Writings

THESE SCULPTURES ARE HALF WOMAN, HALF INSECT: PRAYERFUL, GRASSHOPPER, SPIDER…
HALF-WOMAN, HALF-ANIMAL SCULPTURES
THE INSECT WOMEN SEEM READY TO MOVE, WHILE THE ROOSTER WOMAN—HALF-WOMAN, HALF ANIMAL SCULPTURE, IS STILL, STRENGTHENING TOWARDS THE SKY, STANDING UPRIGHT. SHE HAS A SMALL, BARELY DRAWN CREST  

BUT IN ALL THE SCULPTURES THAT INTEREST ME, THERE’S THE 6-HEADED HORSE IN PARTICULAR, WHICH IS NOT HYBRIDIZED, BUT VERY STRANGE, VERY PARTICULAR. THIS 6-HEADED HORSE PARTICULARLY CAPTIVATES ME: HE APPEARS TO REAR UP, TO DANCE, AND ALL 6 HEADS SUFFER AND HOWL, AND SOME DON’T HOLD UP WELL. THEY ARE HELD TOGETHER “BY A HAIR”, BY A THREAD  

THEY ARE WOUNDED, READY TO FALL
THE HORSE DANCES IN A DANCE OF DEATH
IT APPEARS TO BE IN RUINS AND EMERGING FROM THE RUINS
THIS HORSE, WITH ITS LEGS IN THE AIR, REARED UP, IS DANCING.
IT’S AN ELABORATE DANSE MACABRE WITH A DISQUIETING MATERIAL, ROUGH, GNAWED, RAW, ROUGH, JAGGED, SCRATCHED, PERFORATED, BUT SHINY IN PLACES, THE LIGHT HITTING IT.
THIS IS NOT A DESCRIPTION OF REALITY: WE ARE IN THE REALM OF FANTASY
, AND THE SURFACE OF THE MATERIAL IS PAINFUL, TORMENTED, GOUGED, BRUISED—THIS MATTER REMINDS ME OF OSCAR WILDE’S QUOTE: “THE TRUE MYSTERY OF THE WORLD IS THE VISIBLE, NOT THE INVISIBLE.”
AND THERE, IN FRONT OF THIS SCULPTURE, HE IS MATTER, HE BECOMES MATTER.
ITS SURFACE APPEARANCE IS PART OF THE VISIBLE, BUT A PAINFUL, SUFFERING VISIBLE, AND FOR ME, THERE’S A GREAT MYSTERY IN THAT. 

1 

BECAUSE SHE WAS A FEMALE ARTIST WHO WAS IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZED, NO ONE TREATED HER THE WAY WOMEN AND FEMALE ARTISTS ARE USUALLY TREATED.
IT’S AS IF SHE HAD BEEN A HYBRID—HALF-WOMAN, HALF-MAN—AND THAT THE MAN WITHIN HER HAD HIDDEN THE WOMAN IN HER USUAL DISAPPEARANCE.
SHE RECEIVED A LOT OF RECOGNITION RIGHT AWAY; SHE COULD HAVE EXPRESSED THAT HAPPINESS—OR AT LEAST THAT SATISFACTION. BUT NO, WHAT SHE SHOWS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FULFILLMENT OR INNER PEACE, AND THAT SURPRISES ME. DID SHE ALREADY FEEL THAT SHE WOULD DIE YOUNG? EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS ADORED. VERY YOUNG.  

ALL THESE SCULPTURES ARE NOT DESIGNED TO SEDUCE
THESE SCULPTURES ESCAPE BEAUTY AND CLASSICAL FIGURATION
THEY ARE AS IF IN RUINS, DECOMPOSED, BORN OF A RUINED LANDSCAPE—THESE ARE SCULPTURES THAT DO NOT INVITE CARESS
ONLY THE EYES WILL TRY, BY TOUCH, TO FEEL THEM, TO TOUCH THEM, TO QUESTION THEM, FOR THEY ARE ENIGMATIC
THEY INTERROGE THE GAZE THAT OBSERVES THEM
THEY ARE ALMOST SURREAL, LIKE THE SPIDER, LIKE THE HORSE.
BUT GERMAINE RICHIER WOULDN’T HAVE LIKED THIS APPELLATION CONTRÔLÉE
THERE IS ALWAYS METAMORPHOSIS, TRANSMIGRATION )
LIKE PYTHAGORAS, WE COULD SAY THAT THERE’S AN IDEA OF KINSHIP BETWEEN ALL LIVING THINGS, WHETHER ANIMAL, VEGETABLE OR HUMAN, AND HERE GERMAINE RICHIER’S INSECTS SEEM TO RESPECT ALL FORMS OF LIFE.
FROM ONE TO THE OTHER AND FROM THE OTHER TO THE OTHER 

THE INSECT WOMEN ARE READY TO MOVE, AND THE ROOSTER WOMAN IS TRAINED—SHE HAS BREASTS AND WINGS, AND HER CREST IS BARELY HINTED AT, LITTLE
SHE STANDS TALL IN THE MIDDLE OF A COCORICO
THE MAN OF THE NIGHT IS READY TO TAKE FLIGHT 

IT IS LARGE, AS INDICATED IN THE TITLE 

2 

HE’S THE BIGGEST, BIGGER THAN THE HORSE, BIGGER THAN THE THREE-HEADED HYDRA LIKE MY AFRICAN SELF-HYBRIDIZATION: OGONI THREE-HEADED MASK FROM NIGERIA AND THE MUTANT FACE OF A FRANCO-EUROPEAN WOMAN. 

THE HORSE CARRIES HIM AWAY, GALLOPING OUT OF A BAD DREAM, AS IF ALREADY DESTROYED, IN AND BY THE STORM AND THE WEATHER. 

YOU FEEL HE’S GOING TO DISINTEGRATE, HE FEELS DEATH, FROM WHICH HE’S TRYING TO ESCAPE 

BUT IT IS ONLY MATTER, IN ITS MATTER, IN THIS VISIBLE. IT’S A MYSTERY THAT FASCINATES US, ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MARKS OF TIME AND THE EROSION OF BODIES.  

ORLAN

THE ART WORLD OFTEN REDUCES ARTISTS TO A SINGLE PRACTICE, THE MOST STRIKING, THE MOST MEDIA-FRIENDLY.

FOR EXAMPLEI’M OFTEN LUMPED INTO THE “PERFORMANCE ARTIST” CATEGORY, YET I’M A MULTIMEDIA ARTIST WHO ISN’T BOUND BY ANY PARTICULAR MATERIAL, ARTISTIC PRACTICE, TECHNIQUE OR TECHNOLOGY, OLD OR NEW. I USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, ROBOTICS, AUGMENTED REALITY, NFT, SCULPTURE IN CARRARA MARBLE, RESIN, 3D PRINTING, VIDEO, PHOTOGRAPHY, THE CULTURE OF MY CELLS, MY ORAL, INTESTINAL AND VAGINAL FLORA, PLASTIC SURGERY, PAINTING, DRAWING, INSTALLATIONS, MUSIC, WRITING?

 

IN DORA MAAR’S ART, POLITICS AND AESTHETICS COME TOGETHER IN A SEARCH FOR THE MARVELOUS, FOR URBAN MAGIC, FOR THE INCONGRUOUS. IN THE STREET, SHE OFTEN COMBINES SOCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SURREALIST ACCENTS.
HER SENSITIVITY MAKES HER PARTICULARLY ATTENTIVE TO THE SOCIAL REALITIES OF A EUROPE IN THE MIDST OF AN ECONOMIC CRISIS.
IN MY PRACTICE I TRY TO SAY THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR MY TIME BY QUESTIONING SOCIAL PHENOMENA, ALWAYS WITH A CRITICAL DISTANCE.

STREET PHOTOGRAPHY IS A WAY OF LINKING DORA MAAR’S ART TO HER POLITICAL STRUGGLE. SHE SEES IT AS A GENUINE SOCIAL GESTURE. TAKING TO THE STREETS IN 1933, AT A TIME WHEN EXTREME RIGHT-WING MOVEMENTS WERE ON THE INCREASE, WAS NOT A TRIVIAL MATTER. NEVERTHELESS, DORA MAAR’S COMMITMENT WOULD NOT REMAIN THE SAME FOR THE REST OF HER LIFE. ALTHOUGH HIS EARLY YEARS IN PARIS WERE MARKED BY A REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE, IT SEEMS THAT HIS DEPRESSIVE ISOLATION GRADUALLY DETACHED HIM FROM THIS SOCIAL DIMENSION, TO THE POINT WHERE HE BECAME DEEPLY MISANTHROPIC.

DESPITE HER POLITICAL AWARENESS, SHE DOESN’T SEEM TO INTEGRATE INTO HER LIFE THAT THE BODY IS POLITICAL, THAT PRIVATE LIFE IS POLITICAL, THAT EVERYTHING WE DO IS POLITICAL.  AND I’M FURIOUS WHEN I SEE THE DISASTER, THE DISTRESS THAT COULD HAVE DRIVEN HER FROM THIS POLITICAL AWARENESS TO ANTI-SEMITISM, TO BECOME A SELF-CENTERED CLAM. SHE SEEMS TO HAVE GONE FROM A DEPENDENCE ON HER GOD ON EARTH: PABLO PICASSO, TO A DEPENDENCE ON A VIRTUAL GOD.

