Performance Is A Practice
What does it mean to practice art? I would say it matches up with relative comparison to practicing one’s identity. Is there a right or wrong way to practice either? Is there a correct way to practice or perform the feminine? Capitalism thrives on telling those who do, “yes.” Can the same be said of art? Does capitalism rule the art world in the same way it rules everything else? I would argue that the two share one thing in common, your level of performance or practice is largely determined by your audience.
To practice one’s identity, in a binary world is to adhere to a binary standard, in which there is a delineation between “masculine” and “feminine”. The rules state that if you are not masculine, wholly and unequivocally, you are by default feminine. This “othering” creates rules. Men are not allowed to be “men” AND practice feminine aesthetics. They are forever defined by a “gold standard”. This is a world of rules. And for those who are not “men”, which by default somehow makes them women, they too appear to have rules. Advertisements and visual media of any kind exemplify what is desired. By whom? Who’s to say? My earlier work explores the question, “for whom is this visual media for?”. Toys like Barbie model for us a “gold standard” of the feminine enshrouded in themes of entertainment and self expression. “Stereotypical barbie”, complete with long blond hair, long thin delicate limbs, and pointed toes. How is she to ever play flat footed sports, fight in combat with a cropped cut (the historical point of reference for the deemed masculine crew cut), or use her weight to manipulate heavy materials and machinery. Such cultural points of reference model for us the rules of this game. I am reminded of eleven-year-old me. Braces, an awkward perm, and clothing that no longer donned ice cream cones knew that the me of yesteryear seemed outdated. But the new me, failed somehow. Failed in achieving a type a status, a type of aesthetic. I seemed to be failing at a game that my training playing with Barbie was supposed to prepare me for. As if I too had “othered” Barbie not connecting the dots that this play somehow was for my own good. I missed the memo.
As a researcher, I am fascinated with cultural installations that play out these games. Reality TV shows that center around the value of one’s visual appearance, such as “Love is Blind” or “Naked Attraction” tug at a tacit importance of our visual presentations. In one such episode of “Love is Blind”, a seemingly connected couple who “fell in love” sight unseen, found the spell to be broken once they finally saw each other. For him, he found offense to the level in which his betrothed performed her appearance, claiming her natural beauty to be more alluring. In “Naked Attraction” which presents the exact opposite in which the viewer is exposed, quite literally, to a person's genitalia before learning of their personality or even ever seeing their face. In the end, we learn that what we attempt to hide or manipulate in the performance of ourselves does not seem to actually matter, and that nakedness is of no consequence as it turns out.
If there is a measuring stick, those who practice the feminine appear content to accept the challenge. Striving for an idea of perfection, but whose idea is unclear. Often we rise to our peers, those closest to our personal circles. Friends & family who share tried and true tips and tricks for the perfect “xyz” become our guides to our identity. Proximity often determines the level of practice. I suppose the same could be said for practicing art. Aligning our level of practice to our community to achieve a higher level of performance becomes the game. Your work is only as good as the members of your community help you achieve. The community you decide to align yourself with holds the key to your performance, in both art and identity. If only there had been “fine art” Barbie to prepare me for that game instead.
