Wednesday, September 9, 2015

my statue! my love!

Reactor

Statue Porn


by Ben Valentine on February 3, 2012
Within the past year I have become increasingly excited by art in the public sphere. Like many today, I believe that the arts have an integral place in society, and that artworks should no longer be trapped in museums and galleries for only a few to admire.
However, while learning more about public art, I began to notice a startling trend; it appears that the public possesses an odd affinity toward public works. Aside from the common images of the Statue of Liberty or the popular monuments in Washington, DC, I found image after image of art lovers groping, humping, licking and kissing public statues in a trend I have come to refer to as Statue Porn. I began looking for more of these photographs and compiled roughly 50 into this GIF.





I dismissed this public love affair with artworks as horseplay; mere childish humor for those who do not fully appreciate or understand art. Yet, as I found more and more images, I could not help but question this gut reaction, was I being snobbish? This is a trend, and as someone fascinated by public art, I cannot ignore the public’s reaction.
Honestly, how are we supposed to engage with a giant naked woman carved from stone? What interactions does the city hope to incite when they fund bronze statues of only naked white people who have been dead for many years and have no direct relevance to it’s location? I slowly came to believe Statue Porn is more a product of bad public art than a bad audience. I had made the easy mistake of blaming the public in these photographs, when I should be critical of the art itself.
*   *   *
Image credit in order of appearance. 1. autumnismyfavoritecolor on Flickr, 2. Jim Bates, Seattle Times, 3. Wuicho of Brown Planet, 4. lolgallery.com, 5. Photo of Shenae Grimes, unknown photographer, 6. Of Jamie Smith, unknown photographer, 7. Suicideblonde on Tumblr, 8. love2travelwritefilm.com, 9. Unknown photographer, 10. questioneverything.ca/features/parliamentary_comparisons, 11. zenith2007 on myLot, 12. jenmac on blogger, 13. Noelle Boc, 14. Vincent Abbey, 15. Peter Visontay, 16. Rylie on Tribe, 17. travish89 on myspace, 18. meri on blogger, 19. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 20. littlejessmo on flickr, 21. lolgallery.com, 22. lolgallery.com, 23. lolgallery.com, 24. lolgallery.com, 25. lolgallery.com, 26. lolgallery.com, 27. lolgallery.com, 28. zenosfrudakis.com/sculptures/public/index.html, 29.myoldmansaidfollowsunderland.blogspot.com, 30. justbarkingmad.com/?p=2212, 31. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 32. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 33. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 34. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 35. Mr. Nhi^^ on Flickr, 36. http://oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 37. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 38. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 39. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 40. o6-carebear-o6.xanga.com, 41. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 42. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 43. oddstuffmagazine.com/funny-poses-with-sculptures.html, 44. Sierra Greaves, 45. lolgallery.com

A Victim of Bad Curation

Comics

A Victim of Bad Curation


by Edie Everette on September 7, 2015
EEExhibitShockHyperSize5-1280




Vogue's Grace 2

Vogue's Grace Coddington talks super models, sewing, cosmetic surgery and London in the sixties


Steven Meisel: Grace Coddington, 1992. From Grace
Steven Meisel: Grace Coddington, 1992. From Grace


SHARE THIS PAGE


Related


We are very proud to be publishing Grace Coddington's book, Grace: Thirty Years of Fashion at Vogue. First issued in 2002, and highly sought after ever since, this monograph not only collects together the work of the legendary fashion stylist, Creative Director for American Vogue, and star of the hit 2009 documentary The September Issue, but it also showcases for some of the greatest photographs ever published in British and American Vogue.
The 408-page book includes forewords by American Vogue Editor-in-Chief Anna Wintour and designer Karl Lagerfeld as well as personal anecdotes and insider stories of working with photographers Cecil Beaton, Irving Penn, Bruce Weber, Steven Meisel and Mario Testino and fashion-world personalities such as Naomi Campbell, Jerry Hall, Linda Evangelista and Manolo Blahnik.
In preparation for the book's release on 28 September, we interviewed Grace about her life and work, while she was on holiday at her house in Long Island; look out for the intrusion of a wild bird, which draws this first instalment of this three-part interview to a close. Also, read on to see Grace discuss her early career, her even earlier attempts at dress making, and what, in her mind, makes a good model.