WE MIGHT ASK: ” WHAT IF SHE HADN’T MET PICASSO? “, ” WHAT IF SHE HADN’T ACCEPTED THIS TOXIC SITUATION ” AND ” WHAT IF SHE’D HAD THE STRENGTH TO LEAVE HIM? “

WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN HIS LIFE? IN HIS WORK?  

 

IN THE 1980S, DORA MAAR RETURNED TO PHOTOGRAPHY WITHOUT A CAMERA, REUSING HER NEGATIVES FROM THE 1930S, SCRATCHING THEM UP AND COVERING THEM WITH GOUACHE OR INK. HIS PHOTOGRAPHY BECOMES A MEDIUM FOR HIS PAINTING. THE CIRCLE IS COMPLETE. THE ARTIST ” DOESN’T ABANDON HER PHOTOGRAPAHY “, SHE EVOLVES IT, TRANSFORMING IT INTO A MEDIUM. SOME LEAVES STAND OUT FOR THEIR POINTILLIST FRAGILITY.  

 

AFTER WORKING WITH PABLO PICASSO ON GUERNICA, DORA MAAR GAVE UP PHOTOGRAPHY, HER GREAT PASSION, TO DEVOTE HERSELF TO PAINTING. WITH THIS DECISION, SHE BOWED TO THE ADVICE AND INSISTENCE OF PABLO PICASSO, WHO CONSIDERED PAINTING TO BE ART PAR EXCELLENCE. SHE THUS GAVE UP HER PREFERRED ART AND ALL HER PHOTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITIES, IN WHICH SHE HAD DISTINGUISHED HERSELF AND EXCELLED. BUT IT WAS FROM THE PAINFUL SEPARATION WITH HIM UNTIL HIS DEATH THAT SHE PAINTED.  

THIS CAPACITY FOR INTROSPECTION, THIS UPROOTING FROM A WORLD THAT DIDN’T UNDERSTAND HER, THAT DIDN’T ALLOW HER TO BE WHAT SHE WANTED, THAT FORCED HER TO RECLUSE HERSELF, BUT HER ART DOESN’T STOP. 

DORA MAAR’S PAINTINGS REMAINED LITTLE KNOWN UNTIL HER POSTHUMOUS SALE IN 1998-1999, WHICH INTRODUCED THE PUBLIC AND PROFESSIONALS TO A HIGHLY PERSONAL BODY OF WORK THAT HAD NEVER LEFT HER STUDIO. THE PRICES OF HIS WORKS SUBSEQUENTLY ROSE EXPONENTIALLY. IF DORA MAAR IS NOT CLEARLY CONSIDERED A GREAT ARTIST IN HER OWN RIGHT, IT’S PROBABLY BECAUSE OUR WRITING OF ART HISTORY IS IMBUED WITH A VIOLENT MYSOGINISM. IF PABLO PICASSO ISN’T JUST AN INHUMAN EXECUTIONER, BUT ALSO A GREAT ARTIST WHOSE NAME WE NEVER FORGET TO MENTION, THEN DORA MAAR ISN’T JUST A WOMAN WHO WEEPS, SHE’S AN ARTIST, A WOMAN WITH A NECESSARY POLITICAL COMMITMENT WHO, THROUGH HER INFLUENCE ON THE MEN AND WOMEN OF HER TIME, SUCCEEDED IN IMPROVING THE SOCIAL CONSCIENCE OF ALL. WE ARE STILL LIVING TODAY THANKS TO THE BENEFITS, PARADIGMATIC AND SENSITIVE CHANGES THAT EMANATED FROM IT THROUGH THE INSPIRATION THAT OTHERS HAVE ATTRIBUTED TO THEMSELVES.
AS FOR ME, ALL MY LIFE I’VE TRIED TO SHAKE THE BARS OF THE CAGE AND BREAK DOWN THE WALLS OF ICE BETWEEN THE SEXES, BETWEEN ARTISTIC PRACTICES, BETWEEN SKIN COLORS, BETWEEN SOCIAL CLASSES, BETWEEN GENERATIONS… I HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO HELP CREATE A BETTER WORLD.

 

THE DRAWINGS PRESENTED HERE FOR THE FIRST TIME BEAR WITNESS TO THIS DAILY WORK. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF DORA MAAR   ?

 

FOLLOWING HER BREAK-UP WITH THE PAINTER IN MID-1945, DORA MAAR FELL INTO A DEEP DEPRESSION AND FOUND HERSELF COMMITTED TO A PSYCHIATRIC ASYLUM. SHE WAS SUBJECTED TO VIOLENT TREATMENT, INCLUDING ELECTROSHOCK, WHICH WAS FORBIDDEN AT THE TIME! AND UNDERWENT PSYCHOANALYTIC TREATMENT WITH JACQUES LACAN.

SHE BECAME A DEVOUT CATHOLIC, FILLING HER NOTEBOOKS WITH DRAWINGS OF STAINED GLASS WINDOWS DURING HER DAILY MASSES. TURNED TO THE CATHOLIC RELIGION, UNDERGOING A QUASI-MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE THAT INFLUENCED HIS PICTORIAL WORK. SHE PAINTS THESE PAINFUL POST-WAR YEARS IN TWILIGHT TONES, WITH OCCASIONAL FLASHES OF LIGHT.  

 

THE DRAWING OF PICASSO WITH HIS EYES GOUGED OUT IS OBVIOUSLY STRIKING, AS IS THE DRAWING MADE IN A HOTEL WHERE DORA MAAR WAS STAYING WITH PABLO PICASSO, IN WHICH SHE DEPICTS HERSELF SEATED AT A TABLE LITERALLY TRANSFORMING INTO A PIECE OF FURNITURE. SHE BECOMES AWARE THAT SHE HAS BEEN AN OBJECT.
THESE DRAWINGS BEAR WITNESS TO DORA MAAR’S REALITY IN ITS INTROSPECTIVE FRAGILITY. HER WORK WITH LACAN MARKS THE IMAGES SHE CREATES, PIERCING HER UNCONSCIOUS WITH A SHARPENED AWARENESS OF THE UNFOLDING DRAMA. HIS LIFE WAS MARKED BY POVERTY AND ISOLATION.
THESE DRAWINGS SHOW A WOMAN SITTING IN THE DEPTHS OF THE WORLD, DESPERATE AND CRYING OUT FOR HELP.
A RECLUSE IN HER HOUSE IN MENERBES, SITTING BY THE RIVER, SHE LEAVES US WITH THE DUTY OF DOING JUSTICE THROUGH THE STORY WE TELL OF HISTORY, OF WHAT WE DO WITH HUMANITY.

 

 

” WOMEN ARE SUFFERING MACHINES, SAID PICASSO. FOR ME, DORA HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE WOMAN WHO CRIES. SHE WAS ALWAYS A KAFKAESQUE CHARACTER.   IS THIS HOW YOU SEE DORA MAAR ?

 

PABLO PICASSO IS WELL AWARE OF HIS MISTRESS’S TALENT, AND IF HE CONSIDERS ALL WOMEN TO BE SUFFERING MACHINES, IT’S BECAUSE HE HIMSELF IS A SUFFERING MACHINE, LIKE MANY MEN OF HIS TIME (ALTHOUGH THIS CONTINUES TODAY).

VOLTAIRE SAID, “WOMAN CAN ONLY BE A WIFE AND MOTHER, IF NOT SHE IS A MONSTER”. 

WE PLACE HER IN THE PERPETUAL FIGURE OF THE DISCREET, THE MOTHER, THE GENITRESS, THE LOVER, THE FRAGILE, GENTLE WOMAN, REMAINING IN THE SHADOWS, SPEAKING LITTLE, LOW AND SOFTLY, SO AS TO MAKE HERSELF LITTLE HEARD AND RESEMBLE A FRAGILE, WEARY CREATURE, CHILD, ETERNAL SUBMISSIVE, MUSE, INERT IMAGE, MODEL OF SELF-ABANDONMENT “FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMON GOOD, OF THE OTHER, OF MAN”? AND IT’S INCREDIBLE TO SEE HOW THESE STEREOTYPES AND IDEAS PERSIST TODAY, AND HOW SOME WOMEN STILL FEED THIS IMAGE. ALL THE MORE SO IN A COUNTRY THAT LETS YOU CHOOSE! WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY DOMINATED BY MALE THINKING, WHICH TENDS TO IMPOSE A CERTAIN TYPE OF BEAUTY AND ATTITUDE, A WOMAN’S GESTURES, ACCORDING TO HIS DESIRES, TO SEE HER AS A MOTHER, AND TO EXPECT LATENT SUBMISSION FROM HER.

 

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS TITLE, THIS NOMINATION OF WEEPING WOMEN, GIVEN TO PICASSO’S PORTRAITS OF DORA MAAR HAS STUCK TO HER ALL HER LIFE, LIMITING HER TO THE IMAGE OF A WOMAN CHOSIFIED AND DECONSTRUCTED BY THE GREAT MASTER. 

 

REPRESENTATIONS OF DORA MAAR’S FACE REVEAL HER FEELINGS ABOUT A WORLD MOVING TOWARDS WAR. IT’S A SYMPTOM OF A VIOLENT, WARRING PATRIARCHAL SYSTEM.  

