http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/11/07/taking-whatshertits-to-another-level-ben-beress-print-is-cut-from-a-show-at-cornish Comments On: Taking Whatshertits to Another Level: Ben Beres's Print Is Cut from a Show at Cornish by Jen Graves en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:45:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
Rightly or wrongly, I immediately read the Beres as a well-made feminist point about artists becoming 'women artists' rather than artists. There is clearly no intention to differentiate the breasts so the names attached to them are in effect random - these are not pictorial representations of individual women, so it is hard to see why anyone should be offended on that score.

On the other hand, if I was going to use another artist's name IN ANY CAPACITY, even a completely non-controversial one, I would ask them first. That's good manners.

So, in my backseaty, non-Seattley way, I think the artwork is fine but the artist has been rather ill-mannered and that is a good enough reason for the work to have caused a good deal of unease.
Posted by Sewell]]> Fri, 23 Nov 2012 01:14:48 -0800 The Stranger Posted by hitchcock]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:36:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by tinytits]]> Sun, 18 Nov 2012 01:46:24 -0800 The Stranger Posted by sick of sexism being acceptable]]> Wed, 14 Nov 2012 22:17:09 -0800 The Stranger
I am not sure it matters what Ben's intent is ultimately however because the image has its impact independent of his intention. If he is lampooning a particular attitude the effect is still the same. He repeats and strengthens degrading messages.

Like Archie Bunker's TV comments on All in the Family back in the 70's, the script may have targeted the racist comments of a bigot as a source of humor, in the end it just repeats his racism in a powerful forum that strengthens and spreads it.

It's impact on the students, remains negative and it legitimizes that kind of treatment of Cornish employees and women in general in their eyes.
Posted by hitchcock]]> Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:01:13 -0800 The Stranger There have been plenty of comments directed at the curator, the critic, the women who did not want to be depicted and many comments from women directing their disagreement of the artwork a man created at each other. At the very least, whoever the artist is at the center of the controversy, should share not only the notoriety of the "scandal" but should also be given the opportunity to make his intent known. If men are going to be included in the dialogue and ride the coattails of the enhanced visibility of women artists in Seattle, then they/we should also be equal targets of criticism and evaluation.
Posted by juanalonso]]> Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:29:19 -0800 The Stranger Posted by goyasdog]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 21:12:26 -0800 The Stranger Posted by hitchcock]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 03:02:51 -0800 The Stranger Posted by LORD ZOD]]> Sat, 10 Nov 2012 20:26:24 -0800 The Stranger
Posted by hitchcock]]> Sat, 10 Nov 2012 03:11:39 -0800 The Stranger
You're absolutely right. The play on words is obvious if you look closely enough, which you have. In putting together this show, this was actually the argument I expected, rather than the one I got.

Dissent means precisely that - a difference of opinion. When I curated Red Current, I made sure to bring the experience of discovery down to a personal level, because I found the idea of proselytizing a show of "woman artists!!!" distasteful. It left me feeling marginalized. I don't identify as a woman artist - I identify as an artist. I don't wish to have to qualify that all the time. So I presented this show with the intention to promote a bounty of Seattle artists, and allow the discovery of who they were to emerge second. Not first.

So with Elles, it's hard to not jump and say "fuck yeah ladytime!!!!" - believe me. But part of my criticism of Elles (yes, there are others but nothing to do with this issue) has to do with what I foresaw: a city erupting with shows about women. Is that bad? No. What am I getting at? There was potential for men to feel like they didn't get to participate. I knew I could have been wrong about that perception, too. But here we are. My aim was to include these artists in the most exciting conversation to happen in this city in a long time. I wanted to poke at gender politics. I wanted to poke at who gets to talk and when. I wanted to poke at all of these things that have come up.

When I was asked to do a response show at Cornish, I had three choices: create a show of women, create a 'non-gendered' show with equal sexes, or create this one. Out of the three, I imagined that it would be very hard to do better than Red Current, and the show I came up with was what interested me most.

Don't we all find that dissent an integral component of good conversation, the foundation upon which the most interesting and productive dialogue takes place? My opinion is there isn't enough dissent in contemporary society, that we are so afraid of conflict we shy away from things that disagree.

Thank god these conversations are messy. Maybe without the mess they wouldn't be happening.
Posted by sharonArnold]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:22:08 -0800 The Stranger
Carrying on,

Another thing that nags at me about this show is the title. Ils disent means "They [they being two or more people, at least one of whom is male] say." But the English-speaking eye merely sees the similarity to the English word DISSENT. Titled this way, the show presents itself as a dissent. A protest. Of what? Elles. (As in, the shows.) What else could it be? Ils. Elles. Disent. Dissent.

It is problematic to have a show (of male artists) dissent from the Elles shows.