Ellen von Unwerth: Kirsty Hume and Vikram Chatway (Yohji Yamamoto); hair, Ward; makeup, Fulvia Farolfi; USA, 1997. From Grace

Ellen von Unwerth: Kirsty Hume and Vikram Chatway (Yohji Yamamoto); hair, Ward; makeup, Fulvia Farolfi; USA, 1997. From Grace

This book must feel like a photo album for you, as it brings together some of your greatest shoots. Are these fashion photographs evocative of the time and place, in the same way that family snaps bring back memories? "They don’t really relate to what I was doing at the time, but certainly, when you look at the pictures you remember what was happening in your life – whether you were married or single, heartbroken or having a good time. Every time I thumb through the book it brings back a memory, partly because my work is very interwoven with my personal life."
According to the book's introduction, when you were growing up in Anglesey, North Wales, you used to make your own clothes. What sort of outfits did you create? "I was brought up in quite a remote place. It wasn’t very fashion-forward, not that I was very fashion-forward. Still, I did read Vogue, so I used to buy Vogue patterns. I would buy patterns of couture dresses and suits. I remember making several suits."

Arthur Elgort: Christy Turlington in Yohji Yamamoto, Konstantin Goncharov, and Irina Kuksenaite; hair, Oribe; makeup, Sonia Kashuk; USSR 1990. From Grace

Arthur Elgort: Christy Turlington in Yohji Yamamoto, Konstantin Goncharov, and Irina Kuksenaite; hair, Oribe; makeup, Sonia Kashuk; USSR 1990. From Grace

Were you good at that? "I thought I was quite good, but I think if I looked at them now I would laugh. I don’t think I was cut out to be a seamstress, but it interested me, and it still interests me now. I always look at how something is made as much as look at the dress itself. I’m always interested in the inside; it has to be as good on the inside as it is on the outside."
How closely did the experience of modelling match up to your childhood fascination with fashion magazines? "Quite closely, I think. One had a very glamorous dream of how it was, and the reality is, it is much harder work than that. Having said that, I don’t think it was as hard work then as it is now. You weren’t always on a plane; you weren’t expected to get off of a transatlantic flight and go to work; things were a much more leisurely pace. But at the time it felt frantic. The sixties in London were an amazing time, and it was an amazing time for young people, so it was very good timing for me, not that I had a choice! I was just born at a good moment to have fun in youth. You didn’t have to wait to until you’re 30 to be a grown-up model. You could go right in there, in your teens. It was really, really exciting. I guess it was more than I dreamed of."

Ellen von Unwerth: Nadja Auermann in Donna Karan; hair, Danilo; makeup, Laurie Starrett; Morocco, 1992. From Grace

Ellen von Unwerth: Nadja Auermann in Donna Karan; hair, Danilo; makeup, Laurie Starrett; Morocco, 1992. From Grace

You went to a modelling school. What did they teach you there? Were those useful lessons? "Yes and no. They taught you how do your own make-up and your own hair, which was important, because there were no hair and make-up people on set. That was very useful. They can taught you how to runway model, but I didn’t do runway modelling — or actually I did, but only the fun shows. I used to do Mary Quant’s shows, which were really fun, nothing like now. There wasn't an audience of a million people, there was just an audience of 35 or 40 maximum. Anyway, I mainly did photographic shoots too, and you can't be taught how to do that, you can only learn by experience, by working with photographers.""

Mario Testino: Gisele Bündchen, Frankie Rayder, Fernanda Tavares; hair, Marc Lopez; makeup, Kay Montano; Italy 1998

Mario Testino: Gisele Bündchen, Frankie Rayder, Fernanda Tavares; hair, Marc Lopez; makeup, Kay Montano; Italy 1998

You were in a car accident in 1960. Sometimes this is described as a real turning point in your life, yet you continued to model, and before moving into magazines a few years later. Did the crash change your life, or was it less important than we might imagine? "I’m not sure that it was a turning point. I started modelling in 1959 and it was a year and a bit later that this happened. I guess it was a wake-up call. Life is very delicate. You can be at the top of whatever you’re doing and it can come crashing down, which it did with me. I pretty much stopped work at that point, while having plastic surgery on my face. I still bear remnants of that crash now. I have a big scar on my eye, and my eye is uncomfortable, so I never quite forget it.
"Still, I don’t think it was a turning point, because I didn’t have anywhere to turn. I had just started modelling and after the healing was done, after I could put enough make-up on, I went back. I had incredibly supportive friends and photographers. I was lucky.”

