#because while she can recognize oppression and injustice she cannot see the whole picture and thus only thinks of how it affects her

[sameteeth]

in s3ep2, eleanor tells mrs. hudson she doesnt come from privilege, which mrs. hudson immediately denies. but i think its SOOO telling of eleanor's character! she sees herself as a woman in a world full of men, which she is, but she completely ignores the class and racial divides she obviously benefits from. she claims she has no privilege to mrs. hudson, who comes from no money and works as a chambermaid to woodes rodgers, leaving behind her beloved children to make sure eleanor has clean clothes and to empty her chamberpot. eleanor had power on nassau, power she wielded for her own benefit and to the severe detriment of others. obviously she experienced misogyny, but she was never forced into poverty, never forced into sex work, never forced into service of any kind, because her father was wealthy and she was born into a higher class. her experiences of misogyny and oppression are vastly different than mrs. hudson's. but for her to tell a chambermaid she experienced no privilege? it's laughably untrue. eleanor oversaw and directly profitted from the trade of hundreds if not thousands of slaves on nassau, was raised by "chattel property of the guthrie estate" mr. scott, who is never even given a name in his own tongue (on screen, at least), never showed kindness to anyone but those who put money in her pocket because she was born with that money and that trade empire already in the guthrie name. she had to fight to get it, and fight she did, but the fact that those things were so close to her reach just by virtue of the circumstances of her birth? that's privilege, whether or not she sees it that way

[bloodfcst-a]

the last few mornings i’ve had hanging out with @sailorrmood​ have been absolutely incredible for my self-esteem and energy. thank you always for being ready to hang out to dismantle sexism, ableism, racism, and all the other shenanigans we see on the internet in the name of virtue signaling and performance activism.

i’m attempting to return to tumblr, but one of the things that really grinds my gears is the pseudo-authenticity and one-time performance activism via a reblog of a semi-relatable post. i say semi because while there are good intentions in many of these posts, people often just click like or reblog without considering the lack of intersectionality that was in the main post, or figure “i did my part” and expect everyone else to move on without recognizing that the situation lies beyond your simple text post. just because you moved on from knowing people are being unfairly incarcerated and dying at the hands of actual criminals weaponized by the ‘ justice system ’ doesn’t mean i have, or will.

today i really read someone with their whole chest say “i just learned about racism this week. wow. i’m white and i should do something about things.” and i can’t even imagine what it’s like to live in a world with so much privilege that you can really go 20+ years of living without recognizing the world around you and without noticing inequality or injustice. caucasity is a hell of a thing. meanwhile i’m an afab nb black & native so truly there’s never a time i’m not reminded of all the privileges i don’t have. i get so annoyed seeing people on tumblr say something completely ignorant and then use an excuse.

just two days ago i saw someone say “it’s sexist to ship clerith and not cloti, i’d know, i’m a womanist.” << which is not womanism, this is truly white feminism at its peak. i’ve also seen “this is my opinion and to critique me and my opinion is transphobic because i’m trans and you’re missing my good intentions.” this is both fragility and performativity to overrule an actual discussion, claiming bc of some label they know to be a haute keyword that their opinion is right. if you were truly an ally, you’d be willing to accept that your opinion is lacking the inclusivity you claim to hold. for womanism was birthed from the lack of intersectionality and critical thinking, for those outspoken or overruled or considered inferior by radical “feminists.”

( if someone were truly womanist, for example, both aerith and tifa would both be validated as women, because they both have worth inherently because they were born, and it cannot be invalidated based on a perceived gender role that they may or may not fall into. they inherently have the right to comfortable in the position that suits them best and that they have chosen of their own accord. to consider aerith inferior because she is ‘feminine’ or tifa inferior because she is ‘masculine’ or any other adjectives which could stereotypically fall into either of those categories is an explicit rejection of the acceptance ‘feminism’ claims to advocate for. )

and being trans is a valid identity but it is not a suitable response if you use that as a way to silence others or invalidate any other person’s experiences.

i recognize june is considered pride month, but it’s also juneteenth... ironic, given that this month is supposed to be celebrating the  proclamation the emanicaption of slavery to the remainder of those who were still held in captivity six months after the declaration had been legally issued... and yet here we are, 150+ years after the fact and still fighting for the right to live under the same oppressors by a system created to capture the slaves freed by the emancipation proclamation.... but y’all aren’t ready to see the big picture. but you need to be. black people have been. and that’s why they’re fighting for their lives now.

