pure enjoyment and entertainment. I do not include likings in what I do. It is as a thought against art to aim to please and collect like stamps. Wanting to create places of art as places of visual candy stores surely works as people like glitter and images of fantasy. If you want to be bored by art and not be provoked a thought, it is your choice, but don’t claim all art must be eye candy.

Question is what does a visitor want from places of art and is it important to pay attention to and to what extent? What is the visitor for the art establishment other than a consumer and what is art for the art establishment and for the visitor? People wish to be entertained, be surprised, be in the presence of greatness, fame, names, skill, be in awe, but all this in the good sense of leaving the place in some kind of having seen is something what tourists do. To be in wonderment of it all is what I hope. Do people want to be safe in places of art, safe from the visual that may attack them in some way? What is a visual attack in real life? Is that a threat as such and in what way? Pictures do hunt us and stay in our minds, what do they do and how do images impact our thinking and feelings is something we must be afraid of and alert?
There is a division there between places of art and the normal place of living and looking where art may be placed or not, usually not. We can avoid art totally, but should we? We may live without seeing and being in touch of art, which is part of the problem of why art exists more commercial and must be made in different ways and why art is seen as weird and hostile. Is art hostile and how, if so? And what is the hostile part? What is artist’s job in today’s world? Where is art?

The results of world having been conquered. Are you liking it?

4 joulukuun, 201418 helmikuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

What is especially sad when people who are politicians in the EU, salesmen, businessmen, journalists etc. discuss what Europe should do now as it is in continuous depression, they talk about industrial expansion, innovative technological conquering of markets, new electronic devises, growing of the GDP and how do we get this growth we much need and desire. How do we get growth? What is it in this self-centered world view that is so revolting is that there is nothing that is more precious than what we gain, what we make of it, to profit, to make the wealthier even more rich by exploiting the poor. Terror and devastation that has happened is happening in many African countries still. Blindness continues and we like to move on without much thinking about it. It is intolerable ignorance and indifference by governments and corporations in terms of making money out of misery of people and abusing natural resources as sucking blood with unstoppable thirst. There are severe catastrophic situations many countries have found themselves in without much hope getting out of these violent and horrible paths taken and acts of crimes committed.

This all is nothing new. The most devastating thing is that so little has changed and is changing. Natural resources lure crime, destitution and hopelessness make people desperate and cruel. Or is it greed that makes cruelty a never-ending way for humans?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo#Belgian_Congo_.281908.E2.80.931960.29
”The new president had the support of the United States because of his staunch opposition to Communism, believing that his administration would serve as an effective counter to communist movements in Africa. A one-party system was established, and Mobutu declared himself head of state. He periodically held elections in which he was the only candidate. Although relative peace and stability were achieved, Mobutu’s government was guilty of severe human rights violations, political repression, a cult of personality and corruption. Corruption became so prevalent the term ”le mal Zairois” or ”Zaïrean Sickness”,^[26] meaning gross corruption, theft and mismanagement, was coined, reportedly by Mobutu himself.^[27] International aid, most often in the form of loans, enriched Mobutu while he allowed national infrastructure such as roads to deteriorate to as little as one-quarter of what had existed in 1960. Zaïre became a ”kleptocracy” as Mobutu and his associates embezzled government funds.”

”

Is conquering the world an essential goal for Europe? What is there to conquer other than material possessions?

28 marraskuun, 201422 helmikuun, 2018 | Henna Timanttimetsä

The whole idea of taking over a market is preposterous. To take over markets to rule the world, whatever markets there are. To take over graphics and ratings to show off. Markets that consumers make, that are us. The question is how do we change ourselves and our behavior since we affect the whole world as a market still by consuming or not consuming. To take over minds of consumers is to give maps and guide how to act. For experts to tell us what we are doing wrong. What is ultimately wrong as we struggle in financial depression that does not seem to go away, fade away from our backs. Why do we struggle so much in this constant turmoil of a floating state of misery? We see where we probably should be going but do not act upon it. There are many advises, advisers, but still we do not move from this thing. Why is it so much an agony to change a way of thinking? Because it should be complete?

One example is the voting for gay marriage. Finland is in principle a secular country, but still when it comes to issues of altering a way of thinking that is an ancient relic, we have a huge fight over it. Bible is certainly dragged into it and rights of children. We are worried. Let me remind you that the world is built by the straight world view. It is not a pretty sight. Must be God’s work. Hypocrisy is so obvious and ridiculous. In a secular country religion does not dictate legislation. Religion, Christianity in this case, has lots to say in who has the right to maintain power structures as they have been, who has a say over what changes and what not and how those structures function for society, to benefit who. Religion to decide over people’s lives is walking on thin ice. In a country where church and state are separate issues of who can get married should have been solved already.

Ideas to conquer the world? To make the markets profit. Isn’t the big picture made of small dots.