BOTH ENDURE THE WAR IN THE AFTERMATH OF A CONSUMING, CASTRATING PASSION FOR DORA MAAR.
DORA’S DESPAIR SERVES PICASSO’S WORK IN PARTICULAR: SHE BECOMES THE ICON OF A BATTERED SPAIN, HER LARGE BLACK EYES AND THICK HAIR PRESENTING HER AS A MADONNA. 

HE LEFT HER IN 1945 FOR FRANÇOISE GILOT, WHOM, UNLIKE DORA MAAR, HE PAINTED AS A LUMINOUS, SUNNY FLOWER…

FRANÇOISE GILOT IS THE ONLY WOMAN WHO HAD THE COURAGE TO LEAVE HIM AND WRITE, DENOUNCING HIS ACTIONS AND HIS BEHAVIOR TOWARDS THE WOMEN WHO CROSSED PICASSO’S LIFE IN FRONT OF HER. I WONDER HOW THE OTHER WOMEN, AND DORA MAAR IN PARTICULAR, ACCEPTED BEING MANIPULATED, TORMENTED AND WOUNDED BY PICASSO FOR SO LONG WITHOUT LEAVING. THEY FORMED PATHOLOGICAL MASO/SADO COUPLES.

 

YOUR EXHIBITION AT THE PICASSO MUSEUM WAS ENTITLED ” WOMEN WHO CRY ARE ANGRY “. IN THE COLLECTION ON SHOW HERE, WE DISCOVER FOR THE FIRST TIME A PORTRAIT OF PICASSO DRAWN BY DORA MAAR, IN WHICH SHE GOUGED OUT AN EYE TO THE POINT OF PIERCING THE PAPER. IS IT ANGER OR PAIN ?

 

THIS DRAWING OF PICASSO BY DORA MAAR IS SUBLIMATION IN THE RILKEAN SENSE OF THE TERM, HEALING, VISUAL JUSTICE FOR THE FUTURE. IT’S A SIGN OF UNCONTAINED ANGER, FINALLY RELEASED, NOT JUDGED AT THE TIME. IT’S THE REVENGE OF THE UNCONSCIOUS AND A CONSCIENTIZATION OF ITS REFUSAL TO LIVE IN SUCH A SITUATION. MUCH MORE AWARE OF THE MISERY OF HETEROSEXUALITY, IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT DORA MAAR DRAWS HERE THE TRAITS OF HER GREATEST VITAL IMPULSES.
 

IT IS ABOVE ALL FOR THIS SOCIAL SUBLIMATION THAT I QUESTION THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN THE CONTEMPORARY ARTISTIC SPHERE AND INTERROGATE THE STATUS OF THE BODY VIA ALL THE CULTURAL, TRADITIONAL, POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS PRESSURES THAT ARE PARTICULARLY IMPRINTED ON WOMEN’S BODIES.

 

I WAS INTERESTED IN THESE WOMEN WHO WERE MODELS, INSPIRERS, MUSES, ROLE MODELS, WOMEN IN THE SHADOWS AND THEREFORE LIKE OBJECTS. TAKING THE TEARFUL FEATURES OF DORA MAAR OR JACQUELINE ROQUE PAINTED BY PABLO PICASSO AND PLACING MY OWN BULGING EYES, CROOKED NOSE, UPSIDE-DOWN EARS, SCREAMING MOUTH SHOWING TEETH READY TO BITE.

I WANTED US TO SEE THE START OF THEIR REVOLT, THE BEGINNING OF THEIR EMANCIPATION. I INSERT FRAGMENTS OF MY FACE, INCLUDING MY SCREAMING MOUTH, TO EXPRESS MY ANGER IN THE WORK.
BETWEEN PAINTING AND PHOTOGRAPHY, WEEPING AND ANGER, MY FEMALE FIGURES ARE HYBRIDIZED AND DISALIENATED IN A PICTORIAL FORM THAT I CREATE LIKE EXTREMELY FREE AND DERANGED BRUTAL COLLAGES.

 

I DIDN’T CREATE THESE WORKS TO PUT PABLO PICASSO AND/OR DORA MAAR ON TRIAL, SINCE THEY CAN NO LONGER DEFEND THEMSELVES.
WHY DID SHE STAY IN THIS TOXIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS MAN FOR SO LONG? ONE WONDERS…IN MY WORKS I SHOW HOPING THAT OTHER WOMEN WON’T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE.

 

 I WANTED TO TURN THIS WOMAN FROM OBJECT TO SUBJECT. MY CREATIONS, ALL POLITICAL AND FEMINIST, ARE BASED ON A VISUAL SEARCH FOR FACES OF HORROR, FEAR AND GRANDEUR. PABLO PICASSO OBJECTIFIES DORA MAAR. I REREAD HER WORK, QUESTIONING IT TO PUT THE WOMAN-SUBJECT BACK AT THE CENTER.
IN THE FUTURE, I CAN IMAGINE OTHER POSSIBLE SERIES ON THE WOMEN BEHIND THE SCENES, ALL THOSE WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED SO MUCH TO THE FAME OF OUR GREAT MASTERS… 

IT’S ABOUT CHALLENGING AND ENCOURAGING TODAY’S WOMEN TO STOP PUTTING UP WITH THINGS, TO FREE THEMSELVES, TO EMANCIPATE THEMSELVES, TO FEEL LEGITIMATE, ONCE AND FOR ALL, TO COME OUT OF THE SHADOWS AND MAKE THEMSELVES HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR!

 

JOHN RICHARDSON, PICASSO’S BIOGRAPHER, CONSIDERED THE PICASSO-DORA MAAR RELATIONSHIP TO BE ABOVE ALL SADO MASOCHISTIC. DO YOU AGREE WITH HIM ?

 

“YOU WON’T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING ABOUT DORA MAAR IF YOU FORGET THAT SHE WAS ABOVE ALL A MASOCHIST,” SAYS JOHN RICHARDSON, THE GREAT BIOGRAPHER OF PABLO PICASSO (WHO DIED IN MARCH 2018) AND WHO KNEW HER TO THE END. PICASSO’S BIOGRAPHER, SEEMS TO PERCEIVE NOTHING BUT MYSTERY EMANATING FROM THIS POWERFUL FIGURE. CAN WE ASK OURSELVES WHETHER THIS MAN IS WELL PLACED TO INFLUENCE THE DEBATE AND THE IMAGE WE MIGHT HAVE HAD OF THE COUPLE? DEFINING DORA MAAR AS A MASOCHIST DOES NOT RESOLVE THE ETHICAL MONSTROSITY REPRESENTED BY PABLO PICASSO  

 

SURREALIST MUSES OFTEN STAGE THEIR ENCOUNTERS WITH MASTERS, MANIPULATING THE INTEREST THEY PROVOKE. AWARE OF THE POTENTIAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH THESE MEN, THEY PLAY ON THEIR SEDUCTIONS TO ATTRACT THEIR ATTENTION, TO IMPOSE THEMSELVES AS SUBJUGATING FIGURES. AT THE TIME, THIS POSITION WAS PERHAPS BETTER THAN NO POSITION AT ALL. THEY’RE INTO MANIPULATION.

PABLO PICASSO AND DORA MAAR MET IN 1935 AT THE CAFÉ LES DEUX MAGOTS. TO LURE HIM INTO HER WEB, SHE SHOWS HERSELF WITH A KNIFE, PLAYING WITH IT BETWEEN HER FINGERS. CUTTING HERSELF SLIGHTLY BY SPEEDING UP, SHE SOILED HER WHITE GLOVE BY PUTTING IT BACK ON AFTERWARDS. MY DEAR FRIEND MARINA ABRAMOVIC DID A SIMILAR PERFORMANCE, “RHYTHM 10” IN 1973.  

BODIES HAVE SUFFERED FOR MILLENNIA WITHOUT A DRUG TO STOP THE PAIN. FOR ME, PAIN IS ANACHRONISTIC AND SUFFERING IS NOT COMPULSORY, IT’S OPTIONAL. OF COURSE I’M AGAINST THIS OPTION! I’M IN FAVOR OF THE BODY AS A PLEASURE, I’M IN FAVOR OF EPIDURALS, FOR EXAMPLE, AND I’M AGAINST “YOU’LL GIVE BIRTH IN PAIN”, BUT SOME ARTISTS WITH THIS OPTION DO INTERESTING WORK. THAT’S NOT MY APPROACH! THAT’S WHAT I TRIED TO SAY IN MY “CARNAL ART” MANIFESTO.  

PABLO PICASSO CAME TO FETISHIZE THIS BLOODY GLOVE TO THE POINT OF DISPLAYING IT IN A FRAME IN HIS STUDIO. THIS ENCOUNTER IS ALREADY INDICATIVE OF THE YOUNG WOMAN’S MASTERY OF PAIN AND VIOLENCE.  

 

AS A WOMAN OF HER TIME, DORA MAAR PROBABLY HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO LIVE A LIFE OF MUTED STRUGGLE AND COMPROMISE, DESPITE HER INITIAL SUCCESS IN A MAN’S WORLD.

 

WHAT INFLUENCE DOES PICASSO HAVE ON ELLE ? OR THE INFLUENCE OF HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH PICASSO ? AND WHEN THE MUSE IS AN ARTIST, IS SHE CONDEMNED TO REMAIN IN THE SHADOW OF GENIUS ?

