Just Can't Kill The Beast
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
This weekend, due to some unforeseen circumstances, I had to see some family members that I hadn’t seen in some years, since I was as high as his knee or maybe her waist. Eventually, as inevitably happens at these times, when I’ve all but exhausted the topics we have in common, and they notice I’m a young man filled with potential, the conversation turns to me, and what I’m doing with my life. And rather than explain what it means to be an artist in South Africa, at least one who doesn’t own a paintbrush, I denied it. The cock crowed three times, and I hung my head.
Later, when I started to think about it, I wasn’t particularly ashamed. Peter did it, and he’s damned famous. Duchamp did it for a while. Hell, I bet you we’ve all done it.
I mean the reasons are pretty clear, most people aren’t educated about art, there isn’t a culture of art education and the rest don’t give a toss. And the media treats us like buffoons, even the arts media.
But this is nothing new.
Actually, it’s distinctly boring, as the rest of this post probably will be too, so you are forewarned. What started to strike me as I thought about the state of the arts, is that there is another more subtle denial taking place, especially effecting younger artists or those involved in more contemporary modes of production. It seems to me that there is a process of classifying artists, according to race, and its bound to be incredibly damaging.
A manifestation of this recently would be Miles Keylock’s Pick of the Week, that got quite a bit of attention further down the page (and sorry, I know it must seem to be Pick-On-Miles Week), where he constantly refers to the artists on that show as white. They can’t be taken seriously as artists, only as white artists. It’s a process of disintegrating the challenge of more conceptual work, and at the same time it is the journalist taking an almost apologetic position for his own race.
Another example that comes to mind is (and I will at this point state that this is a rumour) Sue Williamson using, without permission, a picture of Nandipha Mntambo on a recent flyer. A subtle thing, really. But one must ask if a similar thing would happen with a young white artists face? And is it fair to advance one’s own credibility by using the reputation of another artist for being black? And surely this reputation is damaging to the meaning in Nandi’s work.
In both instances the power is being taken out of the hands of the artist, and their work or image (if there’s a difference) is jaded by a classification of race. Now I’m not by any means at all calling Sue or Miles racist, nor by using these examples am I laying the blame only on them. As a matter of fact, on this site at least half the comments are made up of racial slurs of various degrees of humour and affection, and if I look through my own posts I bet I’m guilty too. What I want to know is why we continue to bandy these terms and concepts about so lightly? Is it an overcompensating fear of being PC, or an overcompensating need to be PC? I’ll tell you one thing… I have very little desire to be denied as an artist. I do enough of that myself.
posted by Robert Sloon at 8:39 AM
52 Comments:
Nice piece Sloon. I suppose, in truth we all harbour feelings which for one reason or another we keep buried. It is not pc to feel less than 100% committed to the cause of the national democratic revolution. Does this mean I can't poke fun at the pomposity of politicians ? Does it mean that I can not suspend judgement on my acceptance as an African ? Does it mean that I must check myself from thinking that it is sad and perhaps not quite right (from a humanist, or Rights of Man perspective) that my offspring do not have an equal right to employment and other rights of citizenship in the country of their birth, the only country in which they have citizenship. And this, while respecting the need to redress a skewed distribution of opportunity & cultural capital, legacy of apartheid's
( and before that, colonialism's) appropriation of power and resources. Perhap's I must see myself as a child of many diaspora's , a history of this & that AND THAT... living like an alien from space amongst a people who feel entitled by patriotism of place (a micro-historical perspective) , which is so pervasive as to seem natural.
on this topic, i highly recommend a visit to Jean Meeran's video pieces at the Bell-R's bree st gallery only on til this weekend (i think).
Okay I obviously got the wrong end of the schtick. I though the MK piece was precisely about how these were white artists that actually should be taken conceptually seriously because of the self-reflexisive nature of their work?
good food for thought mr sloon...and the other comments. it seems that virtually every other article and comment on this blog has some racial connotation/slur...it is obviously something on everybody's mind, the question is when do we stop analysing and what are we going to do about it?
We are the fall guys for the entire colonial experiment. Every little neo-Nazi banging around Europe has more freedom from racial stereotyping than we do. So I'd say the best thing to do is stop thinking the topic is going to go away, and keep engaging with it all the time. If we can lend anything useful to the debate we can at least raise its sophistication
why dont you all go fuck yourselves?
what exactly is your point, anonymous? are you a neo-nazi from europe?
