Life and Art Documentation

According to Art History 101: Performance Art, performance art is live. It has no rules or guidelines and is more of an experiment. It is only art because the artist says it is art. Performance art may be composed of paintings, sculpture, dialogue, poetry, music, dance, opera, film footage, turned on television sets, laser lights, live animals and fire. Many performance artists are also interested in crossing the perceived boundary between art and life such as thinking of everyday activities in an artistic manner, which proved to be the main concept of this week’s lesson.

Women have always played an important role in Performance Art. Many women turned to this new form because they felt that more traditional media such as painting and sculpture had long been dominated by male artists and wanted to explore fresh territory. Women have proven to be true pioneers in Performance Art, making work that is brave, innovative, risky and just plain good! (Byrd. 1998) One of these women includes Linda Montano. She discusses how art has been generous to her and has allowed her to explore fear, exuberance, unconscious subject matter, fantasies and ideas. She says, "It is the place where I practice for life." She explains the transitions between life and how art based on rituals have allowed her to act truthfully, spontaneously, and can alter one’s perception of life. She even eventually came to the point during her days of work where she called each day art and not life.

I have never considered routine daily activities to be anything but, well, routine. So when we were assigned this project, I wasn’t certain that these same mundane tasks could be seen as artwork. It was not until I learned about performance artists, such as Linda Montano, that I came to appreciate how such activities could be considered art. Repetition can transform routine activities into art, and eventually I too may start calling activities art, instead of life.

For this project, I chose a task I like to do when I am stressed out: watching the fish in the first tank. The time always passes by quite quickly when I become mesmerized by the many colors and fish swimming. It fact I am usually calmed and put into a trancelike state. I still was not sure if I can call this art. Then I began to think about its components and most importantly whether or not I considered it art. Performance art is often emotional and topical, frequently dealing with political and personal matters and with issues such as race, class, and feminism. Although my artwork doesn’t initially signify any of these meanings in a direct manner, it does signify a way to deal with such manners. It represents something that is honest and a source of tranquility. Instead of resorting to violent actions, one can sit and contemplate issues at hand as an alternative to malicious behavior. This alternative response can, in its own way, be exciting and a refreshing look at life and one’s passions. This artwork is able to signify behavior that is associated with relaxation in order to assess difficult situations. This allowed me to find that art has given alternatives to life experiences that may be difficult to cope with. Even when something appears to be tedious and uninteresting, it can become exciting and represent passion. Performance art allows for the removal of limitations and obstacles, and alternative ways of looking at life.

Therefore:
1. My performance is art because it changes a routine task into something that is honest and a source of tranquility. This behavior was a way to relax in order to accumulate thoughts and assess current situations that may be influencing current behaviors. It allows for a everyday relaxation technique to become something beautiful.

2. Art is I an expression that can be exuded in many different ways. It not only represents the passions of the artist’s life and beliefs, but also alters perceptions on life. Art creates an opportunity for analysis and multiple interpretations.

3. The difference between art and life that life is the experiences that one faces, but art gives new or different meaning to those experiences. Montano says that art is the place where she practices for life. Art, while intending for the public eye, turns out to have affects on the life of the individual. So, although they represent different things, they are actually quite reflective of each other.

References: Byrd, Jeff. Women in Performance Art. 1998 http://eamusic.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewowem/electronmedia/visual/performanceart.html
Esaack, Shelly. Art History 101: Performance Art. 2007. http://arthistory.about.com/cs/arthistory10one/a/performance.htm Montano, Linda. “Art in Everyday Life.” LA: Astro Artz. 1981.

Psycho Film Stills

FILM STILL: Alfred Hitchcock's PSYCHO

Cindy Sherman, one of the most respected photographers, uses ambiguous and eclectic photographs to develop a distinct signature style. “Through a number of different series of works, Sherman has raised challenging and important questions about the role and representation of women in society, the media and the nature of the creation of art (1). ”
In her Untitled Film Stills, Sherman captures herself in the roles of B-movie actresses, by dressing up in wigs, hats, dresses, clothes unlike her own, and playing the roles of characters. “There are also very few clues as to Sherman's personality in the photographs - each one is so unique and ambiguous that the viewer is left with more confusion than clarity over Sherman's true nature (1).” According to Judith Wilson, “what we construct on the surface of each picture is an interior, a mixture of emotions. Each setting pose and facial expression seems literally express an almost immeasurable interior which is at once mysteriously deep, and totally impenetrable: a feminine identity.”