we all still have plenty of work to do, myself included, with dismantling biases taught to us by society and the social spheres we interact in. there should never be a time where you think “ah, i’ve learned enough about this subject” or “i’ve heard enough stories.” even when something is presented to you, you should possess critical thinking skills and learn to take nothing at face-value. raise questions to everything you see, especially presented by the media, and prepare to be made uncomfortable if your assumptions are wrong ( because more than likely, they will be ). who is the person mentioning the subject? what other opinions do they have? are there people presenting counter-arguments? how does their identity influence the way they interact with the information mentioned? to who is their audience? for what purpose are they interacting with said audience? if that seems like too much work... congratulations! you’re quite privileged to acknowledge the inconvenience of having to look at someone’s words and think more than 0.5 seconds about it. and if that’s hard for you to do with one post, imagine someone having to do that with literally every interaction for their entire lives. that’s the reality of black people, and other people of color, and any person that has a label that has defined them as “other.” remember, too, that these labels do not exist independently of one another, that they stack, and that a person can easily have multiple privileges, or on the flip side, things to be persecuted over, multiple injustices to face.

is it hard? yes. scary? certainly. but you should bravely face it head-on, as i am and my ancestors have before me. for those of you who claim to herald truth and freedom and the equality of all humans, who recognize there is no place in a just world for superiority and supremacy, you should invoke your strength as well. use it in times where you may need to be corrected for your decisions. do not hide behind one of your identities to prevent yourself from doing the hard work of re-evaluating yourselves and the information you share. if you’re to claim you’re an ally of anyone, that first and foremost means to listen to other’s stories and to provide them the platform to be heard, to not erase their voices when they are the most affected by it. learn about new perspectives and then dare to journey into a new world with those ideals you claim to hold together.

i have the honor of leading anti-racism workshops this week at my job, but you don’t have to be an anti-oppression coordinator to do this important work. you just need to actually put some real effort into what you’re saying, thinking, believing. remember to be inclusive. remember to listen. and remember to love. and if you can’t do that, you can certainly unfollow me so i can get you the hell off my dash lmaooo. thank you mutual checker!!

so in conclusion... just do better, y’all. i’m tired of seeing fake woke folks. everyone can learn to be a better ally to each other. and most importantly... CLICK THE LINK BELOW.

https://blacklivesmatters.carrd.co/

kay thanks!!!

[torymansfieldah-blog]

Censorship continued: Dana Shultz’s Open Casket

Who is Dana Schutz? What does she usually depict in her work and how does she go about creating her paintings?

Dana Schultz is a white American painter. Her work typically depicts people or real life. Schultz’s work is usually in the form of abstractions. She uses bright colors and humorous approaches to the human figure. She typically does not paint subject matter such as Open Casket, however, she felt it was necessary to call attention to the issues of police brutality and social injustice in America. This particular painting by Dana Schultz received lots of clash-back from African American viewers who were outraged that a white American was profiting off of black pain.

What does her painting Open Casket depict? How is the subject depicted?

The painting Open Casket depicts the dead body of Emmett Till, a fourteen-year-old boy. Dana Schultz, the artist, paints the boy in an abstracted style while still using her expressive mark-making to make the subject known. In the painting, his shirt is a bright white which makes the blood smear on his shirt even more prominent. While it is abstracted, it doesn’t make the imagery or the content any less horrific. She uses red very minimally to draw attention to the places she did use it. Schultz chooses to leave some areas of the painting built up with more detail while other areas are more abstracted and less clear. For example, in the face, certain areas such as the nose and lips are still left identifiable while other areas such as the eyes are smeared and more abstracted. While the content may be horrifying, technically it’s beautifully done. Her repetition of color and painterly style adds another element to the piece. I love her ability to move color around all over the canvas, for example with the yellows and reds. Her abstraction of the face further pushes the horrendous nature in which the boy was found. 

Why is this subject matter so controversial? Discuss both sides of this debate: a.) arguments from individuals who wish to take down (and for some, destroy - i.e. Hannah Black) Open Casket; b.) arguments for keeping the painting in the public eye (i.e. Coco Fusco).