I read an article in the paper by a black journalist who was overjoyed when a white shoplifter was caught, because it was proof that white people also steal. This is the kind of problem we have. Where the fuck did the perception ever come from that white people DON'T steal? (Whether this perception is held by blacks or whites its equally ridiculous).It is this level of oversimplification that we are dealing with, and it makes discussion at any public level a total fuck up.
which anonymous are you responding to, as you were saying
Sloon
Your commentery on life is like oh so deep and has obviously inspirid similir minded idiots to spout their crap about life, art, and other shit.
I mean, Jesus.
Stick to your crappy art drivel/criticism. Your better at that. Shit.
To Anonymous 9:30,
If you are going to be so unashamedly contrary and agressive, you need to learn how to spell.
Otherwise no-one's going to take your commentAry seriously...
aggressive. damn these sticky keys.
I would love Anonymous 9.30 to please please say your say on this matter instead of just trying to stop the discussion. If you think it's so dumb, then you must have something interesting to say about it. Please tell us what it is. Otherwise we can just rot and rust forever and get nowhere and discuss nothing and sit and simmer in our own little rooms
shut up.
Your a asshole and your opinon is a asshole to.
go and sit in your room and simmer. Maybe you will do something constructive. Like make a painting or somthing.
fuck.
It seems to me that an artist who makes a work that depicts big black booties and calls it Damn Those Bitches Represent is situating himself directly within the race debate and hence should expect to have his work address as such.
I did something constructive like making a painting or something, and it led straight back into these issues cos they are very important. What is painting for if not to help think about the culture we live in. So, what do you think?
I saw that piece with "Damn those bitches represent' and I thought "I bet Ed Young has been working out all sorts of ways to describe this exploitative piece of crap, but it is still very clearly an exploitative piece of crap". Is that what you are saying too?
for the record, the bitches video depicts white bootie, so you have missed a crucial little point.
Sloon,
I agree with your Nandi/Sue argument but you fail to acknowledge the fact that Nandi had agreed to be part of a video which deal with issues of blackness and racism. if sue is pushing her career by doing this is beside the point. The point being that Nandi argreed and knew what the vid was about. Sue does have the right to publish any video still from that work as it is a video piece. If nandi has the right to oppose this then so does any subject in her video, effectivly leaving sue without any press material.
So sloon, by excluding these aspects of the work you are the same as the journo's you crit.
I have no right to use the imagery/footage from the bitches video, and i do.
Fair enough. But in my defense the flyer thing was something I overheard, and in all honestly (and stupidity in hindsight), I didn't realize that it was a video piece at all. I took an example off the top of my head. Apologies to Sue Williamson.
"thief" are you actually the legendary Stander?
Fuck
Stander died in agony, not a moment too soon, the wanker
Stander is alive and well and living i the Cayman Island's. It was an open secret in certain police/drug circles in Jhb. in the lae eighties. The body was brought 'home' and identified by his father, who took one peek into the coffin - the face wwas blown off , and the ol man was no fool - and nodded, as if to say 'yes'. But no body asked him "yes to what?' The stiff was a set up , a poor sucker who was hired to drive the 'stolen' car . It wasn't te first time Stander had hunted down a dead ringer, and it is a ploy, I believe, he has used again. The cop was supplied by the Miami Mob, who facilitated the whhole crazy whitewash deal. It took most of what Andre had, cashwise, to go clean. Then he had to really go to work, to fund the rest of ghois life. And that, of course is the really deep story, the real mystery...
I have as little desire to classify myself "artist" as to deny that I am an "artist". Both descriptions cannot be true. And yet they are: I balance my refusal to allow them to classify me an artist, against their continuous refusal to allow me to deny that I am an artist. So what am I then ? That is the thing....
who are they and do they give a fuck what you are
I think my fellow white South Africans are fucking disgusting on the issue of feeling so fucking sorry for themselves about Affirmative Action. They are not getting their homes bulldozed or being beaten up for not carrying a pass or getting schooling that prepares them for menial labour. With the amount of privilege they have accumulated by now they should be fucking honoured to give up something that is actually so small in order to help the country get going. Fucking whingeing bunch of assholes. The art scene also gives preference to black artists in certain key ways, and what do you see? It is still overwhelmingly filled with white artists who are barely feeling it.
dear thief, "they'" include you. Do they care? I don't know, but you cetainly took the bait. FISH .
