I’m getting so excited about my thesis that I had to share some of it with you whilst I am still working on it- here’s a little jist of where i am going with it all…
‘Ulay stitches his mouth shut whilst Abramavic talks for him. Stelarc hangs suspended from meat hooks which pierce his flesh. Eriwin Olaf present a family clad entirely in latex. Cathy De Monchaux traps visceral flesh-like folds between harsh torturous metal devices. And Chris Burden is shot in the arm. These are art pieces, they have been exhibited or performed in galleries and purchased, applauded and digested, but more importantly accepted by the art world. These works can be read about in educational arts books, they are condoned. Yet each of these pieces have a fetishistic, sadistic or masochistic aspect to them, though within each of these works the choice of content has an alternative explanation. These acts or images are used as parables of politics or social issues, personal pain, alienation and so on. They toy with the contractual and the transgressive but, they are still allowed back across the line as artists opposed to being condoned as perverse. I am certain this is because though they utilise the taboo in their work they purport to do so objectively, from a stance of distance and considered choice rather than driven passion. Here the difference lies between the artist and the fetishist. ‘
Synthi
xxx
