Australian Artist knits a scarf with wool take from her ......

I wasn't surprised that this video went viral, but the negative reactions I thought were really more than would have been expected. but maybe that part of performance art, to attempt to redraw boundaries and make us comfortable with what we currently find need to be secretive about.

So if you are brave, look here.

So is Australia represented at the cutting edge of performance art, or is this to be dismissed as attention-seeking. How does it stack up to Marina Abramović'performance art?

You decide!

Asher

Isn't that where all women store their wool?
I used to hold the wool for my mum when she was rolling it into balls from skeins. I did often feel like telling her to stick it up her fanny. It made my arms ache. Not her fanny; the holding of the wool.
My question is: what is she knitting? Doesn't seem anything I could wear.
It does seem to me that if she performed this act in a strip joint in Bankok she wouldn't get a second glance. Likewise in Darwin, except here it would probably get a laugh.
Trust me. I'm not rushing out to buy tickets.
I'd like to see how she goes stringing a barbed wire fence in the same way.

Congratulations, we are on our way to becoming the new facebook. There was a time when we used to post here provocative news, only if they were related to photography. Now that the floodgates are open, can I post films of kittens in boxes and snakes swallowing men or perhaps funniest home videos? Anyway, where is the like button?

What amuses me is how people come up with such ideas. Its not like she'd be sitting there one day with a ball of yarn in her hand and wonder what would happen if she stuck it up her ****. I think its a good thing people can still knit. Its a useful craft. I do a bit of it myself from time to time. Never have I thought of sticking it up some orifice, although I do remember some years back, while knitting on the train to work, the ball rolled off my lap and disappeared under the seat. It caused a panic on the train, with all sorts grovelling around to find the end. Now that I think of it, there was one bloke who did yell: "hey Sheila! Stick that up your fanny, will you?" Maybe if I'd taken notice I'd be famous by now.

Tom dinning said:

I used to hold the wool for my mum when she was rolling it into balls from skeins. I did often feel like telling her to stick it up her fanny. It made my arms ache. Not her fanny; the holding of the wool.

Click to expand...

Hilarious !!!
Made my afternoon

Asher Kelman said:

I wasn't surprised that this video went viral, but the negative reactions I thought were really more than would have been expected. but maybe that part of performance art, to attempt to redraw boundaries and make us comfortable with what we currently find need to be secretive about.

So if you are brave, look here.

So is Australia represented at the cutting edge of performance art, or is this to be dismissed as attention-seeking. How does it stack up to Marina Abramović' performance art?

You decide!

Asher

Click to expand...

Quite frankly, the two performances draw on styles that have been used and overused in the past. I am surprised that Casey Jenkins manages to stir up interest with that knitting piece. We have had enough of this kind of performance in the 60s-70s, when feminists defended reappropriation of the female body by paintings with body fluids and displayed castings of their naughty bits. I would have expected this to be standard program in gender studies.
However, the outrage shows that reminders like this are apparently still necessary. For your information, the intended message is that women are allowed to do with their body as they please and there is no reason that society would impose parts of it to be off limit.

Marina Abramović is even more banal. The surrealists were already masters at this game: mise en scène of the Artist.

Aaah!
Where's Wally's scarf.

Cem_Usakligil said:

Congratulations, we are on our way to becoming the new facebook. There was a time when we used to post here provocative news, only if they were related to photography. Now that the floodgates are open, can I post films of kittens in boxes and snakes swallowing men or perhaps funniest home videos? Anyway, where is the like button?

Click to expand...

Cem,

Consider that this kind of art is premiered in the most prestigious modern art museums, MOMA in New York and MOCA in Los Angeles, (with Marina), for example, to name just two recent major such performance art exhibitions. At the same time, a huge number of equally talented arts, but actually classical or modern photographers cannot get such public display opportunities!

All such performances are reported with still photography:



and so this art is part of the spectrum of Photographic Art of our time. This also becomes important when it will be shown again, as art itself, in the art sections of major newspapers and all the picture become potentially part of the artist's body of work to be exhibited once more in future "retrospectives".

So this is actually some of the competition photographers face in getting public attention. It also is one facet of what interests the art world's "movers and shakers"! In the end, this photograph substitutes for the voice of the art itself. I mist say I find the ambition, ideas and execution, admirable. I'd have love to have scene 20" x24" Polaroids or perhaps a platinum palladium print so folk would be more open to this as great photography or at least significant and worth exhibiting. I see nothing about this picture that's offensive. It's just a very bold metaphor for women who wish not to be stigmatized by the essence of femininity, that is cyclic fertility and then renewal of the wombs receptive capability.

