Yeah, me too. I'm actually quite curious about this theme in your work Andrew. This image is reminiscent of many others in your body of work. What kind of role do you think these representations of women play within your art?
this here gal is either really, really, REALLY young, or terribly malnourished. or both. beautiful, but faceless.
quite often, when you see a faceless body in advertising (such as in a pantyhose ad, for e.g.), the body you're seeing belongs to a 15 year old.
i wonder if we've broken the world in ways that can't be fixed.
or, just as we look at the unconscious racism and sexism of previous generations with a sense of benevolent scorn, i wonder if subsequent generations will look at us and say: "they were so smart with their computers and flying machines, and yet they didn't even know a single thing about moon cycles, or about how to tell time by the colour of the sun on the river. what fools."
Warning, this response may provoke you into a fit of rage, or if recieved correctly spark an interesting debate:
I will start with my favourite target, the most likely to get emotional and write a 20 page resonse, refuting my assertions, the witty, reclusive feral child you all know and love:
Wolfboy said, "this here gal is either really, really, REALLY young, or terribly malnourished. or both. beautiful, but faceless."
-Are you saying that the very young and/or malnutritioned are beautiful?! You might want to reword that. At least dont suggest malnutrition is beautiful (see hyperlink below).
-This female body might be thin, but it isn't a typical example of malnutrition.
Next our lycanthropic buddy states, "quite often, when you see a faceless body in advertising (such as in a pantyhose ad, for e.g.), the body you're seeing belongs to a 15 year old"
-I think he is comparing the situation to this picture. For one, this is NOT a faceless body. It has a very distinct and powerful identity, with the gazing eyes of an animal associated with age and wisdom. Secondly, what's wrong with a 15 y.o's leg? Selling pantyhose seems like a pretty good excuse to show just a leg. If you want to take issue with something there is of course far more worthy forms of exploitation to approach (rather than undergarment ads and digital art). I'm guessing the point you're making is about our concept of beauty (and maybe predation), but this is not clear from your brief observation.
Sorry Wolfster, please take this with a grain of salt (and maybe some pepper).
In response to Momo, and Ren's questioning:
As I mentioned above I don't think this is a case of malnutrition. This person could be very fit. But in the case of Smokeytiger's digital image, it may not be a person at all. We have had a similar discussion in a previous post, where I copied one of andrew's digital assembalges in homage to his creativity and vivid imagination. There we came to some agreement that the image is similar to those in art history, depicting gods (animal heads being mostly Egyptian). Now, that is not to say religions (old and relatively new), art-history or history in general, doesn't have it's share of sexism; it admittedly does. Also, it is not to say that by merely asking Mr'Nidge about the role of women in his art you are necessarily commenting on this specifically, but the allusion is there. I say that there is inarguably some undesirable qualities in our modern concept of feminine beauty. With women around the globe looking at the idealized, unacheivable airbrushed, plastic surgery constructed, bo-toxed, barely human modifications, there would be a bit of concern with artists representations, as some say art (by a broad definition including all media) is what forms those ideals.
“Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it”-Brecht
That being said, I interpret this image, my words and perception being equally the "hammer", not as what a women should be (an owl-head is even harder to achieve than a flat tummy), but a fantasy about the power (whether that be symbolized as sexual, or violent - note the bow and arrow) of a feminine god-creature. It would be nice if Smktgr could single handedly redfine concepts of beauty in culture and his own mind, but I don't blame him for using an already existing language to describe this surreal figure he has conjured up. Especially considering the strength he implies it has. When I look at this i don't think "hey, this gal needs a sandwhich", I think "this is a divine creature that may represent love, sexual desire, primal forces in nature, or all of the above, or something I simply dont understand". Ultimately, we will have to wait for the artist to explain what he means with this figure, or others in his work, but of course, he has no obligation to indulge us so. That is often what makes visual art thought provoking; its ambiguity.
I think this is most probably a portrait of Artemis, also known as Diana. The owl is one of her symbols, and is a symbol of wisdom, darkness and death. She is often seen with a bow.
Although....Athena, an even greater deity is known for her wisdom and has an owl as a symbol, but is usually in full armor and carrying a spear, and usually a more mature womam(if we go with the interpretation that this is a young body that we see here).
Either way, I think that both are lunar(owls and artemis) so I'm ot sure why she's hanging out in broad daylight with a rainbow over her.
I picture both goddesses to have equally exquisite breasts.
I think that it is maybe our North American Puritan Conservative nature that makes us twitch a little when we see naked breasts, the europeans wouldn't even flinch.
Nice piece, but really not enough symbolism for me to digest here. What's going on Smok-i, run out of time on this one or is it a work in progress?
(my guess to the interpretation is it's probably just another nutmeg inspired dream.)