See how easy it is to write a paragraph withourt defecating, urinating, attempting procreation or VISITING THE FUCKING BARBER. Of course THEY are MARTIANS. SO AM I. but who r u?
without loosing sight of progessive goals one can debate both affirmative action and the various strategies and programmes of transformation. At the level of untested hypothesis one idea is pretty much like another. An absurd idea can even , sometimes, be the seed of a great practical breakthrough. So, let's say that perhaps it is no more absurd to bar th empowered from employement as it is to DRAFT the fuckers ( i.e. us) into useful programmes, such as night school teaching, peer and 'shadow' on-the-job tutorials, volunteer and assigned 'call up' duties to FIX the broken material fabric and kick start dormant systems. LETS HAVE SOME 5 YR PLANS. KHAKI WORKSUITS WILL DO. VIVA THE ROLE OF THE INTELLECTUAL IN SERVING AND ASSISTING THE MASSES. VIVA THE REVOLUTION.
dear ed young,
with respect the issues are utterly different. Can't you see that?
It 's fine and naughty for you to rip off that movie. While your work is so impactless you will get away with your 'piracy' , because no body cares, or kows, about it. But if you were to raise this work to the public profile of your Bruce Gordon, then you might hear from their copyright police. Would not that be great? I guess you win both ways. And you lose, because either way it is a trivial work..
The issue with the other work you mentipon, the flyer, is somewhat different. From what I heard the flyer showed the subject with text overlay "THIS IS A BLACK', which , again this is runour, was not part of the original agreement between artist and subject for which useage rights had been granted. It would be interesting now to hear from the principals involved in this issue, not to judge the rights and wrongs of this, but because issues around Subject's Rights ( I see it as a Rights issue rather than a race issue) are either ignored or glossed over, and should be openly debated.
dear thief, I didn't get your question. Do you mean which group are they? What I meant was simply 'they' as distinct from'I'. In otherwords everybody on planet earth that is not me.
dear moni
Thanks for the insult. first of all, if you had done some research you might have noted that the particular video has recieved much international attention, more than bruce gordon probably will.
The problem with this blog is that you guys focuss pretty much on the local context and then to get back to Kendell's point that SA art is festering under a rock.
But anyway, I am not here to defend my work.
But to the point of research, which simply meant that you had to go see sue's piece at salt, the "This is a black" text is from the piece itself. Sue higlighted certain phrases from the discussion with floating text as they were spoken, so these were nandi's words. I agree that maybe it is pulled out of context in the flyer, but I also believe that an artist have the right to use any still from their work for publicity puposes.
But I also agree, that it would be nice to here from the parties involved in this matter.
And I still think that your comments are a bit lazy and uninformed
Dear Ed, thanks for the reply. Let me spell out what I previously suggested: If the video had of been launched internationally with the same kind of almost satruration coverage which Bruce Gordon received locally I am sure you might have received the attention of the copyright-cops, had the work been sold for lots of money. I apologise for sloppy thought in calling it trivial. What I meant to say was that I find it trivial. If this peeves you, too bad, but you should know that I rate Bruce Gordon in all its aspects one of the most memorable productions of the past half decade, here, or as U 'n Kendall might have it "festering under a rock".
On your other gripe, you should do some research yourself: I have been told that the flyer doesn't actually say what I had been told it did, and which you repeat.
look, moanie.
this is getting silly now. It does not actually matter what it said, but I remember it saying something of the sort, I remeber it being a section where she was seeing a coloured boyfriend and and it was a comment that she overheard his friends sayng to him "but she's black" or something of the sort. I do not have the material on hand but I will just say that it was some sort of term as such and it might have been removed from it's original context by grabbing a still of a video where the content is not clear, this is the case with many video stills. It can be beneficial to the piece or damaging. While you are thinking of subject concerns you should at least also consider the mechanics of artistic production.
Or get off this blog
I shot and edited those sections of the piece.
