What does it mean when you say you love art?

I love art.
I just love art.
I seriously love art.
I really love art.

Meaning of love here is curious as love, the feeling, an act, a state of mind, is something where we deem ourselves good, worthy and humane. What does it mean when you love art, is that you want what is best for art? What is best for art is objectivity and knowledge over art. It takes a lot to be connoisseur and yes it takes heart which as I have seen seems to be lacking. Cynicism is the ultimate tool in art, so I wonder where is the love. What does it take to love selflessly, unconditionally. Is that possible within the business? I doubt that. Impressions are more important than understanding what is truly progress and good. To embrace the individual, the maker of art is part of this loving. It can take strange paths to embrace the hero artist whose art is so much loved. Or is it the art which is loved?

Love, the emotion, being impressed, moved, overwhelmed so much so that you want to sink into it, make it a profession. What is  love here for other than making oneself important, you truly know what you are doing having chosen a side of civil and know what to protect, what is good and let everybody know how much feeling you have for it all? Art traditionally is a field where self-importance is cherished, love for the self and getting ahead as that loving caring person with feeling. How much rationality goes with this one wonders. When you are so much in love what do, do you think then or do you go blind? What could you be thinking when feelings dictate you?

In business emotions get in the way and they fool you. To sell something as healing and good as art oftentimes is plays a part. Emotional outlook on art makes you defensive and place of critique is to flatter, not to hurt those precious feelings as you are in depth in this thing. This is also why fine art makes such slow progress. It is an industry of emotions and those emotions get hurt so easily, such sentimentality is against change, in way of constructive criticism. Emotionally based defensiveness can get so interesting that it reveals the soft spots, how good is that. To critique the person when you critique the art is a very wrong kind of way to see and make critique. It easily becomes a love and hate battle, you know and critics become too careful.

When it really is a question of unprofessional conducting of the business, incompetence, arrogance, greed, it is nice mix. When the answer continuously to not having your way is it is the fault of those who object, could you please for fuck’s sake take a look in the fucking mirror in a way that you truly see yourselves? Money being the measure of worth, all kinds of players there.

Cultural significance of sucking cock

https://soundcloud.com/henna-joronen/cultural-significance-of

Hi guys, how about that social change guys? You are doing it so well guys, a lot is happening out there isn’t it. We need some social change guys. We need it pretty quick guys.

Go social changing, I’m waiting. Kind of slow, don’t you think. Lot of obstacles on your way there guys? Social change is like sex change, you need a surgeon to do it.

How art is seen: is it on the background, is it the person, is it to make personality or is it there when thought of art is needed, art is important for reasons that any artefact with hints of content has. Is it what we can feel or think or what we do not understand.

Hypocrisy is to hide. How interesting pretence is can be argued and must be.

Hide your true self, hide your intentions, hide what it actually is you’re doing and to prevent from changing, changing yourself and how things are done. It takes something which most are not ready to go and do. The thought of losing and loss is too great, so to talk about social change is much more safe. I use the word scene instead of using the concept of art world. Art world to me resonates only size and the business which circulates wealth or doesn’t. What gets shared is interesting to think about. To define art world is like defining a construct that is eating its own tail which does not want to interact in any other way than what is possible for that beast as it is unable to think in any other way. To revolve unchanged talking about social change in fancy spaces how ‘high art’ is going to take part in social action which is making change which very though is somewhat odd.

It could be heartwarming if arts was in any way doing what it says, being transparent, reliable, other than massive tool for propaganda, producing toys, extravaganza, making impressions to fool and for fools. Yes I would like to believe those with money and power, I really would and please come and ask for tax payers money to make social change. Why I don’t see the effect needed because corruption and false talk has made it clear that to make social change there must be a total turnover in values, in ways of doing, the concept of fine art is not to change anything but stay the same. To make art temples and sites for tourists is not in any way making social change. It is doing the opposite. Sure tourism brings in the money. To think money changes everything is thinking wrong in the first place. Contempt is so obvious and present I don’t know what other social change would mean than on very personal level to examine one’s behaviour, falsehood, hypocrisy, why one does what one does: what are the true motives of making and doing anything. To take offence is so normal.

One problem is the need for money, the flaunting of money, the show off of money, talk about money, that money brings value and only money. It is very destructive what comes to the environment the spectacle and valuing of the material. Art institutions like to say they work to change things. It is bizarre as very little has changed what comes to art business, position of the artist, where art is shown and what makes value in art which is the institutional presence and expertise, professionalism which also follows money. It is where artist must be shown if a traditional artistic career is what we must pursue.

https://hyperallergic.com/369762/a-syllabus-for-making-work-about-race-as-a-white-artist-in-america/

https://www.guernicamag.com/siri-hustvedt-both-sides-of-the-chasm/?platform=hootsuite

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/is-the-push-for-women-in-stem-hurting-female-artists/522915/?utm_source=atltw

Kulturkampf Of The Left? Extremes, Be Gone!

https://www.socialeurope.eu/2017/03/kulturkampf-left-extremes-gone/

VOICE

The Urgency of Art in a Dangerous, Rapidly Changing World

With the first Culture Summit in Abu Dhabi, Foreign Policy seeks to highlight the power of collective imagination as a force for good.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/10/the-urgency-of-art-in-a-dangerous-rapidly-changing-world-united-arab-emirates-culture-summit/

 

 

Small dog with a big heart

How good are you at encrypting images?

2010, gouache  on paper, 55*45cm

This for example breaks the rule of how to photograph your art.

To play according to rules, rules make value: What are the rules then? Made for what and by whom? Like woman is smaller and therefore can be used for the ends of the bigger? Strangely enough, big does not equal strength necessarily.