This is such a controversial matter because she is a white artist choosing to depict the death of a young black boy. As a white artist, many feel that she cannot relate to this issue, nor does she have the right to. Hannah Black argues that the painting should be taken down because it is never acceptable for a white person to profit off of Black suffering. Black argues, “ those non-Black artists who sincerely wish to highlight the shameful nature of white violence should first of all stop treating Black pain as raw material.” Black also discusses the unnecessary hurt caused by this painting and argues for the removal of the painting all together. While Fusco, argues that to call for censorship or the destruction of a work simply because of the content or who made it leads us down an even darker path. She argues that “Hannah Black and company are placing themselves on the wrong side of history, together with Phalangists who burned books, authoritarian regimes that censor culture and imprison artists, and religious fundamentalists who ban artworks in the name of their god.” She also reiterates that while Black argues that Dana Schultz is using this painting to profit off of Black pain this simply isn’t true. Dana Schultz had no intention to sell the painting or make any money off of it. Fusco also addressed the area in Black’s letter that brings up Emmett Till’s mother and how she made her son’s dead body “available to Black people as an inspiration and warning”. An inspiration? This was a young boy’s dead body and she used the word inspiration. Fusco mentions that while she doesn’t agree with Black’s argument she still believes it should be addressed and analyzed rather than just recirculating the argument over social media and remaining silent.

How does Coco Fusco analyze history to back up her arguments?

Coco Fusco backs up her argument for Dana Schultz’s work by saying that Black does not consider the history of anti-racist art by white artists. These artists were often commissioned by Civil Rights activists. She also fails to recognize that suffering bodies are seen throughout the history of Western art. She also argues that numerous black artists have depicted imprisoned or enslaved bodies in the early stages of their careers in order to gain a larger following. She also discusses that many young black artists are harbor insecurities because they are told by art dealers that no one wants to hear about their issues. Young artists are hesitant to call themselves “black artists” because professionals warn them not to do so. I mentioned this previously, but she also discusses the history of the death of Emmett Till. She argues that Hannah Black lacks accuracy as to what happened. She says that Mamie Till wanted the world to see what those men had done to her son. There was no exclusion of race, the casket was donated to the national museum for all to see, there was no exclusion of non-black people. She argues that it is reductive to claim that all treatment of black suffering is driven by commercial interests and sadistic intentions. She specifically brings up works made by white artists like Paul Cadmus and John Steuart who painted blacks struggling against white oppression. However, she does mention that by using these artists as examples, she does not mean to suggest that all white artists are depicting black oppression with good intentions. There are better ways to arrive at cultural equality rather than policing the art community and forcing many into silence about these issues. 

Do both sides of this debate have valid points? Why?

This is a difficult topic because I do see valid points in both arguments. In Hannah Black’s letter argues that as a white woman, Schultz has no right to create work of raw Black pain. She argues that it is not our right as white people. I must admit, I do see the validity to her statements. I don’t think I could ever comprehend the tragedy and oppression that black people have had to face every day. However, I also can relate to some of the points Fusco makes in her argument. By censoring art and making it only for the black community, we are limiting ourselves and our ability to further understand and analyze the issues that happened in the past. Black also argues that on social media today the non-black community is constantly posting imagery of lynchings and death. I see her points in making these accusations but I also think again, she’s not really considering the whole picture at times. Fusco mentions that Black is considering things to narrow-mindedly. Not every white artist that creates work of black people or about the oppression of the black people is doing it to make a profit. Not every white artist has these ill intentions. Fusco brings up that many white artists were making impactful work for Civil Rights issues. She also mentions that some black artists have profited and even gotten a larger following because they did make work of their historical past. I, myself, can’t decide if this is wrong or not and personally I don’t think as a white woman I can comment. However, I do believe that by limiting the creation of art to only one race, is uninclusive and makes it even more difficult to have necessary conversations about race and oppression.

Coco Fusco, Censorship, Not the Painting, Must Go’, Hyperallergic, March 27, 2017.

Hannah Black, Please read and share Hannah Black’s open letter to the curators and staff of the Whitney Biennial, Black Contemporary Art, March 21, 2017. 

*Sorry for the late post my wifi has been completely down and I had to wait to get to the school to post this.*