 

AS FOR THE SHADOW, IT’S QUESTIONS LIKE THESE THAT KEEP US GUESSING. 

 

THE COUPLE INFLUENCE EACH OTHER, BUT THEY ALSO FIND THEMSELVES IN EACH OTHER. ACCORDING TO BRASSAÏ, SHE’S KNOWN FOR HER STRONG PERSONALITY,
“WITH STORMS AND SPLINTERS
BUT ALSO A WOMAN
“A WOMAN WITH A GOOD FIGURE, ONE WHO’S NOT AFRAID OF THE EYES”.
IN THE WORDS OF PABLO PICASSO.

DORA MAAR IS MUCH MORE THAN A NEW MODEL, AS SHE IS AT PICASSO’S SIDE FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR TO THE END OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR, AT A TIME WHEN THE ARTIST’S COMMITMENT TOOK A TRULY POLITICAL TURN: RESISTANCE TO TOTALITARIAN IDEOLOGIES. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT TRACES OF THE COUPLE’S ARTISTIC PARTNERSHIP ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE STAGES IN THE CREATION OF GUERNICA IN MAY-JUNE 1937 AT THE GRANDS-AUGUSTINS STUDIO IN PARIS.
DORA MAAR WILL FOLLOW THE PROGRESS OF THE WORK, CREATING A REAL REPORT ON THE PAINTING IN PROGRESS: A FIRST IN PHOTOGRAPHY, AND ONE IN WHICH DORA IS FULLY INVOLVED. PABLO PICASSO WORKS WITH HER, AND THE TWO OF THEM ARE IN CREATIVE COMPLICITY.

 

AS SHE IMMORTALIZES HIM PAINTING, PICASSO DEMANDS HER TOTAL COMMITMENT. LET HER ENTER INTO HIS CREATIVE PROCESS, GUESS AT HIS IMPULSES AND HESITATIONS, AND DRAW THE SECRET LINES WITH HIM! IT’S IN THIS SENSE THAT PABLO PICASSO’S INFLUENCE WILL CREATE A FORM OF ALIENATION FOR DORA MAAR: SHE CAN’T LIVE WITH HIM WITHOUT MINGLING WITH THE FIRES THAT POSSESS HIM. BUT DORA MAAR ISN’T PABLO PICASSO, AND SHE’S THE ONE WHO ALWAYS STAYS ON THE ROAD, ALONE.

DORA MAAR, BETWEEN 1935-1945, CHRONICLED THIS TRAGIC PERIOD IN NUMEROUS PHOTOGRAPHIC REPORTS.

THIS CREATIVE DIALOGUE BETWEEN PAINTER AND PHOTOGRAPHER PROVIDES A CHRONOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC GUIDE TO PICASSO’S IMAGE, HIGHLIGHTING BOTH THE PLASTIC REVOLUTIONS IN PICASSO’S ART AND THE MAJOR EVENTS THAT MARKED THE TURN OF THE CENTURY. 

HIS INFLUENCE ON THE HISTORIZATION OF PICASSO’S WORK IS MAJOR. MUCH MORE THAN THE CREATIVE INFLUENCE HE CAN HAVE ON HER. SHE STANDS BESIDE HIM TO MAKE HISTORY, WITHOUT NEEDING TO PUT HER OWN NAME TO IT. HELLO!
IT’S CLEAR, HOWEVER, THAT DORA MAAR LOST HERSELF IN THE PAINTER’S REPRESENTATIONS OF HER, ABANDONING HER OWN PRACTICE TO (RE)ENSURE THAT OF THE ” MASTER “. WHICH IT ALSO INFLUENCES.

 

DO YOU THINK TIMES HAVE CHANGED ?

YES, A LITTLE. BECAUSE IF MEN’S VIOLENCE RAISES QUESTIONS, WHY IS IT THAT WOMEN ARE SO INCLINED TO PUT UP WITH IT, AND SO OFTEN PUT THEMSELVES IN THE SHADOWS, IS MIND-BOGGLING. CONSENT AND SUBMISSION ARE MANUFACTURED. IT’S SOCIETY AS A WHOLE THAT NEEDS TO BE QUESTIONED, THE COUPLES AS WELL AS THE MOTHERS AND FATHERS WHO PERPETUATE THESE MODELS. OTHERWISE, IT’S JUST GOING TO GO ON AND ON.

SINCE THE ME-TOO AND BALANCE TON PORC MOVEMENTS, WE’VE ALL BEEN SOAKED IN THE AWARENESS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, WHO HAVE STARTED TO SPEAK OUT. IT’S IMPORTANT THAT THESE WORDS CONTINUE TO COME OUT. WE HEAR THAT ALL THIS WOULD LEAD TO A WAR OF THE SEXES. BUT IT’S NOT WOMEN WHO ARE WAGING WAR, IT’S MEN WHO, FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, HAVE BEEN WAGING WAR AGAINST THEM, DISCRIMINATING AGAINST THEM, ENSLAVING THEM, HARASSING THEM, BEATING THEM, RAPING THEM, KILLING THEM.

 

I’M CURRENTLY WORKING ON A SECOND VERSION OF “THE ORIGIN OF WAR”, 30 YEARS AFTER THE FIRST. IN 1989, I QUESTIONED A PAINTING THAT FOR ME IS THE MOST MONSTROUS IN THE HISTORY OF ART, COURBET’S “ORIGIN OF THE WORLD”. IN THIS WORK, HE MUTILATES THE WOMAN, CUTTING OFF HER LEGS, ARMS AND HEAD LIKE A SADISTIC SERIAL KILLER, STRIPPING HER OF HER IDENTITY BY REDUCING HER TO HER ROLE AS GENITRESS. SHE BECOMES NOTHING MORE THAN A WOMB, NOTHING MORE THAN A SEX, PROBABLY JUST AS THE COMMISSIONER WANTED, AND COURBET DIDN’T OBJECT. I WANTED TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DO THE SAME THING TO THE OTHER SIDE OF HUMANITY. I PUT A MAN IN THE WOMAN’S PLACE AND CUT OFF HER HEAD, ARMS AND LEGS. THIS MAN HAD A MEDIUM-SIZED TAIL, BUT NOT JUST ANY TAIL – IT WAS THE DEVIL’S TAIL, THAT OF JEAN-CHRISTOPHE BOUVET, WHO PLAYED SATAN WITH GÉRARD DEPARDIEU IN SOUS LE SOLEIL DE SATAN. THIS FEMINIST RESPONSE QUESTIONS THE ROLE OF MEN AND WOMEN IN OUR SOCIETY AND THEIR REPRESENTATIONS.

THE SITUATION HAS IMPROVED A LITTLE, SO I’M VERY HAPPY THAT A WOMAN HAS BEEN APPOINTED PRIME MINISTER, EVEN THOUGH EDITH CRESSON WAS A WOMAN WHO TOOK A BEATING AT THE TIME. BUT NOT ENOUGH. IN THE END, IT’S ALWAYS THE SAME: THERE ARE VERY FEW WOMEN IN THE MAINSTREAM MARKET OR IN ARTIST RANKINGS.   THE ART SYSTEM REFLECTS SOCIETY AND DOESN’T SUPPORT WOMEN. WE KNOW WHAT THE GUERILLA GIRLS SAY: “BEING A WOMAN ARTIST IS FANTASTIC! BECAUSE OUR CAREERS CAN EXPLODE AT THE AGE OF 80!” WE CAN SEE THAT MALE ARTISTS SELL THE MOST AND AT THE HIGHEST PRICES. THERE ARE VERY FEW WOMEN AT THE TOP OF THE INTERNATIONAL MARKET, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FEW AMERICANS. WHAT’S MORE, WE THINK WE’VE SOLVED THE PROBLEM BY PUTTING WOMEN IN DECISION-MAKING POSITIONS, BUT MANY OF THEM PREVENT OTHER WOMEN FROM GETTING THROUGH. WE’VE BEEN TAUGHT TO HATE EACH OTHER AND TO COMPETE. AS I SAY IN MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY, BEING A WOMAN IS BOTH A BIOLOGICAL AND A SOCIETAL CALAMITY. AS SOON AS FEMINISM TAKES A STEP, THERE’S ALWAYS A HUGE BACKLASH.  

I LIKE TO QUOTE NIETZSCHE: “WE HAVE ART SO THAT WE DON’T DIE FROM THE TRUTH”. DORA MAAR HAD HER ART.

 

DORA MAAR DENIED BEING A FEMINIST. YET TODAY, SHE’S A FIGURE OF FEMINISM, OR AT LEAST A SYMBOL OF THE FIGHT AGAINST VIOLENCE AND BULLYING AGAINST WOMEN. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN ?

DORA MAAR WAS DETERMINED NOT TO BE CONTENT WITH THE LIFE OF A WOMAN TYPICAL OF HER TIME, SO SHE BROKE DOWN SCHOOL GATES TO DEMONSTRATE HER DISSATISFACTION WITH HER MEDIOCRE STATUS AS A WOMAN. THESE ARE ALREADY FEMINIST VALUES. TO BE A FEMINIST IS TO STAY ALIVE, TO HAVE A LIFE. EVERY WOMAN IS A FEMINIST, EVEN AND SOMETIMES EVEN WHEN SHE PRETENDS NOT TO BE! AT A TIME WHEN THIS WORD CARRIES HEAVY PEJORATIVE VALUES, AND WHEN WOMEN CAN’T SEEM TO EMANCIPATE THEMSELVES BY RE-ENACTING MASCULINE CODES. BEING A FEMINIST AND DECLARING IT MAKES US UNATTRACTIVE.

