Oh, Araki!
















Images found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.



So, Nobuyoshi Araki, finally. Although, this may be more of an introduction to him, or perhaps, a few paragraphs where I babble on an on about my difficulties writing about him and attempting to understand his work, or rather, the different ways to consider his subject matter, which is very often bondage. I have chosen not to include, for now, some of the more explicit images, although I think they also deserve their space. In an art history class last semester I showed some of his work, and the teacher was quite shocked, from what I can recall. I particular, I think she found his work repulsive when I told the class that he often was naked himself when photographing these tied-up women.

So, why? There are many different why's.
Why am I showing him?
Why is that problematic?
Why do I have inhibitions showing, supporting and even just discussing his works?
Why are they in the way that they are? I suppose this meant, what are they?

What are our true private parts? Our genitals or our faces?

This review, or commentary, is interesting, as the author writes about the retrospective exhibition in question as a holistic experience; that only looking to his pornographic and erotic photographs, and then judging him by those, would be inaccurate, and we ourselves would lose a lot from that. For example, a reference to the two series about death, one about his wife, and one about his cat. They are both very sad, and also hard to look at. But not because there are private parts I am too shy to look at, but because I can see his hand holding the hand of his dead or dying wife, or his cat getting thinner and thinner, until it lies in a little coffin, barely skin and bones left. And that is equally difficult, but much more private, and more voyeuristic of me to look at. At least, that is how it seems to me.

Food, flowers. Both carrying heavy sexual connotations, and in his photography, even more so.

And then, the "appropriate" feminist response; he is a chauvinist pig, using his camera as a penis to exploit these more or less innocent women, who, no matter if they are there by free will or not, are tied up, and so they are helpless. But they look directly into the camera, most of the time. And, they do not appear to be ashamed, or like victims. Do I then need to free myself of this idea? I already told you I would babble on for some paragraphs.

I will come back to you, Araki Nobuyoshi. We are far from done with each other, mister.


Come again, please


So, a very long time since my last post. Being fully aware of this, I will start out gently. Things simply got a little crazy, I went to New York (which was great! My second time, I am falling more and more in love with it), and will now get back into this.



The first thing I would like to write about for my comeback is the movie Sleeping Beauty, starring Emily Browning, yes, the girl from the tragically-bad-yet-hilariously-bad Sucker Punch. An interesting actor, and with those two movies on her list, I am drawing some strange conclusions. Either way, Sleeping Beauty was a disappointment. From what I heard about it and the plot, I expected a lot more. However, I also did watch it in bits and pieces, and it might be a much more complete experience watching it on the big screen, in one go. But as of now, it was underwhelming to say the least. Silence and long shots are great, and I am a huge sucker for them, but it feels as though the director, Julia Leigh, used them in absence of real flesh in the story. Some parts were great, but there should have been so much more than just those individual parts. This was more like a preview, or like a small collection of interesting ideas she has for costumes, screenplay and writing, not like a complete work.

However, there are good parts to it. One of them being Lucy's experience of being a lingerie waitress at some strange, kinky dinner party organized by rich, white-haired old people. The costumes, although not having much physical substance to them, are very interesting in connections to the harness. Lucy wears relatively normal underwear, but the more androgynous, specialized waitresses are more interestingly clothed.


Still needing to digest this, I don't have a lot of comments about these. These are the first sets of pieces. Now, this is not a blog about lingerie. I don't know enough about it, and I am not interested enough in it (yet), BUT I acknowledge that there is a significant connection, and so to dismiss lingerie when discussing harnesses would be, in my opinion, narrow-minded. Discussing lingerie without including harnesses is, of course, entirely possible. Both Fashion Pirate and Maja Casablancas write about lingerie in very interesting ways. So this discussion might just segway into underwear, and the comparison between inner- and outerwear, and how harnesses might just be underwear bleeding onto the surface of our clothing. Where does practicality come into it? Is that even relevant, when discussing lingerie? Like I said, I know little to nothing about this. 


But my lack of knowledge matters little, for these pieces are great. I have not been able to find out who makes them, to my great frustration. The entire sense of the "outfit" or the style of the models, with the hair, makeup, attitude (as seen in the movie), goes very well with the skeleton-like, almost-a-dress piece of lingerie. It is like a skeletal costume, heightening the ribcages, or rather, suggesting them. I don't know how else to describe these. 

It does not matter so much that I consider these to be harnesses, and I don't think that is so much the point of this investigation/blog/research/all of the above anymore. After having taken a break, not really having thought about it too much, I think there are a couple of ways I like to think about this train of thought I've started. 

One is in the aesthetic sense. This is partially where lingerie comes in, and also my hesitations about writing about this. I suppose that is my slightly stiff upper lip, conservative-self that is very uncertain in regards to writing about and showing nudity on this blog. I have not even written that much about fetishes and kinky sex yet. But yes, underwear and clothing is more aesthetic, and the "civilized" version of the next and second point.

The second point is exactly that; fetishes and kinky sex. This includes bondage (Japanese, and probably, at some point, other kinds), ropes (segwaying into martial arts about tying and binding up your opponent and Japanese ways of containing and wrapping up things; food, people (clothes; criminals), and other "alternative" cultures related to this. I don't want to say alternative, but I really don't know how else to talk about it, because it is so on the edge of what I am comfortable discussing. But I'd still like to do it, because I think it is an interesting subject matter, and many artists (Araki Nobuyoshi, for one, whom I will return to, after these many promises) have been and are doing incredible work that I would like to look at, read about, understand, without going to my instinctual reactions of: I don't know this, and I have always been told that it is a diversion of the norm, so I'll just avoid it. It's scary to write, as I think nobody likes to admit their own narrow-mindedness. But I am, and I'd like to change it. Either way, an incredibly rich field that deserves more than one specialized blog post.

The third, and for now, final (although I am certain that there will be more divisions and subdivisions as time goes by; my mind is now already re-categorizing these, seeing how limiting they really are) category is the religious one. This is more metaphorical, and mostly stems from a favorite part in Neil Gaiman's American Gods, in which Shadow, the main character, is being tied up in a tree, not by the neck, but by a series of ropes around his body, more like a harness. It makes me think of sacrifice and Norse mythology, and also what ropes and ties symbolize in terms of duties, commitment and rituals. What do you need  to do? From my very brief knowledge of Confucianism, I also think about ritual propriety, filial piety and work ethics. I will come back to this later, as it is the most obscure section of this research, and also the most symbolic and conceptual section. Meaning, I am a little clueless.

Back to Sleeping Beauty. I don't have a lot to say. I think it should be enjoyed in terms of design and set-up, but I am not sure what the meaning she is trying to convey by using this lingerie is. Perhaps only a stern, androgynous, sexy-but-deadly-look, or something like that. Perhaps something else. Either way, it is interesting, also in terms of the compositions she uses. In terms of aesthetics, these are definitely my favorite part of the film.