Still, with that all said, great picture, keep them coming.
macro-- my statements were deliberately ambiguous. you are, i believe, the one who always tells us we must be ok w/ ambiguity? and lycanthropy is only one of many qualities i possess.
at its core, my late-night sleep deprived comments related to the exoticism and fetishizing of women, and the female form, and of some of our ridiculous concepts of youth and beauty. my problem with a 15-year old's legs being used in pantyhose ads has to do with the false standards it creates of what is beautiful, and of what is normal.
in my job at the youth shelter, i deal every day with amazing, intelligent, beautiful young women who loathe themselves and their bodies b/c they've had a lifetime of images that create a totally warped standard of how they should look, and of how everyone other than them looks.
i don't object to the use of these figures in smktgr's art. in fact, i'm a big fan of his work in all its forms. i think i can like and admire his work (and him, too) while still questioning some of its (and his) core assumptions.
wow gnarly feedback and discussion. In fact I can't think of anything to add. As far as I know I have no plan or design in the art that I make. I like to think of it more as trying to be a good open conduit for a higher subconcious source. Just drinking from the poison pool of the black star and seeing what comes to my eyes. Muchos Gracias.
Maybe it's that Im just starting to get in the Christmas spirit or something but I feel an incoming blizzard of creativity and evolutionary change.
Yukdugu wishes for me to send her regards to everyone.
"you are, i believe, the one who always tells us we must be ok w/ ambiguity?" -Lorne
-you got me there. I don't think I say "must be", but I certainly advocate tolerance to ambiguity. It seems I have been caught in the trap of my own logic, telling you not to be so ambiguous, and to be tolerant of it at the same time. I will consider this further.
"As far as I know I have no plan or design in the art that I make. I like to think of it more as trying to be a good open conduit for a higher subconcious source". -Andrew.
- Claiming a subconcious source does lend itself to the possibility of this being about sex and fear (of women, and/or owls? hehe).
for the record...someone decided to pretend they were me. Which is fine. mixed with laughter, I figured I would add one more piece... I feel there is definately an odd juxtoposition between power and vulnerability. I think the thing with the female body that struck me the most connected me with a jean kilbourne talk i heard one time...she spoke about how women's bodies are mostly chopped up in advertising and contribute to a piecemeal approach women take to their bodies (sectional: hips, thighs, abs, cheekbones, etc). Similarly to a butcher discussing meat (oooh snap!). In any case, I don't feel this art does that because i do think there is more power in the image than that. But boy am I glad I got such a reaction!! YAY!
A Love for Art was a collaborative blog for visual artists, musicians, writers, and social scientists. This blog has evolved into a new blog called BETA, go check it out!
19 comments:
let's play MUSIC!
As always, goldeN.
hey! where the F are you guys?
i wanna play some freakin' music.
for some reason I can't take my eyes off the malnutritioned feedbags. dammit.
Yeah, me too. I'm actually quite curious about this theme in your work Andrew. This image is reminiscent of many others in your body of work. What kind of role do you think these representations of women play within your art?
dum dum dummmmm...
the big question(s).
this here gal is either really, really, REALLY young, or terribly malnourished. or both. beautiful, but faceless.
quite often, when you see a faceless body in advertising (such as in a pantyhose ad, for e.g.), the body you're seeing belongs to a 15 year old.
i wonder if we've broken the world in ways that can't be fixed.
or, just as we look at the unconscious racism and sexism of previous generations with a sense of benevolent scorn, i wonder if subsequent generations will look at us and say: "they were so smart with their computers and flying machines, and yet they didn't even know a single thing about moon cycles, or about how to tell time by the colour of the sun on the river. what fools."
my verification word is: sidvky.
Warning, this response may provoke you into a fit of rage, or if recieved correctly spark an interesting debate:
I will start with my favourite target, the most likely to get emotional and write a 20 page resonse, refuting my assertions, the witty, reclusive feral child you all know and love:
Wolfboy said, "this here gal is either really, really, REALLY young, or terribly malnourished. or both. beautiful, but faceless."
-Are you saying that the very young and/or malnutritioned are beautiful?! You might want to reword that. At least dont suggest malnutrition is beautiful (see hyperlink below).
-This female body might be thin, but it isn't a typical example of malnutrition.
Next our lycanthropic buddy states, "quite often, when you see a faceless body in advertising (such as in a pantyhose ad, for e.g.), the body you're seeing belongs to a 15 year old"
-I think he is comparing the situation to this picture. For one, this is NOT a faceless body. It has a very distinct and powerful identity, with the gazing eyes of an animal associated with age and wisdom. Secondly, what's wrong with a 15 y.o's leg? Selling pantyhose seems like a pretty good excuse to show just a leg. If you want to take issue with something there is of course far more worthy forms of exploitation to approach (rather than undergarment ads and digital art). I'm guessing the point you're making is about our concept of beauty (and maybe predation), but this is not clear from your brief observation.
Sorry Wolfster, please take this with a grain of salt (and maybe some pepper).
