View  Edit  Attachments  History  Home  Changes  Search  Help 

gorillagirlsJaneLy

The Guerilla Girls lecture was very interesting, and raised many questions in my mind. The majority of people who wrote are both very enthusiastic and supportive of the GG, or they are very offended and anti-GG. After going to the lecture, looking at the facts, and seeing what everyone else thought about the topic I could see where both sides were correct and had valid points.


I know that there are definite lines in the world, and being of a minority, female, and not Christian, (not to mention strange art student) I have felt the sting of being unaccepted many many times. One would expect me to be pro-anything that will help whatever others consider my stereotypical self to be. Asian? Female? Non-Christian? I don’t know. Either way, my viewpoints on the matter are a bit muddled.


Frida’s gorilla mask was quite effective. If she hadn’t been masked, a lot of the audience would have judged her on her looks, rather than concentrating on the facts she wanted to lay on the table. This seems to be one of the issues the GG are aiming at. When you see someone’s face and the way they do or don’t do their hair, or makeup, or how they shave, or what piercings they have you assume things. The wrinkles and wear of time, visuals really do matter. On the whole, they matter a whole lot more for females than males, which is related to one of the GG main views on the subject of males in contrast to females.


It did seem as though Frida went over a lot of subjects, including racial biases very superficially, and was intent on working the crowd to a frenzy by introducing funny things that people could laugh at and automatically agree with without thinking further. The stereotype barbies, for example. It helped to show that there did exist stereotypes, but what exactly was the point to having the barbies? Besides comedy, of course.


It is also true that Frida has a valid point in saying that women artists and artists who are not white don’t get the recognition they deserve in contemporary times and recent history. Art world history in the time when women weren’t allowed to do art at all doesn’t count because of course; they didn’t have the opportunity to do art.


Even though this lecture seemed a little overblown, progress is only made by protesting and struggling and raising a fuss, and even then, one might not get anywhere significant. In the studio, I see this as: No matter how hard you work, you may never get anywhere. But then again, you might. I think the GG have gotten somewhere, and I think they have a valid reason for getting attention, but I am still undecided on how I feel about their methods of gaining attention, and their formal point (women vs. men? Or underrepresented people for recognition? The former seems to be very prevalent in the GG website and mindset, but the latter seems more admirable)


Using comedy in such a way that the issues seemed laughable, yet still of the utmost importance was an interesting way of addressing their point, and getting their message across. Conceptually, using comedy is a very effective and intelligent way for an artist, or anyone to connect with someone else with whom they wish to communicate.


Jane Ly

-----------

Links to this Page