Bruce Weber, Brittany, 1984. From Grace

Bruce Weber, Brittany, 1984. From Grace

Having undergone reconstructive plastic surgery, did you form fairly fixed ideas about the merits and perils of voluntary, cosmetic surgery? "I'm not sure. I lost an eyelid; they had to put a whole new eyelid on. That's very different from getting a boob job or liposuction. Still, I am very opposed to people having a ton of stuff done to themselves. I think people grow old beautifully and should be allowed to do so. That’s not to say that, if you feel better with it, you shouldn't do it. But first you should try to feel more comfortable about yourself looking the age that you are, rather than trying to look 20 years younger."
What makes for a good model? "Obviously you can’t be ugly, fat and short. You have to have the various requirements, but you can be beautiful but stiff, and wooden and have long blonde hair and not be willing to do anything. Models have to be brave. You also have to have your wits about you, to have energy, and to try things. For instance, when I first started working with Edie Campbell, she had long hair down to her waist, and we wanted to do a punk story with her. We said, 'Would you be willing to cut your hair off and dye it black?' She immediately said yes. That’s what I like in a girl. I think particularly the English girls are daring and willing to try.
"I also like it when they turn up on time, but a lot of them don’t. Well, they do more than they used to, in 1990s. That was a weird time because the super models had become all powerful; they could be two hours late and you would book them again. There was nothing you could do about it. Now If someone turned up two hours late, I probably wouldn’t re-book them."

Arthur Elgort: Shalom Harlow; hair, Didier Malige; makeup, Mary Greenwell; Morocco 1996. From Grace

Arthur Elgort: Shalom Harlow; hair, Didier Malige; makeup, Mary Greenwell; Morocco 1996. From Grace

[noise in the background]
"Hang on. Oh, my god! A bird has just flown into my house. Oh birdie! Birdie! Oh god, my cats are after him. Can you call back in 10 minutes? I’m so sorry!?"
We certainly did call Grace back, to discuss The September Issue, her first trip to China, moving the New York, and why she still doesn't get on with the Internet. Check back soon for further instalments, and if you like what you see order your copy of Grace here.

SHARE THIS PAGE

Vogue's Grace

Vogue's Grace Coddington on The September Issue, Seventies China and Eighties New York


Peter Lindbergh: Naomi Campbell; hair, Julien D’Ys’ makeup, Stéphane Marais; USA, 1990
Peter Lindbergh: Naomi Campbell; hair, Julien D’Ys’ makeup, Stéphane Marais; USA, 1990


 

Towards the end of this month, Phaidon will publish Grace Coddington's book, Grace: Thirty Years of Fashion at Vogue. First published in 2002, and highly sought after ever since, this photographic monograph not only collects together the work of the legendary fashion stylist, it also showcases for some of the greatest fashion images ever published, taken by the likes of Cecil Beaton, Irving Penn, Bruce Weber, Steven Meisel and Mario Testino.
In anticipation of its release, we caught up with Grace at her Long Island holiday home, to discuss her life and work. You can read the first instalment of this interview here. In this second part, Grace talks about the documentary that made her a household name, as well as the differences between US and European working practices and why, in her opinion, even the wildest fashion story has to retain an element of reality.

Mario Testino: Gisele Bündchen, Frankie Rayder, Fernanda Tavares; hair, Marc Lopez; makeup, Kay Montano; Italy 1998

Mario Testino: Gisele Bündchen, Frankie Rayder, Fernanda Tavares; hair, Marc Lopez; makeup, Kay Montano; Italy 1998

We're sure this is a question you get asked about twice a week, but would you tell us how the film The September Issue changed your life? “Yes, I do get asked that twice a week, because people are still seeing that movie. It's quite extraordinary. In fact the director came over to see me recently. We're very good friends, although in the beginning, I was extremely reluctant to let his film crew in on my life. I thought they would get in the way. After all, no-one acts completely naturally in front of the camera. For the first nine months, I shut my door on them. Then I was told I had to be in the film, I decided to make the best of it, and I made the film crew part of my team. I asked their advice, and I got to know them really well. It was a small team: a camera man, a sound man and a director and, sometimes the director wasn't even there.
“In the end it was very easy, and it seems that I came across as a more real person than some people in the film. Truthfully, they were only filming me for the last two weeks, but in the cutting of the film, I became a strong character. It's the way they edited it.
“The movie made me into someone whom everybody knew. Before The September Issue, a few fashion knew who I was, but nobody else. That does change things. Every time I go outside people shout my name, like a rock star, though they're always very nice! I'll be sitting on the subway and someone will come up to me to ask, “What's it like working at Vogue?” I get into a conversation like that every other day. It also gets you tables in restaurants, as well as a lot of opportunities.”

Ellen von Unwerth: Nadja Auermann in Donna Karan; hair, Danilo; makeup, Laurie Starrett; Morocco, 1992

Ellen von Unwerth: Nadja Auermann in Donna Karan; hair, Danilo; makeup, Laurie Starrett; Morocco, 1992

You are known for your high-production, cinematic-style shoots. Yet, leafing through this new book, there are quite a few simple images of beautiful girls in great clothes. Have we misunderstood you? “No. It can be high production, even if it’s a girl standing against a grey background. Yes, I like things that tell a story – I think that's what I'm known for – but you can tell a story on a simple background too. I do like putting things in a location, because it helps. But then the endless flights and travelling can get to you. To put something in a stark studio is much more difficult, because the thing itself has to speak louder, whereas if you put it in a beautiful landscape you have half the job already done for you. You can be more focussed in a studio, but you can also get stifled and bored, and it feels repetitive. So I like the juxtaposition of doing a studio one day and a location the next. And there can still be a story behind it, even if it’s in the studio, or you can build a set! There are endless variations.”

