Archive for April, 2017

25
Apr
17

Slices of JHB number 2

SLICES OF JHB 17

20
Apr
17

Till Dusk Kiss the Source I Donne Hornby vocals by Michael Matthews

15
Apr
17

AWake: ambivalence 02 by Michael Matthews

12
Apr
17

Slices of JHB number 1

SLICES OF JHB 14

01
Apr
17

Beyond Neglected Histories: Neglected Histories (Part 2) : Fe in front of Male – old news or i-con-ic expression

A re-adjustment to our understanding of the male artist’s thinking in the post-past era has led us to empathise with the role the male-in-General has to play in a society no longer to His exclusive use and ab-use. Our time with its neo- and post- and post-post- conceptualisations has provided the ideal for an innocent perspective e.g. to view the Male-artist as having-been-punished, now ready to put on the satirical shoes and jump – straight into an Other observation that fe-male tried to fill the artist’s shoes, so to speak, by pushing for space or, at the best, manipulatively ‘inspiring’ him to walk her into the art history scene some way or another; depending on how the object is viewed.

The Fe-Artist – thank heavens – now creates her own objects but is still more or less seen as being preoccupied with her feminine selves. It might be overseen that this preoccupation has something to do with deconstructing the objectifying glass, the images females have had to see of themselves. It is to create a way of seeing not from the Male-Artist-as-Objectifyer’s position but from an outlook of the Other as another.

Being where we are now, the denied-equal-opportunities-idea has a clichéd appearance in postmodernist twists where various manipulative acts have a parallel privilege to be brought to the fore. The idea is not to un-qualify the Male-artist as gender exploiter into a paranoid angle, but to free him from that his-tory, from the guilt trip that followed him to act as a conveyer of an image that was not his own. The Fe-artist has taken up the brush herself, so that the male artist is free from the social responsibility to represent her, and if he does, it may be as a hu-without-man being.

To view the Fe-male ‘artist’ as born through the male-as-conveyer, is like saying: women bear children; men bear women; who bears men? God through wo-man as embellished, who cannot make art seriously because they make babies – male artists who are the cultural bearers and law makers of society so they can put themselves erect on pedestals on gallery walls in theoretical perspectives.

But of course the above is supposed to be old news by now. We all know where fe comes from. We know that the term Neglected Histories used to designate supplements of being denied parallel stands, of pre-fixing the male ego to the extent of be-coming post-male. We know Male-artists hanged themselves in the female image because they feared the female hanging as well as the extensions of the female image into commercial art forms and fashion photography, not wanting to realise that these are supplementing the Fine Arts. The representations of the fe-male image has shifted its concepts. It has opened the way into a more eclectic and rounded way of looking at the world we are in and moving into.

And it has the potential to raise our anxiety levels if we get too specialised into specifics. If hanging the feminine object took place under pressure in the past, it now has the potential to become a ritual act of self-discovery and forgiveness, as Fe’s nowadays play survival alongside their male contestants – and kiss the Source from a position of unity.