FOR MY PART, I’VE TRIED TO BE A WOMAN, A REAL ONE, AS SHE’S DESIGNATED, BUT I’VE NEVER SUCCEEDED. I’M “A” WOMAN AND “A” MAN, I HAVE FEMALE-TO-FEMALE TRANSSEXUALISM.  

LIKE MY FEMINIST PREDECESSORS, I’VE DECIDED TO MAKE MY CRITICISMS AND OPPRESSIONS MY STRENGTHS, TO TAKE ON THIS MONSTER FIGURE, TO CLAIM IT AS MY OWN AND MAKE IT THE SYMBOL OF MY PRACTICE, MY LIBERATION AND MY EMANCIPATION. “TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE BOX” AND “ORLAN ACCOUCHE D’ELLE M’AIME” ARE TWO OF MY WORKS THAT SHOW THIS.

ORLAN FEBRUARY 15 200000000000000023

I’M ORLAN, AMONG OTHERS, AND AS FAR AS POSSIBLE. AND MY NAME IS CAPITALIZED BECAUSE I DON’T WANT TO BE MADE TO FIT IN, I DON’T WANT TO BE MADE TO FIT IN. MY NAME SPEAKS LOUD AND CLEAR, BUT THE NEWSPAPERS ALWAYS WRITE IT IN LOWER CASE, THE MEDIA TRY TO CRUSH ME.

 

I’M AN ARTIST WHO ISN’T BOUND BY ANY PARTICULAR MATERIAL, ARTISTIC PRACTICE, WAY OF SPEAKING, TECHNIQUE OR TECHNOLOGY, OLD OR NEW. IT’S HARD TO PUT ME IN A BOX, IN A DRAWER: I’M A MONSTER!

I TRY TO SAY THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR MY TIME BY QUESTIONING SOCIAL PHENOMENA, ALWAYS WITH THE NECESSARY CRITICAL DISTANCE. 

I WORK ON THE STATUS OF THE BODY IN SOCIETY, VIA ALL THE PRESSURES AND OPPRESSIONS: CULTURAL, TRADITIONAL, POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS THAT ARE IMPRINTED ON BODIES, AND IN PARTICULAR ON WOMEN’S BODIES. I DENOUNCE THE SHORTCOMINGS OF RELIGIONS AND TRADITIONS.  

ALL MY WORK QUESTIONS THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, CULTURAL, IDEOLOGICAL AND AESTHETIC PRESSURES THAT ARE INSCRIBED ON BODIES. TODAY AS YESTERDAY, I HAVE NO INTENTION OF PUTTING UP WITH THEM! I LOVE FLESH, I’M CAREFUL ABOUT MY HEALTH, BUT I HAVE NO INTENTION OF LOOKING LIKE THE SKELETAL WOMEN ON THE CATWALKS AND IN MAGAZINES.  

 

I BEGAN MY WORK WITH SCULPTURE, DRAWING AND PAINTING, THEN I CONSIDERED THE BODY AS A MATERIAL AMONG MATERIALS, BECAUSE I AM A BODY, NOTHING BUT A BODY, A WHOLE BODY, AND IT’S MY BODY THAT THINKS.  IN LIFE, YOU DON’T JUST HAVE ONE BODY, YOU HAVE MANY! ALL DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER OVER THE COURSE OF A LIFETIME. I DON’T SAY “AM” BUT “ARE”! I DON’T BELIEVE IN THE SOUL. I SAY “THIS IS MY BODY, THIS IS MY SOFTWARE”. I’M A SOULLESS, MONSTROUS MONSTER!  

 

MANY PEOPLE PUT ME IN THE “PERFORMANCE ARTIST” CATEGORY, BUT I’M AN ARTIST WHO USES ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, ROBOTICS, AUGMENTED REALITY, NFT, SCULPTURE IN CARRARA MARBLE, RESIN OR 3D PRINTING, VIDEO, PHOTOGRAPHY, CELL CULTURE, ORAL, INTESTINAL AND VAGINAL FLORA CULTURE, PLASTIC SURGERY, PAINTING, DRAWING, INSTALLATIONS, MUSIC, WRITING….

THESE DIFFERENT MATERIALITIES ARE FLESH, BUT ABOVE ALL I WORK ON THE CONCEPT OF THE WORK, WHICH IS THE BACKBONE OF MY WORK. I’M A CONCEPTUAL ARTIST WHO LOVES FLESH, FORM AND COLOR…

 

IN 1965, I PRODUCED A WORK IN WHICH I PRETENDED TO EMERGE NAKED FROM A LARGE GILDED FRAME. THIS IMAGE IMMORTALIZES THE UNWAVERING DETERMINATION THAT KEEPS ME GOING TO THIS DAY.

ALL MY LIFE I’VE TRIED TO GET OUT OF THE BOX. THE FRAMEWORK REPRESENTS THE FORMATTING, THE READY-TO-THINK, THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF CHILDHOOD AND THE ENVIRONMENT.  

IT’S THE DISTANCE WE TAKE WITH THIS FRAMEWORK AND WHAT WE DO WITH IT THAT’S IMPORTANT. YOU HAVE TO DETECT IT, KNOW THAT IT EXISTS, SO YOU CAN OVERCOME IT, PLAY WITH IT, FREE YOURSELF FROM IT.

PAUL B. PRECIADO PRESENTS WHAT I CALL THE FRAME, THE CAGE.

IN MY OPINION, YOU CAN GET OUT OF THE CAGE WHEN YOU BECOME AWARE OF IT, WHEREAS IT’S DIFFICULT TO GET OUT OF THE CAGE. YOU HAVE TO SAW THROUGH THE BARS.

ALL MY LIFE I’VE TRIED TO MOVE THE BARS OF THE CAGE, AND BREAK DOWN THE WALLS OF ICE BETWEEN THE SEXES, BETWEEN ARTISTIC PRACTICES, BETWEEN SKIN COLORS, BETWEEN SOCIAL CLASSES, BETWEEN GENERATIONS… ACCORDING TO ARISTOTLE, THE MONSTER “UPSETS THE SOCIAL ORDER”. I’M A VERY ANNOYING MONSTER.
I MUST BE WHAT THEY CALL A MONSTER!
BUT WHAT DO WE CALL A MONSTER? 

 

AS EVERYONE KNOWS, THE WORD MONSTER HAS ITS ORIGINS IN THE LATIN AMBIGUITY “MONSTRARE”, FROM WHAT IS SHOWN, POINTED AT AND  “MONSTRUM”. WHICH MEANS “HEAVENLY WARNING, PRODIGY”. THIS DOUBLE RHETORICAL MOVEMENT, OF BOTH THE ONE WHO IS SHOWN AND THE ONE WHO SHOWS, PUSHES US TO CONSIDER THE MONSTER OUTSIDE THE MANICHEAN POINT OF VIEW THAT GOVERNS THE MYTHS AND TALES OF YESTERDAY AND TOMORROW.  

 

ETYMOLOGICALLY, THERE’S NO PEJORATIVE OR DIABOLICAL MEANING ATTACHED TO MONSTER. NEVERTHELESS, IF WE FOCUS ON THE MONSTER AS IT IS CONCEPTUALIZED IN THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS, IT IS A FRIGHTENING, UGLY BEING, LIVING OR FANTASTIC, THAT AROUSES HORROR THROUGH ITS PHYSICAL AND/OR PSYCHIC ATTRACTIONS. FOR EVERYONE, THE MONSTER IS THE ONE WHO DEFIES NATURE, THE ORDER OF THINGS.

 

THIS NOTION OF DEVIANCE FROM THE NORM IS PERFECTLY CLEAR IN MY  MANIFESTO “ORLAN ACCOUCHE D’ELLE-M’AIME”. IN 1964, I DECIDED TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY FOR MYSELF, TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF MY EXISTENCE AND FREE MYSELF FROM THE MASK OF THE INNATE. BY CHOOSING TO BREAK WITH THE NORM, I BECOME PART OF A TRANSGRESSION OF CONVENTION… I BECOME A MONSTER.  

 

IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT WOMAN IS MAN’S MONSTER. IF IT’S UNACCEPTABLE FOR WOMEN TO BE THE SOLE PROGENITOR, REDUCED TO BEING THE ORIGIN OF THE WORLD, THERE’S NO DOUBT THAT MEN ARE THE “ORIGIN OF WAR”. I’M CURRENTLY WORKING ON A SECOND VERSION OF “THE ORIGIN OF WAR”, 30 YEARS AFTER THE FIRST. IN 1989, I RESPONDED TO A PAINTING WHICH, FOR ME, IS THE MOST MONSTROUS IN THE HISTORY OF ART: “THE ORIGIN OF THE WORLD”. COURBET, WHO MUTILATES WOMEN, CUTTING OFF THEIR LEGS, ARMS AND HEAD, STRIPS THEM OF THEIR IDENTITY BY REDUCING THEM TO THE ROLE OF GENITRESS. THEY BECOME NOTHING MORE THAN WOMBS, NOTHING MORE THAN SEX, PROBABLY JUST AS THE PRINCIPAL WANTED, AND COURBET DIDN’T OBJECT. I WANTED TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DO THE SAME THING TO THE OTHER SIDE OF HUMANITY. I HAVE A MEDIUM-SIZED TAIL, BUT IT’S THE DEVIL’S TAIL, THAT OF JEAN-CHRISTOPHE BOUVET, WHO PLAYED SATAN WITH GÉRARD DEPARDIEU IN SOUS LE SOLEIL DE SATAN. THIS FEMINIST RESPONSE QUESTIONS THE ROLE OF MEN AND WOMEN IN OUR SOCIETY AND THEIR REPRESENTATIONS.