Asher

Casey Jenkins is not at the MOMA, but apparently, her performance is all over the Internet. And judging by the comments on the news sites telling about her performance, this kind of display is as necessary today as it was in the 70s. Breaking news: women have a vagina. It can be used as a cavity. Sometimes, it bleeds.

This is not all. There is a Chilean artist named Carina Ubeda who has been collecting her own menstrual blood on scraps of cloth for five years. Is it art? I don't know, but apparently, it can be useful. Let me cite a comment by another woman:

Though I am absolutely one of those “I don’t get it” people with regard to most art, I find this piece really fascinating and wonderful.

For a long time, I was ashamed of my period. In part, this was because it lasts for-f’ing-ever (10 – 14 days nearly every time), it’s stressfully heavy and it makes me violently ill, but there was also this deep-rooted fear of strangers or acquaintances or people I was romantically interested in realizing I was on my period — that I even had a period. I didn’t mind if my friends knew, but something about it made me feel so incredibly unattractive to those around me. Honestly, even at 23, I am still a bit apologetic about for reasons I cannot quite pinpoint; I sometimes wonder if this is because people do make menstruation seem “filthy” and taboo.

As a result, events like these and that menstrual poetry slam from a few weeks ago are inspirational to me. I am not brave enough to try and break down that barrier on my own, so I strongly appreciate and applaud those who do. Even if you are not fans of being anywhere near somebody else’s menstrual blood — a preference that I find quite understandable — it is great to at least give a little salute to the people who do, as they’re helping to destigmatize one of the most natural, necessary bodily functions in the world.

After seeing the dates for the performance, I realized I missed such an historic event. So did most of Darwin, so it seems. It didn't get a mention in any listings I read. The local paper didn't pick it up, that I noticed. It seemed to have passed without much notice. Then again, I'm not surprised. The Visual Arts Association is a very small part of the art scene here with limited and very narrow perspectives.
Personally, I have no objection nor am I shocked or offended by such art. I might suggest its intention was to do that to me. I'm of the generation that still believes body fluids and orifices are to be kept closed or covered, especially while chewing. I would no more go see someone defacate or urinate or spit than I would this activity. It's just me.
Mind you, if you ever get to Tasmainia, drop into MONA (museum of old and new ). There are a few surprises there that might give you a bit of reflux.

Tom dinning said:

After seeing the dates for the performance, I realized I missed such an historic event. So did most of Darwin, so it seems. It didn't get a mention in any listings I read. The local paper didn't pick it up, that I noticed. It seemed to have passed without much notice. Then again, I'm not surprised. The Visual Arts Association is a very small part of the art scene here with limited and very narrow perspectives.
Personally, I have no objection nor am I shocked or offended by such art. I might suggest its intention was to do that to me. I'm of the generation that still believes body fluids and orifices are to be kept closed or covered, especially while chewing. I would no more go see someone defacate or urinate or spit than I would this activity. It's just me.
Mind you, if you ever get to Tasmainia, drop into MONA (museum of old and new ). There are a few surprises there that might give you a bit of reflux.

Click to expand...

Tom,

The whole point of "Performance Art" is that one does things that are not normally done in public in an attempt to make folk examine and perhaps recalibrate their view of matters. So yes, there's exhibitionism, but so is making photographs for exhibitions, LOL!

It's exactly the proposition, (or implication), that you provide, that all bodily fluids and cavities are either fodder, dirty or disgusting, is the reason for the existence of this kind of public art as a protest! The women here do not want to be considered just as "dirty" and unpleasant during a period as the menstrual flow seems to be.

I think the demonstration of knitting is pretty tame and the composition of that picture in the Huffington Post, delightful!

Asher

If she keeps knitting till July she might just have the American flag.

andy brown said:

if she keeps knitting till july she might just have the american flag.

Click to expand...

rotfwl!

Andy brown said:

If she keeps knitting till July she might just have the American flag.

Click to expand...

I haven't heard a wittier remark than this in a long time. Thanks Andy!

Cem_Usakligil said:

I haven't heard a wittier remark than this in a long time. Thanks Andy!

Click to expand...

She's an Aussie. Why would she want to knit the American flag? Unless she intends on burning it.
Now that would be funny.

Tom dinning said:

She's an Aussie. Why would she want to knit the American flag? Unless she intends on burning it.
Now that would be funny.

Click to expand...

That would be pretty serious, hard core performance art and would get her much more attention!

Meanwhile, no comments on her picture.

Asher

Cem_Usakligil said:

Congratulations, we are on our way to becoming the new facebook. There was a time when we used to post here provocative news, only if they were related to photography. Now that the floodgates are open, can I post films of kittens in boxes and snakes swallowing men or perhaps funniest home videos? Anyway, where is the like button?