For this self-portrait, based on that of Cindy Sherman’s techniques, I chose one of my favorite movies to construct the film stills. The movie is Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. I have always liked Psycho because, although I am a first class wuss when it comes to horror movies, to me this horror movie is more of a joke. Although it may have defied various norms during the time period, I find it to be more humorous than terrifying. I also enjoy movies with hidden clues and motifs. Throughout this movie there is a mirror motif, a color motif, clues within camera angles, and many transformations that occur. Also, I am a sucker for twists at the end of a movie, and although this one was fairly obvious there are elements of surprise that I did not otherwise expect. My favorite, and one of the most recognized horror scenes, is the shower scene. The five still that I have constructed represent the sequence of events in this scene.

In the film, Marion Crane, the female lead, is somewhat different than the expected norm of the female roles during this time period. Although she shows weakness in her love for her boyfriend and allows herself to be placed in vulnerable positions in her work, financial situation, and while in the hotel, she defies the typical behavior of a woman by stealing from her employer and eloping by herself. Throughout the movie, Marion transforms from an innocent female (signified by her white bra), to a more femme fatal and dangerous woman (signified by her black bra). Marion finds herself in a predicament when she gets trapped in a storm, while driving to meet her boyfriend, and is forced to stop at the Bates motel until the storm settles. Norman Bates, who is dominated by his overbearing, overprotective “mother”, placed her in room one where he is able view Marion, and “ideal” woman for him, through a peephole. This lead to the scene that I depict in my film still, the infamous shower scene, where Marion is violently murdered.

According to Andrew’s Macro Study:

“The spectator is then allowed the privileged position of observing Marion showering, accentuating the theme of voyeurism endemic in the film. Artful use of close-ups heightens suspense and audience complicity as Marion metaphorically cleanses away her sins. Through the shower curtain we then see a shadowy figure approaching. We cannot make out the features of this figure, a technique used by Hitchcock to create suspense, although it seems as if it is female. At this point the curtain is pulled back to the accompaniment of screeching violins and we see the figure in darkness raising a knife to the air. What follows is a series of shots depicting Marion being repeatedly stabbed by "mother", the sudden dramatic change in pace effectively communicating the frenzy of the attack. Shots are almost subliminal as Hitchcock moves away from the continuity technique to associative montage; a series of images are shown in such a way that we infer something that has not been shown.”

This excerpt allowed me realize something I have never realized before and it also brings me to the main point of my argument. "Why is it that in so many films (especially horror films) women are objectified and then brutally killed? What does that say for our society? What does it say in light of the fact that so many women are murdered, kidnapped, raped, and so on in real life?" ( Personal Communication, Perez Miles, 2006)

This film, especially this scene, exposes voyeuristic behavior, exploitation, objectification, and the victimization of women. Women in film, especially horror, are most commonly the objects of male desire. Women are usually placed in vulnerable situations while they are about to be victimized. Here Marion is in the shower with no form of protection as well as no clothing. Vulnerability of a physically attractive female seems to be a attractive viewing characteristic to the male audience.

The shower scene can also be read as Marion's rape by a potent phallic symbol. Psycho reinforces the prevalent ideology of the time period because Marion is a sexually active woman outside of marriage and so has transgressed the moral codes of the family. Marion is killed before she achieves the respectability she craves, a symbolic act of punishment for her sexual transgressions. Is this fair? Most Hitchcock’s films seek to destroy and preserve femininity. Women are objects of male gaze and the recipients of most of the punishments. Hitchcock is obsessed with exploring the psyches of tormented and victimized and brutalized women. Can this correlate with our societies acceptance and/or actions?