Arthur Elgort: Carmen Kass, Ansel Elgort, Richard Houghton, Liundmilla Bakhmat, Nathalie and Laura Love, Ben Reyer, Jane Moseley (Yohji Yamamoto); hair, Julien D’Ys; makeup, Aaron de Mey; USA 2000

Arthur Elgort: Carmen Kass, Ansel Elgort, Richard Houghton, Liundmilla Bakhmat, Nathalie and Laura Love, Ben Reyer, Jane Moseley (Yohji Yamamoto); hair, Julien D’Ys; makeup, Aaron de Mey; USA 2000

In your book, you write about flying to China to shoot a story in the 1970s. What struck you about the place? “Everyone was still wearing the Mao uniform. That was extraordinary. And I mean absolutely everybody. I think two-year-old babies occasionally wore a little shirt with a duck on it or something, but everybody else, from about the age of four onwards, wore the Mao uniform, in either khaki or blue, and they had regulation haircuts.
“Visually, it was very beautiful. I've always been fascinated by uniform anyway. But you know, one has to look at what goes on behind all that, and it was a repressive, terrible government. Aesthetically, it was extraordinary, though I'd be embarrassed to say “oh, it looked great”, because it was an indication of how little freedom everyone had. At least they had settled on a uniform that was extremely practical, well-cut and simple.
“I went out a bought a hundred pairs of pants myself and brought them home. I loved it, though that makes me sound like a silly fashion person - which I was! [laughs]. I've always, in my travels, collected things from the places I've been.
“In China, the other thing was that, everywhere you went, were these big sofas, and they all had a white slip cover on them, even if they were in the middle of a train station. Incredible. And again, it made a huge impact on me. When I got home, I got rid of all my English chintz and I got yards and yards of white linen and covered everything. It's so practical; you throw it in the laundry once a week. I guess that's what they did in the train stations.”

 
Bruce Weber: Taliso Soto (Anne Klein); hair, Dider Malige; makeup, Mariella Smith-Masters; USA 1982

Bruce Weber: Taliso Soto (Anne Klein); hair, Dider Malige; makeup, Mariella Smith-Masters; USA 1982

You also relocated from London to New York in 1987. How different was New York City, in terms of a working environment? “It was pretty different. I briefly changed jobs. I was made design director at Calvin Klein, and I was there for over a year and a half. It was very different to working on a magazine, which is why I went back to working on a magazine. I just preferred the variety of magazines. I'm not a designer. I wasn't really directing design; I was just inspiring and discussing where I felt fashion was going.
“In either case, the change in working practices, between Britain and America, was harsh. You can't mess around. There wasn't time for a cup of tea, they worked extremely hard. People worked hard in England, of course, but you did it in your own time. In America it was full on or you're out. No one ever got fired in England, and people always got fired in America. Is it better? I don't know. Ultimately, does it achieve the same? Pretty much. It's just the way they approach things. So, I'd try not to slope into work at midday, which is what you often did in London. There's a certain expectation you'd better meet, otherwise you were out of a job.”

Steven Meisel: Grace Coddington, 1992

Steven Meisel: Grace Coddington, 1992

In your book you also write about the importance of a shoot looking “real” Could you tell us a little more about that? “Real to you and real to me might be two different things. For me, I need to feel like, to some extent, the shoot could really happen. I'm always interested to see, say, if we're going on location, what's the terrain like, can she wear high heels? If the model should wear sandals or Wellington boots, then that's what she's going to wear. Where you are decides what you have on your feet, and what you have on your feet dictates what you have all the way up.
“I don't generally like a lot of fantastical make-up, but occasionally you can have fun with it. I find the hair very important, and it can be wild and mad, or extremely real. I like extreme hair, but then I also like it when it’s a no-hair and no make-up story. If it's stripped down and real, it can take more to get a picture, especially when you don't have something extremely eye-catching to shoot. It's easier to photograph a huge big evening dress than it is to photograph say, a girl in a simple dress just standing there.”

Grace: Thirty Years of Fashion at Vogue

Grace: Thirty Years of Fashion at Vogue

To see more of Grace’s work, both the real and the fantastical, buy a copy of Grace: Thirty Years of Fashion at Vogue here, and check back soon for the third instalment of this interview, where Grace talks about the influence of Georgia O’Keeffe, what she looks for in a photographer, why she still doesn't "get on with" the internet and what she likes to wear these days. 