In response to Momo, and Ren's questioning:
As I mentioned above I don't think this is a case of malnutrition. This person could be very fit. But in the case of Smokeytiger's digital image, it may not be a person at all. We have had a similar discussion in a previous post, where I copied one of andrew's digital assembalges in homage to his creativity and vivid imagination. There we came to some agreement that the image is similar to those in art history, depicting gods (animal heads being mostly Egyptian). Now, that is not to say religions (old and relatively new), art-history or history in general, doesn't have it's share of sexism; it admittedly does. Also, it is not to say that by merely asking Mr'Nidge about the role of women in his art you are necessarily commenting on this specifically, but the allusion is there. I say that there is inarguably some undesirable qualities in our modern concept of feminine beauty. With women around the globe looking at the idealized, unacheivable airbrushed, plastic surgery constructed, bo-toxed, barely human modifications, there would be a bit of concern with artists representations, as some say art (by a broad definition including all media) is what forms those ideals.
“Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it”-Brecht
That being said, I interpret this image, my words and perception being equally the "hammer", not as what a women should be (an owl-head is even harder to achieve than a flat tummy), but a fantasy about the power (whether that be symbolized as sexual, or violent - note the bow and arrow) of a feminine god-creature. It would be nice if Smktgr could single handedly redfine concepts of beauty in culture and his own mind, but I don't blame him for using an already existing language to describe this surreal figure he has conjured up. Especially considering the strength he implies it has. When I look at this i don't think "hey, this gal needs a sandwhich", I think "this is a divine creature that may represent love, sexual desire, primal forces in nature, or all of the above, or something I simply dont understand". Ultimately, we will have to wait for the artist to explain what he means with this figure, or others in his work, but of course, he has no obligation to indulge us so. That is often what makes visual art thought provoking; its ambiguity.
I think this is most probably a portrait of Artemis, also known as Diana. The owl is one of her symbols, and is a symbol of wisdom, darkness and death. She is often seen with a bow.
Although....Athena, an even greater deity is known for her wisdom and has an owl as a symbol, but is usually in full armor and carrying a spear, and usually a more mature womam(if we go with the interpretation that this is a young body that we see here).
Either way, I think that both are lunar(owls and artemis) so I'm ot sure why she's hanging out in broad daylight with a rainbow over her.
I picture both goddesses to have equally exquisite breasts.
I think that it is maybe our North American Puritan Conservative nature that makes us twitch a little when we see naked breasts, the europeans wouldn't even flinch.
Nice piece, but really not enough symbolism for me to digest here. What's going on Smok-i, run out of time on this one or is it a work in progress?
(my guess to the interpretation is it's probably just another nutmeg inspired dream.)
Still, with that all said, great picture, keep them coming.
I think it has to do with fear of women.
ouch! yowsers! we tend to exoticize what we fear.
macro-- my statements were deliberately ambiguous. you are, i believe, the one who always tells us we must be ok w/ ambiguity? and lycanthropy is only one of many qualities i possess.
at its core, my late-night sleep deprived comments related to the exoticism and fetishizing of women, and the female form, and of some of our ridiculous concepts of youth and beauty. my problem with a 15-year old's legs being used in pantyhose ads has to do with the false standards it creates of what is beautiful, and of what is normal.
in my job at the youth shelter, i deal every day with amazing, intelligent, beautiful young women who loathe themselves and their bodies b/c they've had a lifetime of images that create a totally warped standard of how they should look, and of how everyone other than them looks.
i don't object to the use of these figures in smktgr's art. in fact, i'm a big fan of his work in all its forms. i think i can like and admire his work (and him, too) while still questioning some of its (and his) core assumptions.
wow gnarly feedback and discussion. In fact I can't think of anything to add. As far as I know I have no plan or design in the art that I make. I like to think of it more as trying to be a good open conduit for a higher subconcious source. Just drinking from the poison pool of the black star and seeing what comes to my eyes. Muchos Gracias.
Maybe it's that Im just starting to get in the Christmas spirit or something but I feel an incoming blizzard of creativity and evolutionary change.
Yukdugu wishes for me to send her regards to everyone.
Give my regards to spider-cat!
"you are, i believe, the one who always tells us we must be ok w/ ambiguity?" -Lorne
-you got me there. I don't think I say "must be", but I certainly advocate tolerance to ambiguity. It seems I have been caught in the trap of my own logic, telling you not to be so ambiguous, and to be tolerant of it at the same time. I will consider this further.
"As far as I know I have no plan or design in the art that I make. I like to think of it more as trying to be a good open conduit for a higher subconcious source". -Andrew.
- Claiming a subconcious source does lend itself to the possibility of this being about sex and fear (of women, and/or owls? hehe).
indeed. indeed.
p.s. hi yukdugu. i'll come and visit you soon.
looks like a healthy looking body and boobs to me.
you don't need a magician to know which way those boobs are blow'in.
for the record...someone decided to pretend they were me. Which is fine. mixed with laughter, I figured I would add one more piece... I feel there is definately an odd juxtoposition between power and vulnerability. I think the thing with the female body that struck me the most connected me with a jean kilbourne talk i heard one time...she spoke about how women's bodies are mostly chopped up in advertising and contribute to a piecemeal approach women take to their bodies (sectional: hips, thighs, abs, cheekbones, etc). Similarly to a butcher discussing meat (oooh snap!). In any case, I don't feel this art does that because i do think there is more power in the image than that. But boy am I glad I got such a reaction!! YAY!
ha! awesome.
who is momo?
Post a Comment