According to “When Women Look,” Rhona Berenstein adds an important feature to the conceptualization of spectatorship. She points out that horror films have traditionally been a place not only where women are terrified, but where they "flaunt their femininity" by screaming, fainting, and otherwise performing stereotypically exaggerated gender roles. Also, Gayln Studlar had done studies on the masochistic pleasures of horror cinema and has showed how the “strictly masculine, sadistic, and "assaultive" gaze has been overemphasized, while the feminine, masochistic, and "reactive" gaze has been ignored.” Identification with the terrified, suffering woman is simply unthinkable, too painful, and masochistic. Thus, to thrill to the mutilation of the screaming and terrified Marion Crane in the shower sequence of Psycho could only be a form of false-and anti-feminist-consciousness. This, however, does not stop all viewers from enjoying such scenes and can relate to the indirect acceptance of such actions that do occur. Societies acceptance of movies such as these are indirectly accepting violence acts in our culture. Although these exaggerated gender roles are meant to be entertainment, they are setting and example and sending out ideas that the objectification, exploitation, and victimization of women is customary. This in result may help explain or lead to the murders, rapes, and kidnappings that occur in real life.

According to Linda Williams, “For the woman viewer, however, this "taking it in the eye" pleasures her less, initially, than it does the man. Because women-for all sorts of social, physiological, and psychosexual reasons-already perceive themselves as more vulnerable to penetration, as corresponding more to the assaulted, wide-eyed, opened-up female victim all too readily penetrated by knife or penis, our response is more likely to close down, at least initially, to such images.”

I have come to gain new understanding of the implications of what I thought of as one of my favorite movies. I allowed me to realize deeper meanings and made me think: Are movies, initially meant for entertainment, inevitably hurting our society?

LINK TO REAL SHOWER SCENE : http://youtube.com/watch?v=8Dh2vAEdtNc

1. Cindy Sherman’s Official Homepage. Biography.
http://www.cindysherman.com/biography.shtml

2. Andrews, Rebecca. AS Film Studies. Macro Study: Psycho (Alfred Hitchcock, 1960)
http://www.geocities.com/shakenotstirred2003/psychomacro.txt

3. Williams, Linda. When Women Look: A Sequel (2001).
http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/15/horror_women.html

PSA Documentation on Gender

In our lesson we discussed Luce Irigaray, a French feminist philosopher who takes on Freud by offering a challenge to his configuration of women as necessarily lacking. In Irigaray’s Sex Which is Not One, questions are raised in respect to the assumption that female sexuality is dependent upon male sexuality, and that female sexuality is based on nothing because women’s sex organs cannot be seen opposed to a male’s organs that are visible and larger therefore making it dominate. Her contention includes that we must acknowledge that women already have more than one, multiple even, zones and planes of desire (two-lips touching in addition to an organ whose sole purpose is for pleasure as well as other erogenous zones), as opposed to the one organ or instrument of man (who needs an instrument for pleasure and whose one great organ has to serve the multiple functions of urination and ejaculation). Can there be a system based on female sexuality rather than the phallogocentric system that currently exists?

According to Freud, women’s pleasure is always masochistic, it comes from being a sexual object, from being looked at and desired by men, and also women get pleasure by giving men pleasure. But because of their multiplicity, women feel liberated and no longer feel like an object to the male sexuality Irigaray conjectures female pleasure as auto-erotic; a female is always touching herself, “A women "touches herself" constantly without anyone being able to forbid her do so, for her sex is composed of two lips which embrace continually.” Irigaray then presents the notion that female eroticism is not based on the visual, the precept of looking, the male `gaze', all of which are predicated on the phallogocentric system, but rather on touch. Touch requires closeness or nearness while vision is distancing. A system based on female sexuality would counter vision with touch, it would lessen the distance between people and might ultimately lead to the blurring of ownership.

According to Wikipedia, a public service announcement is a non-commercial advertisement typically in the public sphere, ostensibly broadcast for the public good. The main concept is to modify public attitudes by raising awareness about specific issues. My Public Service Announcement reads “ A Touch Can Set You Free”, with an artistic picture of a man and woman touching hands. This announcement could be posted almost anywhere as long as a large number of people are able to view it, both men and women. Its main intention is to initiate curiosity to an extent that a person would further research its meaning and in return create awareness. This statement is indicating, in a more artful manner, what Irigaray was contending, that female eroticism in not based on the visual but rather on touch. Instead of pleasure being masochistic, a woman is capable of gain pleasure in ways other than pleasing a man. In return touch forms a closer bond is formed, and may lead to the reduction of ownership (a man sexual dominance over a woman), and maybe this “Touch Can Set You Free.”