Click to expand...

Of course you can Cem. Post anything anywhere. Keep the OPF spirit alive.

Spirit, I copy and paste below from Wikipedia. Just to keep the spirit alive.

Etymology[edit]

The English word spirit comes from the Latin spiritus, meaning "breath", but also "spirit, soul, courage, vigor", ultimately from a Proto-Indo-European *(s)peis. It is distinguished from Latin anima, "soul" (which nonetheless also derives from an Indo-European root meaning "to breathe", earliest form *h2enh1- [2]). In Greek, this distinction exists between pneuma (πνεῦμα), "breath, motile air, spirit," and psykhē (ψυχή), "soul"[3] (even though the latter term, ψῡχή = psykhē/psūkhē, is also from an Indo-European root meaning "to breathe": *bhes-, zero grade *bhs- devoicing in proto-Greek to *phs-, resulting in historical-period Greek ps- in psūkhein, "to breathe", whence psūkhē, "spirit", "soul"[4]).
The word "spirit" came into Middle English via Old French. The distinction between soul and spirit also developed in the Abrahamic religions: Arabic nafs (نفس) opposite rúħ (روح); Hebrew neshama (נְשָׁמָה nəšâmâh) or nephesh (in Hebrew neshama comes from the root NŠM or "breath") opposite ruach (רוּחַ rûaħ). (Note, however, that in Semitic just as in Indo-European, this dichotomy has not always been as neat historically as it has come to be taken over a long period of development: Both נֶ֫פֶשׁ (root נפשׁ) and רוּחַ (root רוח), as well as cognate words in various Semitic languages, including Arabic, also preserve meanings involving misc. air phenomena: "breath", "wind", and even "odour".[5][6][7])
Metaphysical and metaphorical uses[edit]

English-speakers use the word "spirit" in two related contexts, one metaphysical and the other metaphorical.
Metaphysical contexts[edit]
In metaphysical terms, "spirit" has acquired a number of meanings:
An incorporeal but ubiquitous, non-quantifiable substance or energy present individually in all living things. Unlike the concept of souls (often regarded as eternal and sometimes believed to pre-exist the body) a spirit develops and grows as an integral aspect of a living being.[8] This concept of the individual spirit occurs commonly in animism. Note the distinction between this concept of spirit and that of the pre-existing or eternal soul: belief in souls occurs specifically and far less commonly, particularly in traditional societies. One might more properly term this type/aspect of spirit "life" (bios in Greek) or "aether" rather than "spirit" (pneuma in Greek).
A daemon sprite, or a ghost. People usually conceive of a ghost as a wandering spirit from a being no longer living, having survived the death of the body yet maintaining at least vestiges of mind and consciousness.
In religion and spirituality, the respiration of a human has for obvious reasons become seen as strongly linked with the very occurrence of life. A similar significance has become attached to human blood. Spirit, in this sense, means the thing that separates a living body from a corpse—and usually implies intelligence, consciousness, and sentience.
Latter-day Saint prophet Joseph Smith Jr. taught that the concept of spirit as incorporeal or without substance was incorrect: "There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes."[9]
In some Native American spiritual traditions the Great Spirit or Wakan Tanka is a term for the Supreme Being.
Various forms of animism, such as Japan's Shinto and African traditional religion, focus on invisible beings that represent or connect with plants, animals (sometimes called "Animal Fathers)", or landforms (kami)[citation needed]: translators usually employ the English word "spirit" when trying to express the idea of such entities.
Individual spirits envisaged as interconnected with all other spirits and with "The Spirit" (singular and capitalized). This concept relates to theories of a unified spirituality, to universal consciousness and to some concepts of Deity. In this scenario all separate "spirits", when connected, form a greater unity, the Spirit, which has an identity separate from its elements plus a consciousness and intellect greater than its elements; an ultimate, unified, non-dual awareness or force of life combining or transcending all individual units of consciousness. The experience of such a connection can become a primary basis for spiritual belief. The term spirit occurs in this sense in (to name but a few) Anthroposophy, Aurobindo, A Course In Miracles, Hegel, Ken Wilber, and Meher Baba (though in his teachings, "spirits" are only apparently separate from each other and from "The Spirit.")[10] In this use, the term seems conceptually identical to Plotinus's "The One" and Friedrich Schelling's "Absolute". Similarly, according to the panentheistic/pantheistic view, Spirit equates to essence that can manifest itself as mind/soul through any level in pantheistic hierarchy/holarchy, such as through a mind/soul of a single cell (with very primitive, elemental consciousness), or through a human or animal mind/soul (with consciousness on a level of organic synergy of an individual human/animal), or through a (superior) mind/soul with synergetically extremely complex/sophisticated consciousness of whole galaxies involving all sub-levels, all emanating (since the superior mind/soul operates non-dimensionally, or trans-dimensionally) from the one Spirit.
Christian theology can use the term "Spirit" to describe God, or aspects of God — as in the "Holy Spirit", referring to a Triune God (Trinity)(cf Gospel of Matthew 28:19).
"Spirit" forms a central concept in pneumatology (note that pneumatology studies "pneuma" (Greek for "spirit") not "psyche" (Greek for "soul") — as studied in psychology).
Christian Science uses "Spirit" as one of the seven synonyms for God, as in: "Principle; Mind; Soul; Spirit; Life; Truth; Love"[11]
Harmonism reserves the term "spirit" for those that collectively control and influence an individual from the realm of the mind.