I love the way white folk tend to think that the way they would run the country is the way the country should be run. You're not running the fuckin country, Jesus
dear white, enjoy your swimming pool while it is still wet
dear ed , as I understand it the mechanics of digital or other production are subservient to the legal constraints governing issues such authorship, right to free speach, protection of privacy, actor's & model's rights to negotiate specific uses of their imag, and so on. I don't see this as at all sill. Actually, it's quite important and p[retty fundamental. Or do you think not?
Mondi,
I agree with you fully. I do not think that one should exploit one's subjects. But I do think this case is slighlty different. Sue should have cleared exactly what would happen with the material and Nandi should have asked. Both parties were repsonsible in this case, so back to the point, I think it is not so good from our side to have a one sided argument.
I myself have been in this situation where imagery of me had been used for print ( and it was a very cold day), but I did sign a release form. I don't really mind but people are sensitive around certain issues.
And as for White, stop your racist commentary and say something meaningful or fuck off.
dear white, did I say I was white....
so.....ultimately who has copyright over your image? i think i'm right in saying that i have copy right over my own image...in theory that should mean that should i show up in the background of cctv footage on the news (for example)i could possibly charge the broadcaster a nominal fee, but if i agree to be the subject/alow my image to be used as part of an art work what happens there? is it a joint copyright between myself and the artist? or does that instance of my image become solely the property of the artist because of intellectual property/authorisation?
mr sloon, i think it is all to do with pc.......a misunderstanding of pc, pc turned so far inside out that it has become offensive, celebration in difference? yeah right! just don't tell anyone
Yes I know you're white, dingwits, and so am I. So I know exactly how your fuckin creepy heads work, and you fuckin think your big white voice needs to get heard by everyone. Get over yourselves. You're not special and you're not clever, you're a typical and predictable waste of privilege. The sooner you lose it the better for everyone.
white , do you mean that privilege, like virginity, marks my separation from intercourse with the adult world? If I promiss to waste mine will you spend yours? Where can we meet? How will I know you? You can't miss me, I look like shit, my hands bleed and the big thing over my head blinks like a flying saucer. I'll have some down time on May Day, if it suits you - dad has given me the day off.
ps have you read Thabo Mbeki in ANC TODAY on "White is not always right"?
Oh, nice, glad you read that. The big thing over your head is the crown of thorns signifying your martyrdom. Ow, how it hurts
dear roky:
wwhat I meant by 'they' is exactly what you mean... except you're one of them. So the extent to which you care whether anyone else is or insn;t called an artist is the same amount they care whether you are. How much do you care?
Sorry thief, I should have said that I don't give a damn about 'care' or how I feel. about this serious issue. A cup of coffee and fresh socks are all i need in the morning to set up an adventure or two. It was just a matter of definition, what some would call, in certain circumstances, a matter of life or death. I t has been rumoured that my feelings ran off on a dark night and return when the rest of us are in the realm of sleep. But no message graces my pillow, come the dawn. I am, and remain, as much in the dark , feeling-wise, by day as I am by night. Does that answer your inquisition?
Just a question. An inquisition is where they burn people at the stake and rip out their fingernails. I'm just talking about art in the over-mediated banality of late capitalism, and in that context I don't think anyone really cares what you're called, it's hard enough producing anything at all, and being called an artist is as convenient as the next term. It may, for instance, help people understand that you're not trying to fix their car or host a talk show.
I think what I really mean to say is, none of it is important enough to be worth doing your head in. Maybe if you spend a lot of time around someone like Malcolm pain you could end up thinking being an artist is agonising like rectal surgery, but really its just pretty ordinary stuff and you think hard about it if you like thinking.
"...I think what I really mean to say..."
c'mon dudes (and female dudes) please think a little harder about what it IS you mean to say, cause this is possibly the most convoluted thread I have ever read on artheat. what were you saying again?
I don't know about anyone else but what I was trying to say several posts up is that our colleague Mr Sloon is a big silly dingbat for dissing MK's Art Pick for using the dreaded "white" word when the art on show so obviously situates itself with the race debate. The art talks about being white and privledged etc so obviously the critic is going to talk about the art talking about being white - its not rocket science!
the nice thing about mr sloon tho is that unlike certain monolithic male bores in our society he does know how to admit to being wrong without defragmenting like an MS DOS dinosaur
my work is done
nice work, if you can get it
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home