SHARE THIS PAGE

lying lolita's lying layers... art by Jorge Cardoso














Torre da Cadeia Velha, Ponte de Lima || 2009



Friday, September 4, 2015

texto longo




CENSORSHIP IS A BITCH








by the Flipados team  Junho / Julho 2015











texto longo



………………







Índice



Capítulo 1 – A censura:

                em termos gerais, historicamente e na internet

Capítulo 2 – The Flipados Team:

                no Photoblog, no Facebook e na Arte

Capítulo 3 – A colagem digital:

                como método artístico escolhido, antecedentes históricos, comparações e                 diferenças










……………………



1) Vivemos tempos muito hipócritas em que os avanços na liberdade são acompanhados de simultâneos retrocessos.

Quando se ganha distanciamento temporal e histórico é mais fácil classificar uma época como libertária ou retrógrada; quando ainda estamos próximos a incoerência parece ser o fator dominante.

Por outro lado, os avanços tecnológicos baralham os dados e apresentam novos desafios…



A censura manifesta-se em todos os aspectos da vida humana: política, religião, opções de relacionamento social e/ou sexual, raça, costumes e negócios.



Em termos políticos, o foco é menos intenso que noutras épocas excetuando os suspeitos do costume: os regimes ditatoriais. Na prática não é bem assim; nos regimes ditos democráticos há toda uma panóplia de mecanismos que levam à censura por hierarquia de poder ou à autocensura para sobrevivência. Nas empresas privadas isto é mais evidente e “aceitável” mas o mesmo se passa nas associações sociais, nos partidos políticos, nas organizações religiosas, etc.

A censura política, sobretudo associada a grandes opções ideológicas, está apesar de tudo em diminuição; entretanto, aparece agora associada a outros factores como a corrupção.



Na área social e sexual temos avanços nos países ditos ocidentais em termos de direitos das minorias, casamento homossexual, etc. em paralelo com práticas ancestrais em países do dito terceiro mundo. No entanto, em termos de consenso teórico global há sintonias, o que sugere que haverá mais vitórias nestas áreas.



Em termos raciais, há consenso teórico e prática menos consensual. Em muitas zonas do mundo, se os conflitos não são exactamente raciais, são de certeza em termos de etnias. E mesmo em países que já se dividiram - aproximando-se mais as fronteiras das nações que os compunham – continuamos a ter convulsões… como se os diferentes níveis de “etnias” e motivos de discórdia fossem “viver do lado oposto da rua”. Em países que têm superior exposição mediática, como por exemplo os Estados Unidos, temos por um lado o primeiro presidente afro-americano e por outro a época de maiores conflitos derivados da atuação policial para com… afro-americanos.



A censura religiosa ficou para o fim. De facto, ao contrário dos séculos mais recentes, a conflitualidade de crenças voltou a agravar-se. Isso manifesta-se diretamente em assuntos claramente religiosos mas também indiretamente em temas do foro social e sexual cujas origens acabam por ser também de influência religiosa. Até na área política há conflitos e censura que é de influência religiosa quando os estados são liderados por chefes religiosos.

Desde Salman Rushdie e “Os Versículos Satânicos”, as bandas desenhadas dinamarquesas e o profeta Maomé… até ao criminoso ataque ao Charlie Hebdo. E por muito que queiramos separar atos de motivação religiosa de atos terroristas, as circunstâncias factuais mostram como estão misturados nos argumentos e justificações. Uma análise da metodologia de recrutamento de novos aderentes ao Estado Islâmico mostra como todo o cariz é religioso.

É: “converta-se, seja muçulmano… deixe de se relacionar com infiéis… venha para a terra prometida”!

Não é: “venha ser terrorista connosco”!



Entretanto, e como exemplo dos avanços tecnológicos que referimos no início, temos a internet. No início foi um campo de liberdade, libertação e anarquia salutar… que levou à convivência do melhor com o pior.

Quem viveu em Portugal na época da liberalização do sinal de rádio… ainda se lembra de programas fabulosos criados nas chamadas “rádios piratas”! Deve ter havido maus programas mas não me lembro porque não os escolhi para ouvir (e esta é uma questão que os censores decidem ignorar… que as pessoas podem escolher). Lembro-me sim dos bons…e alguns deles continuaram depois, já com a rádio regulamentada, e não foram a mesma coisa: não tinham a mesma frescura e espontaneidade.

Com a internet passa-se o mesmo mas à escala planetária. Pode-se encontrar, potencialmente, TUDO! Como cozinhar um pudim ou como construir uma bomba. Com os argumentos do medo e da segurança, os poderes que têm o horror ao vazio (e na altura a internet era o maior local de vazio de poder) decidiram que a internet precisava de ser controlada. Acontece é que ela é uma gigantesca via com dois sentidos, como o caso Wikileaks demonstrou: se a recolha de informação é à escala global também a divulgação de algo incómodo se faz para todos num instante.

