Sigmund Freud

April 29, 2007

Most of this is taken from wikipedia but it is essential to the theories that I am trying to reproduce photographically…

On the other hand, feminist theorists such as Juliet Mitchell, Nancy Chodorow, Jessica Benjamin, Jane Gallop, and Jane Flax have argued that psychoanalytic theory is essentially related to the feminist project and must, like other theoretical traditions, be adapted by women to free it from vestiges of sexism. Freud’s views are still being questioned by people concerned about women’s equality. Another feminist who finds potential use of Freud’s theories in the feminist movement is Shulamith Firestone. In “Freudianism: The Misguided Feminism”, she discusses how Freudianism is essentially completely accurate, with the exception of one crucial detail: everywhere that Freud wrote “penis”, the word should be replaced with “power”.

Denial occurs when someone fends off awareness of an unpleasant truth or of a reality that is a threat to the ego. For example, a student may have received a bad grade on a report card but tells himself that grades don’t matter. (Some early writers argued for a striking parallel between Freudian denial and Nietzsche’s ideas of ressentiment and the revaluation of values that he attributed to “herd” or “slave” morality.)
Reaction formation takes place when a person takes the opposite approach consciously compared to what that person wants unconsciously. For example, someone may engage in violence against another race because, that person claims, the members of the race are inferior, when unconsciously it is that very person who feels inferior.
Displacement takes place when someone redirects emotion from a “dangerous” object to a “safe” one, such as punching a pillow when one is angry at a friend.
Repression occurs when an experience is so painful (such as war trauma) that it is unconsciously forced from consciousness, while suppression is a conscious effort to do the same.
Psychological projection occurs when a person “projects” his or her own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, feelings — basically parts of oneself — onto someone or something else. Since the person is experiencing particular desires, feelings, thoughts, or anxieties, s/he is more prone to attribute those same characteristics to the thoughts, feelings, and motivations of others.
Intellectualization involves removing one’s self, emotionally, from a stressful event, by focusing on rational and factual components of the situation.
Rationalization involves constructing a logical justification for a decision that was originally arrived at through a different mental process. For example, Jim may drink red wine because he is an alcoholic, but he tells himself he drinks it because it has some health benefits, in order to avoid facing his alcoholism.
Compensation occurs when someone takes up one behaviour because one cannot accomplish another behaviour. For example, the second born child may clown around to get attention since the older child is already an accomplished scholar.
Sublimation is the channeling of impulses to socially accepted behaviours. For instance, an aggressive or homicidal person may join the military as a cover for their violent behavior.

Freud distinguished between three concepts of the unconscious: the descriptive unconscious, the dynamic unconscious, and the system unconscious. The descriptive unconscious referred to all those features of mental life of which people are not subjectively aware. The dynamic unconscious, a more specific construct, referred to mental processes and contents which are defensively removed from consciousness as a result of conflicting attitudes. The system unconscious denoted the idea that when mental processes are repressed, they become organized by principles different from those of the conscious mind, such as condensation and displacement.

more research

April 17, 2007

dita_von_teese_tied_up_015.jpg0060591676.jpg

There’s an interesting quote from the above book by Dita Von teese (burlesque artist)

“They won’t find anything liberated in my representing myself as bound, weak, vunerable – sterotypically female. John Willie called it “The realization of helplessness”. There is strength in submission. Why is it more acceptable to play a dominatrix than a damsel in distress? Ernest Greene said “Feminine submission is the last stereotyped to be liberated”. Leopold Von Sacher-Masoch said “Man is the one who desires, woman the one who is desired. This is a womans entire but decisive advantage.”

So the new feminine could be strength masqueraded as vunerability?

links

April 5, 2007

http://www.lacma.org/press/releases/Irmasshortlead.pdf

http://antimusicblog.wordpress.com/2006/02/21/the-self-made-masquerade/

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_3_37/ai_53286432

http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/zoebrigley/entry/frida_kahlos_masquerade/

http://transcriptions.english.ucsb.edu/archive/topics/masquerade/issues.html

on the lookout

April 4, 2007

I’ve decided to go out into the ‘real’ world to observe femininity in the everyday. An old drama teacher of mine used to greatly encourage me to sit on pavement cafes and people watch. It’s the best ‘discreet’ way to view mannerisms and behaviours. It’s fascinating to see how people carry themselves, especially if they are by themselves and without today’s obligatory ipod.

