12.17.07
Sally Mann and “This is not porn, but serious art :0″
I don’t know what to think. Art or not? But this is the never-ending question. Sally Mann’s exhibition in Helsinki makes the news in a not-so-positive way.
I realize people, also and maybe especially children need media literacy and critical social thinking, and this can only be achieved by (in this case) looking at pictures – without forgetting the discussion and critique. But how many H&M ads are enough to achieve media literacy of that kind? How many thousand naked ladies do I have to see in order to get it – of is it possible that at this stage I am not only well-educated, but totally fed up, brainwashed, and – unfortunately – used to all the public female nudity around me? I am overeducated. My sons and daughters will also be, in just a few months after I take them outside the home. They will soon make notions of how “the lady is naked” and “a man drives the car.” There are two things to see here: the verbs “is” and “drives” and “naked” and “car”. If you can see the disturbing part in the two latter, ok, but how about the previous ones? “Is” is a static, “drives” is dynamic. But you’re right, “naked” was the issue now.
I do not wish to raise children to be illiterate, without no possibilities to practice criticism, reverse reading, without the possibility to become socially aware. If I “protect” them from everything they grow up tu use no judgement. But how many Sally Mann’s photographs, commercial ads, fan service movies are enough? When does it become exessive, even for an adult? At around 20 I thought I already had enough. And now? Just very, very annoyed, and able to educate others and able and willing to boycott just about anything.
I saw the Salvador Dalà exhibition at Espoo Museum of Modern Art (EMMA at WeeGee) and must say that it only made me remember Teemu MÀki and the Lynching of the Cat and Whacking Off Video and on the other hand, ARS95 body secretions. Is this art, may one ask.
In the past, pictures or other visual representations had to be made by painting, drawing, sculpting, and later, by woodblock printing etc. There were no photographs, no video, no movies, no TV. What was on a man’s mind back then? The same as now, nude women – well, it’s true. In ancient Greece also nude men, beautiful and perfect, of course, as always, when depicting the object of desire. In Greece men were considered more desirable partners than women, and so ancient Greek art is six pack after six pack – in other cultures and especially towards modern days it seems that the objectified body is that of the female. There are nude women in frames all over the western world on walls of dining rooms, drawing rooms, lounges, and museums. The nude female body in all variations of seductive, innocent, hinting or straight forward positions is probably the most captured form on canvas or paper. But because the medium is oil colour and canvas, pastels, charcoal, pencil or water color, it is art.
Then came the camera, celluloid, and hardwear. Female nudity became the most captured form on the monitor screen, too. Even if Playboy claims to be art, most people seem to regard nude ladies on paper, film, or as bits, as someting else than art. I’m no exception. But contrary to most others, I sometimes articulate my view on framed or sculpted nudes. I tend to think that they represent the porn of their time. Mind you, a dress showing too much – no, not cleveage – ankles was was not socially accepted, let alone nudity. No reputable woman would expose too much, undress privately or publicly, or in any case have a picture painted of her and displayed. I don’t think models were average mothers, reputable women, elite or middle class – nor are they today. Has anything changed? Oh yes, the medium and how efficiently the “artwork” can be spread and copied.
What DalĂ has on his mind (at least accirding to the photos)Â is probably what many male (and presumably mostly heterosexual) painters and other artists have and have had on their mind. Sorry for being a bad sport.