Esta fabulosa ferramenta é o novo palco das guerras… globais ou direccionadas, militares, religiosas, políticas.

No entanto, nem sempre as motivações são tão potencialmente grandiosas; as aventuras censórias do Flipados Team foram na internet – mais especificamente – nas redes sociais como veremos no capítulo seguinte. E o pseudo moralismo que foi invocado para os atos censórios não escondia fundamentos políticos ou religiosos; antes disfarçava evidentes interesses económicos.








2) O Flipados Team nasceu na internet em março de 2007, no âmbito de uma plataforma de blogs de fotografia: o Photoblog


O Cabecilha e o americo/AmericA nasceram no mesmo dia


O Flipado deu à net no fim do mesmo mês


A Rozária S. deu-se à luz em maio desse mesmo ano


Como vemos tem direito ao título honorífico “Banned” e só pode ser vista pelos antigos amigos. Os maus dos presidentes do Photoblog não acharam o seu humor susceptível de ser exibido.

Em Setembro de 2014, a bisneta de Rozária, reavivou a sua luta por uma internet inteligente e, usando a sua antiga alcunha Rozette, voltou às lides


Muitas outras personagens nasceram e entraram nestas aventuras com maior ou menor frequência.



Descrevendo agora as partes fundamentais do Photoblog, temos:

- cada personagem/conta pode fazer uma entrada (post) por dia; o post é uma página

- a página tem uma 1ª zona para colocar fotografias, actualmente é entre 1 e 5 no sistema gratuito. Houve alturas no passado que se podia colocar até 20 fotos.

- por baixo de cada foto há uma caixa de texto/legenda e a seguir às fotos há um espaço para um texto mais longo; até aqui é a parte da página a cargo do blogger

- mais abaixo há a 2ª zona da página que é interativa: a secção de comentários; podem ser de outros membros do Photoblog ou do público em geral.

Depois criaram-se outros departamentos do Photoblog como os forums, guestbooks, mensagens privadas e concursos por temas, mas a essência do blog está no que até aqui descrevemos: uma página por dia e por pessoa onde se colocam fotos e texto e depois uma secção onde as pessoas comentam essa fotos.

Nesta época ainda não havia o Facebook e assim o Photoblog podia ter uma função útil de aproximar familiares separados através de imagens da sua vida e férias; na prática isso era marginal, como também era marginal um caso ou outro de imagens comerciais (venda de produtos) ou claramente pornográficas (mais ou menos rapidamente detectadas e excluídas). No geral o Photoblog era uma pasmaceira… aquilo que designávamos como um blog de “flowers and sunsets”!

Um blogger colocava umas fotos de florzinhas e em baixo, na secção de comentários os seus bloggers amigos escreviam “nice photo”… very nice”… etc, etc.

Outro blogger publicava umas fotos do pôr-do-sol e era por sua vez mimoseado com comentários banais e bajuladores.

Poucos participantes tinham um mínimo de jeito para a fotografia dita artística quanto mais para fazer arte.

Os Flipados rapidamente decidiram dar alguma animação à comunidade, começando primeiro pela secção de comentários… e se as flores e fins-de-tarde não tinham ponta por onde se pegasse havia de vez em quando uma imagem ou outra que permitia uma frase mais imaginativa do que o habitual “very nice”.

Mas, claro que nem todos os colegas bloggers tinham o nosso sentido de humor e assim resmungavam algo depreciativo ou, pior ainda, apagavam o nosso comentário! Por vezes encontrávamos alguém combativo que ripostava no nosso blog e assim tínhamos umas batalhas, vulgo ping-pong, entre secções de comentários de vários bloggers! Admito que foi a única coisa divertida dessa fase.

Depois mudamos de estratégia e encontramos a nossa vocação com a recriação da foto-novela para a época digital!

As várias fotografias de um post contavam uma história e as legendas (e o texto) por baixo reforçavam ou iconoclasticamente davam a nossa versão da história. O humor era – como sempre – a nota dominante! Foi a melhor fase do Photoblog para o Flipados Team!

Assim , os comentários tinham hipóteses de ser mais criativos… o que dependia dos outros participantes. Muitas vezes sentimos que estávamos a dar pérolas a porcos… de todas as nacionalidades porque apesar de tudo era uma plataforma internética mundial.

É evidente que – como sempre – tivemos uma minoria inteligente que percebeu e participou com comentários estimulantes.