I also took a reconnaissance mission to window shop (like I need an excuse!), I needed to take an objective look at fashion and beauty in terms of masquerade and concealment to further my understanding of today’s take on the feminine.

One place I loved was a party shop. Every conceivable clichéd caricature was in there. Policemen, Playboy bunnies, cowboys, nuns, Indians to hen party paraphernalia. I spent ages looking at the facemasks and even bought a couple! I liked the thought of people going to social gatherings but putting on a ‘masquerade’ of them as another being. The ‘hidden self’.

I also took some photographs of handguns at the local police station. The two handguns (and air rifle which I didn’t need) had been seized in a raid of some sort and were awaiting destruction. I managed to handle them myself and was amazed at my reaction. First I was extremely cautious but then it dawned on me how I had the power of life and death in my hands. This same gun I was holding could have ended someone’s life for all I knew. I’ve never seen a real live gun before then much less handled one but there is a definite feeling of ‘power’ (for want of a better word) associated with such a masculine item. My immediate thought of whom the previous owner had been was that they were male. My automatic assumption being that a masculine item such as this belonged to a man. I never did find out if it were true or not but it reiterates the nature Vs nurture debate. Personally I think it’s down to nurture or culture.

So future plans….

Carry on with research, take photographs to see what develops.

run with it

April 3, 2007

Things are steaming ahead alittle faster than I had expected. I’ve been toying with the idea of using phallic objects such as a gun. I was walking past a police station so i enquired about photographing a firearm. The guy said he didn’t know but would make a few phone calls to find out the situation. I called back to be told that all was okay and to come in tomorrow at 11am to ‘shoot’ (haha) the gun. I was only playing around with the idea but now I’m ‘shooting’ (haha – again) tomorrow. I may use it, I may not. But at least I’ll have the image of a real gun to play around with later.

Other than the above, I’ve spent a few days thinking about themes. I couldn’t decide so I made sure I went over all my work before going to sleep to dream about it and let my subconscious decide – how very freudian of me.

After researching other photographers I’ve decided to go with a few themes…

concealment (subversion of the gaze)
multiplicity (many persona’s = a masquerade of self)
phallic objects (masculinity Vs femininity)

I will also play around with mirrors because I love the idea of the observer and the observed, ending the voyueristic tendancies inherent in all of us.

So…my plan for the time being…photograph as much as possible and see what develops.

Case study – Francesca Woodman

April 1, 2007

3_387_5r893xbsuj-324×324.jpgwoodman-1.jpgwoodman.jpgwoodman5.jpgfig3h3.jpgfrancescawoodmanspace2.jpg

Woodman was inspired by the cultural awareness of woman as an object. Her self-representation claimed back her ownership and authority over her own body.

“Woman functioned at best as an idealized ‘other’, at worst as an object for the projection of unresolved anxieties: male subjects sought transformation through a female representational object” Eva Russ

Photographing one’s own body was really about more than re-claiming. It was about transcending it, getting outside the limitation of the body and into the subconscious. Frequently she would photograph her body without her face. This was about de-materialising the body. The face was closely linked to identity but the objectification of women clearly gave no individual identity to women.

Woodman uses mirrors frequently. The mirror is a sought of ‘icon of self’. It serves as an interesting duality of self. The observer and observed, image and representation. It also serves to imply women’s dual consciousness – the self as culturally defined and the self as different from cultural description. It also hints at Freud’s theory of narcissism and the ego. Culturally it is also said that a woman is a mirror for a man.

Mirrors also hold a mystical connection to an ‘other world’. A place of the human soul. Roland Barthes connects photography to death through objectification. Humans are whittled down to a preserved image. Woodman also photographs her body as seemingly dead. In her ‘Angel’ series she photographs herself, as an apparition so there is an interesting connection between objectification, preservation and death. Freud also see’s the double as insurance against the destruction to the ego, the denial of the power of death.

Woodman also touches on the themes of entrapment, being ‘on display’.

Eva Russ sums up Woodmans work as follows….