 

IN THE SAME WAY, THE BAROQUE HAS BEEN CALLED THE MONSTER OF THE CLASSICAL. I WAS VERY INTERESTED IN THE BAROQUE MOVEMENT, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS CONSIDERED MONSTROUS AND THEREFORE UNACCEPTABLE.

 

PATRIARCHAL THINKING TAKES WOMEN OUT OF THE REALM OF SEDUCTION AND SEXUALITY FROM THE AGE OF 50 OR 60.  BEING A WOMAN IS BOTH A BIOLOGICAL AND A SOCIETAL CALAMITY. I’VE WRITTEN SEVERAL PAGES IN MY AUTO-BIOGRAPHY ON THIS SUBJECT AND NOW REALIZE THAT I’VE LEFT OUT A NUMBER OF EXAMPLES.  

 

IN THE DEVOURING OR PENETRATING FUNCTIONS OF MONSTERS, THE SEXUAL METAPHOR IS VERY PRESENT: THE OCTOPUSES OF LITERATURE (HOMER, VICTOR HUGO, JULES VERNE) ARE TERRIFYING BECAUSE THEY SUCK, VAMPIRE THE HERO WHILE THREATENING HIM WITH INDISPUTABLY PHALLIC TENTACLES. DEVOURING MONSTERS ARE BY NATURE CASTRATING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE FEMALE MONSTERS, SUCH AS MERMAIDS WHO SEDUCE AND DEVOUR SAILORS IN SEARCH OF WOMEN, AND SYMBOLIZE THE FEAR OF THE “TOOTHED VAGINA”. LET’S NOT FORGET THAT EVEN THE DEVIL FLEES AT THE SIGHT OF THE VULVA.  

IN THE 70S, I MADE A MASK WITH A BLACK AND WHITE PHOTO OF MY VULVA, WHICH I USED IN DIFFERENT CONTEXTS AND IN DIFFERENT FORMS (VIDEO, PERFORMANCE, SLOW DANCE…). 

IT’S FUNNY HOW INSTAGRAM’S ALGORITHMS CAN’T DETECT A VULVA ON A FACE, SO I’M NOT CENSORED WHEN I SHOW IT (AS LONG AS IT LASTS).

 

THE MONSTER THEREFORE OPENS UP AN INFINITE FIELD OF SEXUAL HYPOTHESES, ALSO BECAUSE IT ALWAYS AND FIRSTLY EMBODIES EXCESS, VITALITY, THE FORBIDDEN, THE SAVAGERY PROSCRIBED BY SOCIETY AND, VIA CHIMERISM, CONFUSION, PROSCRIBED IN THE CIVILIZING CONCEPT WE INHERITED FROM THE GREEKS AND ROMANS: HERMAPHRODITISM, UNAVOWABLE PRACTICES, THE FUSION OF MASCULINE AND FEMININE ATTRIBUTES THAT INVITE THE MIXING OF BODIES.

FEMINISTS HAVE SUFFERED, AND CONTINUE TO SUFFER THROUGHOUT THEIR HISTORY, SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE AIMED AT SANCTIONING THEIR “DEVIANCE”, MARGINALIZING THEIR THOUGHTS UNDER THE STYGMATIZING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE “HALF-MAN, HALF-WOMAN MONSTER”. THE PROCESS OF PATHOLOGIZING FEMINISM IS EVOLVING IN PARALLEL WITH THE STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED BY ACTIVISTS TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST IT, TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST WORDS WITH WORDS.

 

WOMEN, WHO DENOUNCE THE POLITICAL EXCLUSION TO WHICH THEY ARE SUBJECTED, ARE SEEN AS THE EMBODIMENT OF THIS THREAT. THEY WOULD CALL INTO QUESTION THE “NATURAL ORDER” ON WHICH “REGENERATED” SOCIETY IS BASED. FOR THIS REASON, THEY ARE ACCUSED OF BEING “VIRAGOS”, PHYSICAL AND MORAL “MONSTERS”, “HALF-MAN HALF-WOMAN”.  

 

IN THE FACE OF THIS STIGMATIZATION, PIONEERS IN THE FIGHT FOR GENDER EQUALITY ARE DEVELOPING STRATEGIES. OLYMPE DE GOUGES ATTEMPTS TO TURN THE STIGMA ON ITS HEAD. SHORTLY BEFORE SHE WAS PUT TO DEATH ON THE GUILLOTINE, SHE WROTE: “I AM AN ANIMAL WITHOUT EQUAL, I AM NEITHER MAN NOR WOMAN. I HAVE ALL THE COURAGE OF THE ONE, AND SOMETIMES THE WEAKNESSES OF THE OTHER”.

 

FOR MY PART, I’VE TRIED TO BE A WOMAN, A REAL ONE, AS SHE’S DESIGNATED TO US, WHILE SAYING THAT I’M “A” WOMAN AND “A” MAN AND THAT I’M A FEMALE-TO-FEMALE TRANSSEXUAL.

 

I FOUGHT WITH THE POISON OF ALL THE FEMININE STEREOTYPES THAT WE DESIGNATE AS THE WOMAN TO BE: THE SOCIALLY AND RELIGIOUSLY INTEGRATED WOMAN. AT FIRST I INGESTED SO MUCH OF THESE POISONS THAT I VOMITED, WHICH SAVED ME! VOLTAIRE SAID, “WOMAN CAN ONLY BE A WIFE AND MOTHER, IF NOT SHE IS A MONSTER”.  

WE PLACE HER IN THE PERPETUAL FIGURE OF THE DISCREET, THE MOTHER, THE GENITRESS, THE LOVER, THE FRAGILE, GENTLE WOMAN, REMAINING IN THE SHADOWS, SPEAKING LITTLE, LOW AND SOFTLY, SO AS TO MAKE HERSELF LITTLE HEARD AND RESEMBLE A FRAGILE, WEARY CREATURE, CHILD, ETERNAL SUBMISSIVE, MUSE, INERT IMAGE, MODEL OF SELF-ABANDONMENT “FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMON GOOD, OF THE OTHER, OF MAN”? AND IT’S INCREDIBLE TO SEE HOW THESE STEREOTYPES AND IDEAS PERSIST TODAY, AND HOW SOME WOMEN STILL FEED THIS IMAGE. ALL THE MORE SO IN A COUNTRY THAT LETS YOU CHOOSE! WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY DOMINATED BY MALE THINKING, WHICH TENDS TO IMPOSE A CERTAIN TYPE OF BEAUTY AND ATTITUDE, A WOMAN’S GESTURES, ACCORDING TO HIS DESIRES, TO SEE HER AS A MOTHER, AND TO EXPECT LATENT SUBMISSION FROM HER. BUT 50 YEARS HAVE PASSED SINCE THE ARTIST’S KISS, AND I HOPE THAT THE MAJORITY OF US ARE NOW AWARE OF THE FACT, LIKE CAROLEE SCHNEEMANN, MARINA ABRAMOVIC, MONA CHOBLET, CINDY SHERMAN, GHADA AMER, SUZY LAKE, JUDITH BUTLER, CAROLE GILLIGAN, DONA HARAWAY, FRANCOISE D’EAUBONNE, MARIA BUCUR, STARHAWK, VIRGINIE DESPENTES, SILVIA FEDERICI, ISABELLE ALPHONSI, OLIVIA GAZALE, BARBARA KRUGER, JENNY HOLZER, KIMBERLE CRENSHAW, MONIQUE WITTIG, LES INSOU-MUSE, ANNIE ERNAUX, AND MANY OTHERS …  

 

I WORKED ON LA FEMME SAINTE ET LA FEMME CATIN IN 1977 WITH LA BAISER DE L’ARTISTE. THIS WORK IS FIRST AND FOREMOST A LARGE-SCALE SCULPTURE. ON ONE SIDE WAS MY EFFIGY, A LIFE-SIZE BLACK-AND-WHITE PHOTO OF ME, DISGUISED AND DRAPED AS A MADONNA, ILLUSTRATING A TEXT I’D WRITTEN “FACING A SOCIETY OF MOTHERS AND MERCHANTS”. I EMBODIED THE SAINT, THE MOTHER, THE DIGNIFIED AND RESPECTABLE WOMAN, I WAS THE “BELLE”. FOR 5 FRANCS, CANDLES COULD BE PLACED AT SAINTE-ORLAN. ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE WAS A LIFE-SIZE PHOTOGRAPH GLUED TO WOOD AND TRIMMED TO SHOW MY BUST, INCLUDING A BREAST FLASHING WITH A RED LIGHT, AND AN ARROW WITH THE WORDS “5 FRANCS” TO INDICATE THE SLOT WHERE THE 5-FRANC COIN COULD BE SEEN FALLING INTO A TRANSPARENT PLASTIC GULLET. THIS PIECE STOPPED BETWEEN MY LEGS IN A CLEAR PLASTIC DRAWER-PUBIS. IT HAPPENED AT THE GRAND PALAIS DURING THE FOIRE INTERNATIONALE D’ART CONTEMPORAIN AND FOR 5 FRANCS I GAVE A REAL ARTIST’S KISS, NOT A CHILDISH ONE BUT A FRENCH KISS… I THEN BECAME THE WHORE, THE WOMAN TO BE KILLED, THE “MONSTER”.  