Depois começaram os problemas: determinada imagem era censurada e retirada porque alguém a tinha denunciado (flagged)… aliás tinham criado um botão com uma bandeira colocada ao lado de toda e qualquer foto para que algum somítico o pudesse usar em iniciativa censória!!! Nos inícios ainda contestamos e às vezes ganhávamos e a situação era reposta… outras vezes mantinham a conta/blog aberto mas só acessível aos amigos… outras vezes acabavam mesmo com a conta… (banned era acrescentado – qual Medalha de Mérito – ao nome do blogue criminoso).

Embora nalguns casos os amigos ainda tivessem acesso ao blog censurado, parte das fotografias tinham sido retiradas e ficava uma história truncada com mais textos e legendas do que imagens!

É evidente que, tendo sido um processo continuado, tivemos tempo para guardar muitas das histórias offline.





imagens de exemplo do photoblog e mais links





Nesta altura (pré-Facebook) ainda os responsáveis do Photoblog apostavam numa venda milionária da plataforma… por isso queriam um local a cumprir as normas familiares à americana! E por mais que nos inícios tivessem prometido a ausência de publicidade nas páginas, as forças de mercado e os custos de servidores impuseram-se. Agora o Photoblog tem publicidade e os anunciantes vão mais facilmente (ou exclusivamente) para sites de cariz “familiar.”



A experiência do Facebook foi similar, salvaguardando as diferenças de formato desta plataforma e as ferramentas específicas, mas a lógica da denúncia era a mesma! O mesmo se diga quanto à motivação dos responsáveis do site em termos de garantia dos conteúdos ditos familiares para satisfação dos anunciantes!

Como no caso do Facebook há mais exposição mediática que no Photoblog, aparecem regularmente notícias de utilizadores censurados que processam a organização do menino Zuckerberg mas certamente sem grande sucesso.

Pela nossa parte éramos regularmente incomodados (suspensos, bloqueados, censurados, banidos e similares) não só pelo conteúdo das publicações mas por suspeitarem que os nossos nomes não eram verdadeiros, exigindo mudança para o nome real, interdição de perfil completo em vez de mera página para casos de empresas, etc. etc.

Realmente é incrível como a nível mundial tanta gente cumpre as normas do Facebook mais respeitosamente que as leis do seu país! E assim, o dito Zuckerberg tem a maior base de dados da humanidade sem trabalho de recolha… os dados são voluntarizados pelos próprios!

Como não somos masoquistas decidimos que era altura de mudar. Ora o BLOGGER/BLOGSPOT tem ao entrar um aviso de blog com conteúdo adulto para não traumatizar as almas sensíveis; e é assim nessa plataforma que continuamos as nossas atividades!















3) A colagem digital, método artístico desenvolvido pelos Flipados, enquadra-se - em termos de história da arte - como a versão mais moderna da tradição da colagem.

Embora associada aos trabalhos dos cubistas, em termos de conteúdo de obras pintadas, facto é que já antes tinham sido feitas colagens em arte: como expressão do movimento dada. Aqui, como manifesto político anti-política as colagens eram de letras e números e monocromáticos… nos cubistas havia cor e imagens. Mas não faltavam letras (vide Entrada de Amadeu de Souza Cardoso).

Ao longo do século evoluiu tanto na pintura como em madeira, a decoupage (como Henri Matisse em azul), a fotomontagem (como Richard Hamilton), a montagem 3D, o mosaico e finalmente a colagem digital (mais associada à vídeo arte e à instalação digital).

A colagem digital dos Flipados é para já associada só à fotografia e mesmo aqui sem recurso aos programas de processamento de imagem. O próprio recorte dos elementos é low-tech, normalmente rectangular ou quadrado sem efeitos de camadas ou transparências.

A maioria do material que integra a exposição “Censorship is a bitch” usa colagens que foram usadas nos blogs (ex: Zette-» the fashion blog) ou faz colagem de fotos que individualmente contaram as histórias do Flipados Team.

A exposição pretende ser a catarse de toda essa época de aventuras foto-literárias e desventuras censórias. Pretende marcar o fim dessa época de ingenuidade em termos de redes sociais e a mudança para a idade adulta na internet… daí a mudança para o BLOGGER/BLOGSPOT que sabe lidar com material adulto.

Há várias pistas para a evolução artística dos Flipados que pode passar pelo vídeo, pps e multimédia, instalações e performance.

Um dos novos caminhos já é apresentado nesta exposição com a série “Free the nipple”: são trabalhos que não nasceram na interactividade dos blogs mas que foram criados offline… o que perdem em espontaneidade e anarquia ganham em organização e profundidade. De facto, cada série corresponde a um tema; todas as obras da série têm um ponto comum visual na repetição de uma imagem que ilustra esse tema (neste caso do lado direito, usando metade da área das obras, temos o logo do movimento Free The Nipple). Depois cada obra individualmente difere do lado esquerdo com imagens e textos que dão uma interpretação específica do tema (em linguagem musical são variações).