What happens when woman finds herself in the empty space between gaze and her objectified image?
Woman would multiply her image and in the midst of so many illusionary ghosts of herself, she would conceal the true self, who makes them move.”

Case Study – Cindy Sherman

April 1, 2007

012.jpg1708cindb.jpg5515.jpggrotesquelarge.gif

Sherman’s film stills series show the woman as unguarded. This highlights the voyeuristic gaze of the observer. The subject however is startled by something off screen, dropping her persona for just a few moments exposing the feminine as a masquerade.

Moving onto her dolls series, the feminine is seen as grotesque – the opposite of perfect, far removed from the image that cosmetic companies which to aspire to. The female body is also a site of anxiety. For Freud it is the anxiety of castration to the male viewer. To ease it the body is turned into a fetish, which conceals its castration. It is made into an object (quite literally through these dolls). Women are merely objects to be looked at.

Research – part one

April 1, 2007

I’ve been looking into how women are portrayed through photography recently especially through the works of photographers and artists such as Cindy Sherman, Hannah Wilke, Francesca woodman as well as reading and making notes on a few essays by Joan Riviere, Eva Russ, Alice Kaufman and Rosalind Krauss among others.

What interests me is the marked difference between how women are portrayed. The female body versus female identity which are two very different things, but more on that later.

What I hope to achieve is the masquerade of the woman/feminine. Reading the unit guide it thankfully doesn’t state that self means my actual self for personal reasons I don’t particularly wish to delve into my own psyche but I am quite happy to go into traits and characteristics and other things that I share with others. So I hope to achieve the meaning of the masquerade and collective self as a woman.

Recent national and international events that I read, watch or listen to have encouraged me in this endeavour specifically the capture of 12 British soldiers by Iran, one of whom is female. A lot has been made about the fact that she is a woman and a mother – should she really be going into war the media screams? The soldier – Faye Turney, has gone into a ‘man’s world’ against the usual characteristics of female identity. This woman doesn’t adhere to the usual characteristic of feminine ideal.

So what is feminine identity?

In Alice Kaufman’s essay, traditionally women in paintings and sculpture are seen as a passive object, the receiver of a male gaze. Women are there to be seen by men, their identity is formed through a male subconscious.

Modern artists attempt anti objectification through their work by displaying women as masculine, disrupting the female body (subversion of the gaze?) or alternatively man is made feminine. Masculinity is thus not ‘sexed’ but gendered in an androgynous way, prescribed to neither sex.

Walk before you run…

March 30, 2007

What I think this project is all about

The ‘self’ plays many roles. We are conditioned to act according to set social guidances/rule or different roles. We are acting a character to the world. We are signifying our identities – true or otherwise through our behaviour. In the case of gender, we act feminine or masculine. We are taught to identify with one or the another, taking upon distinguishing characteristics of either that we are taught from childhood.

So what happens when one transcends these boundries? What if we are a mix of masculine/feminine? What if we are neither?

What if we lose these characteristics? Is that are ‘true’ selves? Do we need to lose ourselves to find ourselves?Do we need to set aside what we know, take a different path from the one we know?

One question that is prevailant on my mind is this…

“If we consistently ‘act’ towards others, who are we when we are alone? Is that are true self? or do we self-delude ourselves along with our fellow peers?”

I’m really interested in this topic in terms of sex and gender rather than in terms of class, race etc.

I’m specifically interested in opposites -

male Vs female
active Vs passive
masculine Vs feminine
father Vs mother

also

nature Vs culture
body Vs soul/mind
individual Vs society
madonna Vs whore

Definitions

March 28, 2007

c_masquerade_fin.jpgmasquerade_500_400.jpgmasquerade.jpgthomas_barbey_masquerade_655_303.jpg

From the dictionary

Masquerade – masked ball, false show, pretence, appear to disguise, assume false appearance

Self – person’s or things own individulaity or essence, person or thing as object of introspection or reflexive action, one’s own interest or pleasure, myself, himself, herself, yourself.

In some cases i need definition to help me brainstorm idea’s, decide what route or path to go down. But i am still researching the meaning of masquerade in relation to the self.

What puzzles me at the moment is ‘self’. am i creating images directly related to my own personal self or another self? or myself in a wider context such as myself as a female?

hmmmm……


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.