Metaphorical usage[edit]
The metaphorical use of the term likewise groups several related meanings:
The loyalty and feeling of inclusion in the social history or collective essence of an institution or group, such as in school spirit or esprit de corps.
A closely related meaning refers to the worldview of a person, place, or time, as in "The Declaration of Independence was written in the spirit of John Locke and his notions of liberty", or the term zeitgeist, meaning "spirit of the age".
As a synonym for "vivacity" as in "She performed the piece with spirit" or "She put up a spirited defense".
The underlying intention of a text as distinguished from its literal meaning, especially in law; see Letter and spirit of the law
As a term for alcoholic beverages.
In mysticism: existence in unity with Godhead. Soul may also equate with spirit, but the soul involves certain individual human consciousness, while spirit comes from beyond that. Compare the psychological teaching of Al-Ghazali.
See soul and ghost and spiritual for related discussions.

Related concepts in other languages[edit]

Similar concepts in other languages include Greek pneuma and Sanskrit akasha/atman[3] (see also prana). Some languages use a word for "spirit" often closely related (if not synonymous) to "mind". Examples include the German Geist (related to the English word "ghost") or the French 'l'esprit'. English versions of the Bible most commonly translate the Hebrew word "ruach" (רוח; "wind") as "the spirit", whose essence is divine[12] (see Holy Spirit and ruach hakodesh). Alternatively, Hebrew texts commonly use the word nephesh. Kabbalists regard nephesh as one of the five parts of the Jewish soul, where nephesh (animal) refers to the physical being and its animal instincts. Similarly, Scandinavian languages, Baltic languages, Slavic languages and the Chinese language (qi) use the words for "breath" to express concepts similar to "the spirit".[3]

Of course, for the majority here at OPF, English is not the first Language. As evidenced so distinctively recently by the failure to understand an English sentence comprised of ( maybe not so ) three ( 3 ) simple words.

So, Fahim, you've shown how you can indeed post anything here. However, we can also evaluate that and see if it fits,

Allow me to use my freedom to address a question of mine from your own free choice for posting here. The reference to a Fox News happening, also, in fact, Performance Art, which led to you complaining that we don't understand the meaning of simple sentences in plain English. Anyway, you did allude to that in your post above, so I'll respond here, while you are online and engaged. So let me address the challenge of understanding even simple, apparently clearly constructed declarations such as, "Jesus was white!". So here goes:-

We'll, I'm fairly well educated and English is my mother tongue. Moreover the meanings of words happen to interest me a great deal. All words are constructed, in the first place, in their nascence, as metaphors. At that moment, they're understood. With the passage of time that word becomes a link to myriads of new contexts that can multiply and drift the meanings so one has to be attuned to the conversational idiom, tone, circumstances, cultural background and much more to interpret the meaning in each new instance of use.

Most words require no mental effort but sometimes it's not at all clear what the intended meaning or significances really are.

Such are the facts of the matter. You, however, are unwilling to contemplate that I, for one, cannot understand the proposition that "Jesus was white!"

Imagine if I say that Shakespeare was f'ng great. What might that mean? He was a cool dude living in bawdy Elizabethan times with male friends or he was, and still is, one of the most brilliant writers in any language we have known or perhaps, that he was so famous that he didn't have to make a sex tape or even know Oprah or the Kardashians to become an "A-list" celebrity.

So I think it's time for you to share your "obvious" meaning to the Fox woman's assertion, as I'm flummoxed. I tease you not, I am lost! I see her as a babbling divisive right wing air head and one doesn't have to stop for each splatter of bird droppings to get down to that level and attempt to read their true meanings!

Asher

It would mean that shakespeare was f'ng great. That's what it would mean. Nothing more nothing less.
You should know, being English speaking.

I, too, think Shakespeare was F'ng great.