Kicking The Donald


Kicking The Donald: LA’s Irreverent Norm Laich

Kicking The Donald: LA’s Irreverent Norm Laich
Norm Laich's faux-promotional poster for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.
(Courtesy )

I first encountered the fierce humor of Norm Laich this summer in a group show at Team gallery curated by Amanda Ross-Ho. Laich — who cut his teeth as a professional sign painter — had an entire retail rack of custom-made T-shirts advertising gross-out video and performance artist Paul McCarthy for president. More recently, he designed the faux-promotional poster for Republican front-runner Donald Trump. I reached out to the artist via email to learn a bit more about his background, his thoughts on the current political fiasco, and whether or not he really thinks McCarthy could ever command the Oval Office.
Can you tell me a bit about the two sides of your career in the arts — the commercial side, and the fine art side? How do those two different roles occasionally bleed together?



Norm Laich


I have followed an unplanned path in my art career. I was a sign and billboard painter in Detroit in my 20s, then I moved to Los Angeles and developed a business working for artists — using my sign-painting skills to make art, instead of signs. Early on, I worked for Lawrence Weiner, John Baldessari, Alexis Smith, and Mike Kelley, mostly doing sign painter’s-style hand lettering. An early hero of mine was James Rosenquist, who was a billboard painter in New York, using those skills to make surreal Pop paintings. I compare myself to a studio musician hired to back up a star singer with my instrument — the brush. I started my business in 1985 and I’ve worked for over a hundred artists, from college students to Ed Ruscha. Sometimes people have a hard time introducing me at parties. They say, “Norm is a legendary sign painter” — a contradiction, since most of them are usually anonymous.
Since I used to paint billboards, I have developed a specialty of working for artists who do wall paintings. One artist I’ve done over 25 of these for is Arturo Herrera. I just did one for him at Gladstone Gallery for the “Hello Walls” show. (By the way, working next to Raymond Pettibon there for a few days was an experience!) Following that, I did one of my own wall paintings, titled “Wish You Were Weird,” at Team gallery as part of “Bad Boys Bail Bonds Adopt A Highway,” the show Amanda Ross-Ho curated.
You’ve made a very tongue-in-cheek poster promoting Donald Trump for president. His mouth looks like a bloody guillotine… and I think I see two Target logos in there? How do these specific elements represent The Donald to you?
We are experiencing a very extreme period of right-wing radicalism. White power nationalist types are like cornered dogs snarling in desperation. Trump is a scary clown. In my poster, the clouds form a hard-on phallic shape going up the side of his body. Trump’s mouth is like a garbage disposal that never shuts off. As for the logos: My mom lives across the street from a Target so I’m always seeing the Target
signs and the inherent violence of the symbol pollutes my brain.
Did you watch the first Republican debate on Fox? Besides Trump, which candidates delight you the most in terms of being entertainingly insane?
I saw the “lowlights” of the Fox debate. The pundits say Trump is entertainingly bat-shit crazy and I think the rest of the Dumblicans are terrifyingly bat-shit crazy. Twenty-four million watching that debate and no mention of global warming? A 30-second answer by Scott Walker about the Black Lives Matter movement and that’s it?
I’ll vote for whoever runs against the Republican nominee.
You recently unveiled another politically-themed work: A T-shirt that touted artist Paul McCarthy for president. First of all, where did you source that unbelievable photo of Paul, which looks a bit like a mug shot taken after a very long drug-binge? And what qualities do you think Mr. McCarthy has that would make him a great leader of the free world?
The photo of Paul is by the photographer Grant Mudford. The old avant-garde had an image of an artist being an eccentric, provocative, wild and crazy person and I think Paul was playing up to that stereotype all the way in this photo from the ’80s. Now, people are talking how crazy white right-wing politicians are: Are they the new avant garde? Paul is a very intelligent former UCLA professor but I can’t see him being the leader of the free world. In fact, out of character he’s probably too mellow and laid-back for the job.



Scott Indrisek wearing Norm Laich's Paul McCarthy for President t-shirt, which incorporates a photography of McCarthy by Grant Mudford.

Do you think artists can actually affect change when it comes to current events, politics, or elections? Is satire the best tool for this, in your mind?
The debate about political art is ongoing. The critics of political art say it’s simplistic propaganda. I say we are always being bombarded by simplistic right-wing propaganda so why can’t the side I’m on, the left wing, fire back? I like what the art writer Ben Davis says — to paraphrase, “The only real way to affect change is to get involved in the trenches of grass-root politics” — but I know that’s easier said than done in what seems like extra-stressful times.


Blouin Artinfo