Logic of smaller and more fragile must be abused because you can does not strike as civil. How a young woman is a threat makes one vomit. I have been imposed a huge amount of rules to follow to fulfil what is expected of a woman and girl. Rules are not ambitious, they are to make understandable femininity. The sickening automaton which happens without much thought. Does not require intellect, but the obedient think so. It is just the thing of my dangerousness: the logics is that woman is the one who causes hurt. It does not matter what she feels or what happens to her. She is a servant not the boss. Her hurt is irrelevant because she is dangerous with what she has got and what can happen by her. She can disturb and turn something agreed upside down and therefore must be punished before hand. Gazing is one punishment, the other is the place where is must stand, bend over and do what women do. What happens to her is deserved. Watching, looking, gazing, monitoring always have meaning, one can think what are the results (authority) and gained prizes (power). It is a train of ugly thoughts which show on you without you knowing it. Immediate, a thing of imagination or lack thereof, a cultural loop which happens without thinking what happens there and what you are doing, the justification is something which belongs to traditions and thinking where sexes are valued very differently and this is seen justified just because. What is the intelligent part? The powerful do not have to question themselves. Why such laziness is allowed? When you have reached a point in hierarchy you can stop evaluating yourself?

What is there to protect when she is not the one who needs protection? This objectification happens in an instant. She appears and what she represents is sex. It can’t be talked about, addressed in other ways than looking. Gazes go from head to toe and to each other who is looking with you, and she is the intruder. There is no logic obviously when she is the uncivil and kind of empty. The only meaning she has within is her gender, sex and meanings of those are finished and set, settled and reasoned.

To be under monitoring and constant observing as if I was a specimen, an oddity, scary known/unknown especially in the manner of someone disturbing a ‘peaceful’ unchangeable and solid something, something good, valuable and worthy, almost holy. To look at holding power of a group is to ridicule and make feel small. To be something to watch out for is a delicious position nevertheless if there is room for choice, choosing how to use this position. The thought is that one should be careful for the exact reason that one is talked about in all possible ways but mostly in negative sense. The negative is interesting and what does it do. Who creates it, why and what does it mean? I will have a reputation which effects my life in different kinds of ways. I have been made feel inadequate and my worth is in how I look like physically, mainly, and how I maintain that appealing look, but also inadequacy is in the eyes of those who use judgement as a power tool. They consider themselves as big and the one who is under microscope is small. What do they see is very biased.

Could it be said that within conservative communities, people and scenes change very slowly because they think they have found the perfect form of existing and it is called civilised, they are more than. They are unable to change because they are so high and deserving of this place. They can talk about progress, equality, Marxism and kindness behind which they can hide. To change actually takes such effort it seems too radical and a loss. To live up to good ideals may not truly be exactly that. Civilised is a curious idea, it follows a codebook and makes us do things in similar ways, realise our lives according to something which is to give impressions. Acceptance of community is mark of civilised. To bend rules of civilised is allowed for members who are the most respected, wealthy, high in hierarchy. Men are allowed to bend the rules of civil more than women to whom such rules apply making prospects narrow and experimenting more dangerous, always out of the ordinary. According to experience and to what is plain in sight: those limits and rules are fairly easy to test: reactions are violent. Hypocrisy is that sexes are made to act differently. For women doing what men do is often out of the question. To be damaged, fallen and discarded happen for women just like that.

You happy, me happy.

Watercolour drunk passed out

Finland fucks

I just could not help myself and not go look for an orgy online. It is so hidden and not.

Watercolour drunk passed out

watercolour drunk passed out

watercolour for drunk passed out

 

Small dog with a big heart

Small dog with a big heart

In search of porno monster

Small dog with a big heart

In search of a porno monster

Ohje tyttärelle

https://soundcloud.com/henna-joronen/ohje-tyttaerelle-m4a

Layers of femininity, layers to human, layers to a role.

Let’s begin. How do I peel it, her, this thing? From inside out or from outside in as the task is to learn how many layers there are. From where we look at, to where we do not see and what we do not like to see. Gender is much what we show and what we do not. To see her is one task to begin investigate her. It is to want to see her, not what you think you see, her clothes, her background, her nationality, not her body form and how it fits ideals, her. Question is what is a persona and how does one’s persona evolve. How do we know anyone at all when knowing oneself is demanding enough and to think where does a person begin opens an universe to humanity.

To fit ideals and desires is not her, it is culture. It is those who watch, accept, use power and want something of you. The map to being part of society as an acceptable individual, note the word individual. Who are those who think people should fit ideals and images and portray readymade in real life? Why does anyone want her as an image is because images are perfect. To be a match which she should be and match in a way there are little variations is puzzling. What kind of people want the most easiest other people to be?

When it is to want an illusion and not a human being. Many say they like humans, women as humans but they want this and that. It is confusing, those other who want something of you. To grow up to be an adult is to learn to play the game of gender and fulfil expectations and when you don’t you are fucked. One can be repulsed by those given models of how to become and be a woman, such advice as how one’s hair should be like, how it is nice to please and smile. To put smile on one’s face is the one most important thing, there is something wrong if you don’t. How fragile this so-called perfection is, carefully monitored that any irritation and ‘flaw’ shows. She did that, she looked like that. Body parts and how they look are measured to an inch, what those parts do, how they make you feel.

Don’t be afraid

Cutout from a photograph, 2011

2008

Interesting article below from Scientific American by Lise Saffran:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-essential-role-of-storytelling-in-the-search-for-truth/?wt.mc=SA_Twitter-Share ”As trust in experts declines, authenticity and personal connection matter more. And where does authenticity come from, anyway?”

It is a quickie

« Previous Entries