'Because things don’t appear to be the known thing; they aren’t what they seemed to be neither will they become what they might appear to become.'
Posted by Tessa den Uyl and Martin Cohen
Photo credit Max Perissi . Florence, Italy 1994
How can a woman in a semitransparent dress, passing on the streets of Florence, pass by unnoticed? Or should we question why a woman in a semitransparent dress is challenging? The above picture - inspired by Ruth Orkin’s 1951 photograph, ‘American girl in Italy’, reworks the underlying issues of female freedom and independency.
Being foremost independent and possibly attractive stresses female power over men and the ability to challenge patriarchal behavior. The woman ‘out objects’ herself in claiming her ‘subjective freedom’. She, like He, plays this game in the face of gender difference, molding both men and women into objects.
Challenging the other gender, even as we are controlled by a vision of being sexual bodies, is hitchhiking on a road where ‘the obvious will always be the driver, in a country of good reasons’, even when the road might be deceptive.
Less obvious is the question of whether we have distorted intimacy into something we can rationally justify?
Have we made a confused exchange between the inescapable faults ascribed to the virtues of the male and female body and the awareness that intimacy informs all the conceptual relationships of Life?
Intimacy unties borders in which the other is disqualified - in a moral way. That this disqualification is unfounded might perplex us, but it will not make us doubt.
When intimacy is appropriated into a web of the already related, the lurking suspicion is that once we have sexualised the body, will we also not find that we have destroyed intimacy?
Read on: More ways in which images are not always quite what they seem are explored in the post immediately below, by Keith Tidman.
Read on: More ways in which images are not always quite what they seem are explored in the post immediately below, by Keith Tidman.
