Peeping Toms
Institute of Modern Art, Brisbane
4 August 2011
‘Peeping Toms’ a show real screening of 8 short films and video presented by the Institute of Modern Art and OtherFilm. Voyeurism was the theme that tied the works together. It must be noted that 6 of the videos featured white females each made by white males. Le Roi des Aulnes by Russian collective AES+F, featured both sexes, pre-pubescent and predominantly white, and Drip by Fetus Productions was an abstracted video of a sexual act between males and females. The scope was narrow, constructing a very limited perspective on what and who we look at and how.
Robin Hely’s work ‘Sherrie’ that was particularly disheartening. The first scene is set up with a similar tone of a juvenile joke set to play on the desperate and unknowing. Scenes of the artists dating advertisement in a local paper, audio of his voicemails from women responding to his ad, then Hely himself answering an ad. Then, we see Hely’s reflection in a mirror, getting dressed and positioning a video camera unnoticeably under his suit. There are a few snickers from the audience. The next scene is of the artist and the women, Sherrie – who likes walks along the beach, reading magazines, tattoos and whose ex-husband has a drug problem and is an ‘absolute fucking asshole’. Hely makes quiet, polite conversation. The final scene is of Hely’s opening where he is showing the work titled ‘Sherrie’. Sherrie appears, appropriately screams and physically attacks him. It is disheartening to witness someone’s image being exploited without consent. To do that to a person like Sherrie was particularly low blow on Hely’s part – he situated her in a vulnerable and powerless position.
The evenings construction that women, still, in the 21st Century are disempowered over voyeuristic portrayals of their bodies was oppressively obvious. But perhaps the curators, Robert Leonard and Joel Stern, had realised this and constructed the curatorial narrative in this manner as a test of ethics for the audience. Peeping Toms, in its reiteration of patriarchal dominance, is definitely the most backwardly transgressive screening I’ve seen this year, in the sense that it violated the boundaries of everyday ethics and feminist sensibilities.
Athena Thebus
http://www.robinhely.com/movies/sherrie.mov
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNiiiice Athena! Definitely raises some ethical questions, particulalrly regarding consent. Was there a didactic elaborating on Hely's intentions in making the work? Do you think artists/curators have ethical responsibiliites concerning the consent of other individuals in making/exhibiting artworks?
ReplyDeleteps that was Nicola
ReplyDeleteI’m with Nicola; I'd like to know more. Was it shot without consent in poor taste, or staged with clever intent? The sceptic in me is wondering if this is all an elaborate performance- ‘Sherrie’ and all. This is the first I’ve heard of the show. Athena I like that you question the rational of the show as well as state your opinion. This means that as the reader I know what you think but that it is not presented as gospel. dale
ReplyDeleteFirst I want to say that I enjoyed your writing and found the topic very interesting. However while I'm sure your final comments are relevant and make sense when you see the exhibition I didn't get the impression of Sherrie being disempowered over a voyeuristic portrayal of her body from your description. I get the sense that that example you use is more an emphasis of the over emotional, irrational female similar to the documentation of hysteria that situates the female as other and inferior.
ReplyDelete- Eileen
Good point Eileen! regarding that disempowered feeling. Now that you've brought it up - I think it was more my own disempowered feeling. I didn't like how women were represented. There was one video that was a montage of upskirts - ladies mini skirts blowing up in the wind made in the 1960's that went on and on and on for 5 minutes. I felt especially uncomfortable during 'Sherrie'. Please note the use of the word ‘appropriately’ in the last sentence of the second paragraph - I would have torn Hely apart if I was her!
ReplyDeleteDale – In my opinion it was done without consent in overtly poor taste. I’ve provided a link for the video below the still image. Watch it!
Nicola – No didactic but I’ve seen a bit of Hely’s works and they are prankish. So to me ‘Sherrie’ seems like another prank.
Artists and Curators definitely need to consider ethics.
I think consent is really important in making works with other bodies just because people need maximum integrity to their bodies and to be able to exert control over their own image.
Athena
This has become such an interesting discussion, and I have to say that I agree with you on the point that people should have a right to control their own image.
ReplyDelete