 

THE RESULT WAS A HUGE MEDIA SCANDAL. I WAS INVITED TO APPEAR ON NUMEROUS TELEVISION PROGRAMS. FOLLOWING THIS, I RECEIVED A COMPLETELY ILLEGAL TELEGRAM FROM THE SCHOOL WHERE I TAUGHT, WHERE I TRAINED SOCIO-CULTURAL ANIMATORS, MEDIATORS AND ART AGENTS. THE TELEGRAM READ: “YOUR PUBLIC ATTITUDE OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH YOUR ROLE AS A TRAINER. ALL YOUR COURSES ARE SUSPENDED, AND WE WILL TAKE ACTION ON YOUR BEHALF.” THE MONSTER IS A CREATURE THAT FRIGHTENS, THAT ONE HIDES… THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT THEY TRIED TO DO. THERE FOLLOWED A TERRIBLE PERIOD WHEN, HAVING RUN OUT OF MONEY, I LOST MY STUDIO WITH MANY WORKS OF ART BECAUSE THEY SEALED THEM OFF. I HAD NOWHERE TO SLEEP AND NO FOOD TO EAT. I WAS A MONSTER, CONDEMNED, DEHUMANIZED AND PUNISHED.

 

LIKE MY FEMINIST PREDECESSORS, I DECIDED TO MAKE THESE CRITICISMS MY STRENGTHS, TO TAKE ON THIS MONSTER FIGURE, TO CLAIM IT AS MY OWN AND MAKE IT THE SYMBOL OF MY PRACTICE, MY LIBERATION, MY EMANCIPATION.

 

WHAT IS MONSTROUS WOULD BE THE OPPOSITE OF BEAUTY, WHICH IS MERELY A QUESTION OF THE DIKTATS OF THE DOMINANT IDEOLOGY IN A GIVEN GEOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL POINT. IF YOU STRAY FROM IT, YOU BECOME THE MONSTER.

THESE NOTIONS OF BEAUTY ARE CONSTANTLY CHANGING, DEPENDING ON THE COMMUNITY OR TRIBE TO WHICH WE BELONG, OR THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE LIVE.

 

IN MY SERIES OF AFRICAN SELF-HYBRIDIZATIONS, I’VE CREATED A WORK THAT IS A MANIFESTO (AS ARE MOST OF MY WORKS) AND THAT DEMONSTRATES WHAT I’VE JUST SAID ABOUT BEAUTY. I PRESENT A WOMAN WITH A HUGE LABRET, VERY CONFIDENT AND SURE OF HER ABILITY TO SEDUCE, BECAUSE IN HER TRIBE, THE WOMAN WITH THE BIGGEST POSSIBLE LABRET IS THE MOST DESIRABLE. IF WE WORE A LABRET HERE AND NOW, IN OUR WESTERN CULTURE, WE WOULD BE DESIGNATED BY THE MAJORITY AS UNBEATABLE MONSTERS!  

 

IN LITERATURE, YOU CAN SOMETIMES TURN INTO A MONSTER. THIS IS KNOWN AS “METAMORPHOSIS”. THE TERM COMES FROM THREE GREEK WORDS: META MEANING “CHANGE”,  MORPH MEANING “FORM” AND OSE MEANING “ACTION”.

 

I’VE ALWAYS WANTED TO TAKE OFF THE MASK OF INNATE BEAUTY THAT’S IMPOSED ON US FROM BIRTH WITHOUT OUR HAVING CHOSEN ANYTHING, AND I’VE WORKED A LOT AGAINST BEAUTY STEREOTYPES! STEREOTYPES ARE ALWAYS THERE, THEY ARE SHORTCUTS, NORMS, VULGARIZATIONS, AN IMPOSED AND SIMPLISTIC WAY OF ORGANIZING SOCIETY.

 

JULIETTE DROUET REPLIED TO HER LOVER VICTOR HUGO WHO TOLD HER SHE WAS PRETTY: “I’M WORSE”. I’VE ALWAYS LOVED THAT LINE AND KEPT IT WITH ME.

 

I CREATED SURGICAL-PERFORMANCES TO DERAIL COSMETIC SURGERY FROM ITS HABIT OF REJUVENATION AND TO PERFORM A SURGICAL OPERATION THAT WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BRING BEAUTY BUT UGLINESS, MONSTROSITY, UNDESIRABILITY. THE FIRST IDEA BEHIND THESE PERFORMANCES WAS TO FIGHT AGAINST MODELS. RUN COUNTER TO THE VALUES OF COSMETIC SURGERY, DERAILING ITS ORIGINAL PURPOSE. I’M NOT AGAINST COSMETIC SURGERY, BUT AGAINST WHAT WE DO WITH IT. AND I APPRECIATE IT WHEN THEY BECOME AN INVENTION OF THE SELF-LOVE; TO CHANGE THE REPRESENTATION OF THIS BODY, OF THESE BODIES, BY REINVENTING THEM OUTSIDE THE MODELS.  

THE BODY CAN BE A PLAYGROUND WORTH EXPLORING, ESPECIALLY MY OWN. AS A WOMAN, I HAVE A DUTY TO QUESTION THE WORLD OF THE BODY. 

 

I WAS TOTALLY DESIRABLE AND ATTRACTIVE. I DIDN’T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY LOOKS. I LOVED MY IMAGE. BOTH MEN AND WOMEN LIKED ME. BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT MYSELF IN THE MIRROR, I WAS AMAZED BECAUSE I HAD SO MANY UNUSUAL IDEAS IN MY HEAD, VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHERS, AND I FOUND THAT THIS DIFFERENCE WAS NOT NOTICEABLE. I COULDN’T UNDERSTAND WHY MY FACE, WHICH WAS MY CALLING CARD, DIDN’T REFLECT THIS DIFFERENCE. AT FIRST, I EXPRESSED MY DIFFERENCE THROUGH ECCENTRIC OUTFITS AND PROVOCATIVE BEHAVIOR. I WAS SAINT-ETIENNE’S NINA HAGEN.  

 

BY READING EUGÉNIE LEMOINE-LUCCIONI’S BOOK, “LA ROBE”. ONE PASSAGE CAPTIVATED ME. HE SAYS: “LIFE IS DISAPPOINTING. IN LIFE, YOU’RE ONLY AS GOOD AS YOUR SKIN, THERE’S A MISUNDERSTANDING IN HUMAN RELATIONS BECAUSE YOU’RE NEVER WHAT YOU ARE… I HAVE THE SKIN OF AN ANGEL AND I’M A JACKAL, THE SKIN OF A WOMAN BUT I’M A MAN…”. A CROCODILE SKIN AND I’M A DOGGIE. I NEVER HAVE THE SKIN OF WHO I AM.

 

I ASKED THE SURGEONS TO UNDERSTAND MY APPROACH: I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THE IDEA OF DIFFERENCE. I HAD IMPLANTS PLACED ON MY TEMPLES, WHICH ARE USUALLY USED TO ENHANCE CHEEKBONES, CREATING TWO BUMPS. I WANTED TO SHOW THAT IF SOMEONE DESCRIBED ME WITHOUT SEEING ME AS A WOMAN WITH TWO BUMPS, THEY COULD SAY THAT I’M AN UNDESIRABLE MONSTER, BUT IF THEY SEE ME, THEY CAN SOMETIMES CHANGE THEIR MIND.  

 

I APPEARED ALL THE MORE MONSTROUS AS I FREELY TRIED TO DO WHAT I WANTED WITH MY BODY TO ESCAPE STEREOTYPES. THAT’S WHAT’S MOST SHOCKING, THAT A WOMAN CAN DO WHAT SHE WANTS WITH HER BODY WITHOUT ACCEPTING DIKTATS. THE MAJORITY STILL SEE ARTISTS AS DECORATORS OF APARTMENTS OR MUSEUMS.  

 

FOR IT TO BE MORE SHOCKING I WOULD HAVE HAD TO LOSE MY SERENITY FOR MYSELF. THE LIMIT WAS TO DO SOMETHING I COULD FEEL GOOD ABOUT DESPITE EVERYTHING AND DESPITE OUTSIDE OPINION. THE MONSTER FASCINATES, WE SEE IN IT THE PROMISE OF CHANGE, THE WINDOW TO A WORLD WHERE MANICHEAN THINKING ABOUT GOOD AND EVIL, THE BEAUTIFUL AND THE MONSTROUS, LOSES ITS MEANING IN FAVOR  OF FREEDOM.  

 

PEOPLE SAID I WAS CRAZY, THAT WHAT I WAS DOING  WASN’T ART, THAT I WAS THE WORLD’S BIGGEST MASOCHIST. NEVERTHELESS, MY FIRST DEAL WITH THE SURGEON WAS: “NO PAIN…” NEITHER DURING NOR AFTER.