That said, I don't think the male artists in the show are dissenting; I think YOU are, by curating this show and titling it this way. Rather than curate another all-women show this month you have dissented and curated an all-men show. I don't think you did this because you're anti-feminist. I think you did it because it was subversive.

The result is problematic. But, nonetheless, I'm glad you did it. It's better to take risks and have messy conversations than to stay safe and boring.

Susanna


Posted by susannabluhm]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:39:22 -0800 The Stranger
I am a woman! Does that not factor into the presentation of this show? Would it be different if this were presented by a male curator?

This is a valid perspective, and interest, to include a part of the conversation that doesn't often get acknowledged. As I have said before, it's fine to have a heavily gendered discussion, but at what point can all genders have that discussion together, in the same room, at the same time? This show does nothing but point back at women, talk about women, pay elegant homage to women. I encourage everyone to go see it. The artists in this show are celebrating the inspiration of women artists through their work, yes, even Ben Beres. If it were not for his piece, would you feel this sense of outrage?

This show has, through the controversy of this piece, done nothing but unearth a dialogue about gender that is as valid and important to the purpose and point of Elles as the simple celebration of women that has been going on throughout the city. And this does not diminish that celebration. Elles will be up through mid- January. Women do and will continue to have this stage. I hope that the exciting conversation that has erupted around all of this is only the beginning of women continuing to take over.
Posted by sharonArnold]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:06:34 -0800 The Stranger
The boobs were fine. It's a funny piece that makes you think for like 15 whole minutes. People feeling sexually harassed in their workplace and then having the courage to come forward with it is a good thing. So, taking it down makes sense. All fine. Let's see the whole piece online though soon?

What's not fine with me is having this piece, and this show of male artists (and I like those male artists! I admire their work and they are friends of mine!) take center stage the one month--of, oh, THE CENTURY-- that women have the stage.

Motherfucking backseat it! JUST THIS ONCE!

THANKS.

Posted by susannabluhm]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:24:22 -0800 The Stranger
I respect that Cornish as an institution needs to keep clear boundaries drawn against potential sexual harassment. As an outsider, I don't feel entitled to comment on whether the piece does constitute harassment. This isn't a simple case of censoring nudity.

For whatever it's worth, I viewed Beres' piece as a male confession, and a challenge to examine how the simple classification aspect of the Elle's exhibits reinforces male hegemony and objectification.
Posted by Lynn Schirmer]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:53:51 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Rrrrrrrreommny]]> Fri, 09 Nov 2012 00:31:45 -0800 The Stranger Posted by hitchcock]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 23:09:31 -0800 The Stranger
It is women blowing the whistle on the display of their bodies, however symbolic, in a juvenile cartoon to humiliate them in their workplace in a mardi gras style display of breasts.

Transfer it to the men's room wall and its a lawsuit.

And I have seen better drawings.

Makes great publicity for the curator who is, of course, another woman. For every Gloria Steinem, there is always a Phyllis Schlafly. (Look it up, you so called post-feminists.)

Since this kind of reflexive male attempt to subjugate and control women through representation has been a cultural staple for over 500 years, I can't imagine why we care how males respond to Elle's.

What about the students? Wanna bet Cornish has way more females than males in the student body?

The college has done the responsible thing because they have a responsibility toward the young women they are educating. To present this in their place of learning is to throw a wet blanket on a candle.


Posted by hitchcock]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 23:03:24 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Michelle Dunn Marsh]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 22:37:43 -0800 The Stranger
Try to think of it this way. I am offend in this society on a daily bases (list upon request), but if I wasn't then I wouldn't be living in a free society. No one asked for my consent and that is fine because it is better for all of us to have the option of being offended, then to not have the option at all.

What is next a harsh art critique becomes a hostile work environment and reviews must be censored? Look out Jen. ;-)

That said I am just a man, so I feel as if I should just take a backseat driver approach on this one.

-cheers

Posted by Maxx_Lexington]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 21:42:30 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Jen Graves]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 16:28:05 -0800 The Stranger Posted by crystalbarbre]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:36:47 -0800 The Stranger Posted by crystalbarbre]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:31:00 -0800 The Stranger
Obviously, I am a Feminist, and I believe in and celebrate this moment in Seattle right now, and applaud the Centre Pompidou for creating such a monumental exhibition. I am presenting an exhibition that points right back at that celebration.

Catharina Manchanda, in a talk at Gage, pointed out the irony that the women artists we know about in history are in part due to the famous male artists they knew. I am enjoying the turnaround in this show of men who are shaped by the female artists they admired.
Posted by sharonArnold]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:47:53 -0800 The Stranger
@20: why wouldn't we ask men to respond? the male voice is as important to Feminism as any other. that's the point.

The male voice, to me, is not as important in women's issues as the female voice. It should take a backseat for fucking once. A backseat that's right there one inch behind us, but a backfuckingseat. And I don't want to apologize for that attitude.
Posted by Jen Graves]]> Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:38:40 -0800 The Stranger