 

FIFTEEN, TWENTY YEARS ON, IT’S NOT UNCOMMON FOR PEOPLE TO SAY TO ME: “ORLAN, YOU’RE SO BEAUTIFUL”, TO WHICH I REPLY: “BUT HAVE YOU TAKEN A GOOD LOOK AT ME? “DID YOU SEE THAT I HAVE TWO BUMPS ON MY TEMPLES? AND PEOPLE SAY “OH, BUT IT SUITS YOU…”. 

 

MY BUMPS, THESE SO-CALLED HORRORS, THESE SO-CALLED MONSTROSITIES HAVE BECOME ORGANS OF SEDUCTION…IT’S MY CONVERTIBLE!

I DON’T “FOLLOW”, I “AM” BECAUSE I’M IMBUED WITH EVERYTHING THAT CAME BEFORE ME. I IMPLORE THE MONSTERS OF GENDERED NORMATIVITY TO REGAIN POSSESSION OF THEIR DESTINY, TO EMERGE FROM THE PRECONCEIVED SCHEMA THAT WAS THERE BEFORE THEM, CARRYING SUFFERING/NEUROSES ROOTED IN THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS.  

 

FROM CHILDHOOD ONWARDS, CONSIDERING THE OTHER, THE ONE WHO IS DIFFERENT, THE ONE WHO ESCAPES OUR UNDERSTANDING, AS A FRIGHTENING MONSTER IS THE BEGINNING OF CONFINEMENT IN BOXES, IN NORMS… BECAUSE GOING BEYOND NORMS IS ALSO GETTING CLOSER TO THE MONSTER. THE OTHER WILL ALWAYS BE WRONG TO BE “OTHER”. IN ADDITION TO ITS SEDUCTIVE “EXOTICISM”, IT EVOKES A FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN.

 

THE MONSTER DOESN’T SPEAK, NORMALLY BECAUSE WE SPEAK FOR HIM. FOR THE QUEER AND TRANS PHILOSOPHER PAUL B. PRECIADOTHOSE WHO USUALLY HAVE THE WORD ARE THE ONES WHO DEFINE MONSTROUS BEINGS. IN I’M A MONSTER TALKING TO YOU (GRASSET, 2020), HE DESCRIBES HIS OWN MONSTROUS IDENTITY, CONSTRUCTED THROUGH CLINICAL DISCOURSE AND PRACTICE: “I HAD BEEN ASSIGNED THE FEMALE SEX, AND LIKE THE MUTANT MONKEY, I EXTRICATED MYSELF FROM THIS NARROW CAGE, ADMITTEDLY TO ENTER ANOTHER CAGE, BUT AT LEAST THIS TIME ON MY OWN INITIATIVE. I SPEAK TO YOU TODAY FROM THIS CHOSEN AND REDESIGNED CAGE OF ‘TRANS MAN’, OF THE NON-BINARY GENDERED BODY.” PAUL B. PRECIADO ATTACKS THE “FANATICISM OF SEXUAL DIFFERENCE” BASED ON A BINARY REGIME: MAN AND WOMAN. THE MONSTER RESIDES BEYOND THESE GENDER CATEGORIES, REINFORCED, IN HIS VIEW, BY PSYCHOANALYTIC DISCRIMINATORY DISCOURSE. “AND ISN’T THIS CATEGORY OF THE OTHER ALL THE MORE PROBLEMATIC IF THIS OTHER IS ATTRIBUTED THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A MONSTER, I.E. A NON-HUMAN, AN OTHER-THAN-HUMAN? SILENCED, MONSTERS HERE BECOME INDICATORS OF A RELATIONSHIP OF SUBMISSION AND DOMINATION.

 

IN A BINARY WORLD WHERE YOU CAN ONLY BE “BEAUTIFUL” OR “STUPID” (AND WE DON’T SAY “BEAUTIFUL” AND “STUPID”), THE MONSTER IS SATANIZED AND CONDEMNED BECAUSE THE MONSTER IS THE “OTHER”, THE ONE WHO ISN’T LIKE US, THE ONE WHO ESCAPES THE NORMS. 

IF THE MONSTER IS THE ONE WHO ESCAPES OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD, WE CAN ALL BE SOMEONE’S MONSTER. “WHEN I TALK ABOUT ME, I’M TALKING ABOUT YOU. HOW CAN YOU NOT FEEL IT? AH! FOOL, WHO THINKS I’M NOT YOU! ”
VICTOR HUGO.
THE MONSTER EXISTS ONLY IN THE EYES OF THE BEHOLDER. IT’S ALL A QUESTION OF THE ARCHETYPAL CONSTRUCTION OF “THE OTHER”.   “WHAT MAN FREQUENTLY SEES DOES NOT ASTONISH HIM, EVEN IF HE DOES NOT KNOW THE CAUSE. BUT IF WHAT HE HAS NEVER SEEN HAPPENS, HE THINKS IT’S A PRODIGY. WE CALL “UNNATURAL” THAT WHICH HAPPENS CONTRARY TO HABIT: THERE IS NOTHING, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, THAT IS NOT ACCORDING TO NATURE. LET THIS UNIVERSAL AND NATURAL REASON DRIVE OUT OF US THE ERROR AND ASTONISHMENT THAT NOVELTY BRINGS; THE APPEARANCE OF THE MONSTER IS THE RESULT OF A LACK OF REASON AND EXPERIENCE.” IN THE 70S, I CREATED MY “BODY-SCULPTURE” SERIES. MOST OF THE TIME, MY FACE IS HIDDEN, EITHER BY THE POSE, MY HAIR OR A MASK. TO STAGE THE BODY AND STRIP IT OF ITS IDENTITY SO THAT IT STANDS OUT LIKE A SCULPTURE. THEY WERE MINI PERFORMANCES, BUT IN WHICH I STOPPED A MOVEMENT, AN IDEA, A BODY IMAGE TO CREATE A  SINGULAR AND UNEXPECTED SCULPTURE, AND AN EXTREMELY DELIBERATE, ELABORATE AND DECISIVE WORK. I APPEARED NAKED, BUT I DENOUNCED THE LEARNED GESTURES OF FEMININE SEDUCTION, SUCH AS WIGGLING, SHOULDER PADS, MAWKISHNESS, MOUTHS FORWARD, PLAYING WITH THE HAIR. I CREATED REBELLIOUS, INVENTIVE, EXPRESSIVE ATTITUDES. SEDUCTION AND LIKING TO PLEASE, FOR ME, CAN MEAN LIKING TO TALK, DEFEND IDEAS, LOOK SOMEONE IN THE EYE WITHOUT BATTING AN EYELASH AND/OR FLIRTING. I PRESENTED MY DEFORMED, UNUSUAL BODY IN TORSIONS AND POINTS OF VIEW THAT MADE IT MONSTROUS BECAUSE THEY SHOWED IT DIFFERENTLY. I BECAME A MIRROR FOR ALL THOSE WHO LOOKED AT ME. I SHOWED THEM THAT BEAUTY CAN BECOME GROTESQUE ONLY IF VIEWED FROM A NEW ANGLE. IT’S THIS IDEA OF NOVELTY THAT CREATES THE MONSTER IN A WORLD BUILT ON BOXES AND READY-MADE THINKING. FOR MONTAIGNE, WE HAVE TO GO BEYOND OUR PRECONCEPTIONS, OUR DOGMATIC JUDGEMENT, TO SEE THROUGH THE MONSTER. THE UNKNOWN, ONCE IT BECOMES ORDINARY, LOSES ITS FRIGHTFUL FEATURES. MONSTERS DON’T EXIST, BUT THE FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN IS VERY REAL. OUT IT’S THE UNKNOWN THAT’S ALWAYS FASCINATED ME, THE FACT OF EMANCIPATING MYSELF FROM MY OWN EMANCIPATION, OF ALWAYS THINKING AGAINST ONESELF. IT TAKES A LIFETIME TO KILL THE MONSTER INSIDE US.

MY LIFE IS THE FERMENT OF MY WORK, OF MY ART, AS WELL AS ALL THE ORGANISMS AND MICRO-ORGANISMS THAT INHABIT ME AND ALL THOSE AROUND ME, AND MY VARIOUS FORMATS. “ATTEMPT TO GET OUT OF THE BOX”. IS A WORK WHOSE AIM IS EMANCIPATION.

ALL MY LIFE I’VE TRIED TO GET OUT OF THE BOX, OUT OF THE FRAMES, AND TO “GIVE BIRTH TO ME-LOVE”. I AM MUTANT, INNOVATIVE, MOBILE, NOMADIC AND AFFECTED BY OTHERS, WHO CAN ALSO BECOME FERMENTS OF TRANSFORMATIVE INTERCESSORS.  

I’M MY OWN FERMENT, I’M MADE UP OF CELLS, MICRO-ORGANISMS AND BACTERIA… I BRING ABOUT MY OWN TRANSFORMATION, DESTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION, DEFORMATION AND REFIGURATION. I TRANSFORM AND INTERACT WITH WHAT I’M MADE OF… I REINVENT MYSELF.

I AM A RESPONSIBLE AGENT WHO ACTS ON MY BODY, ON MY CELLS, AND ON MY HEALTH. ON MY HAT. MY OWN SUBSTANCE IS SELF-TRANSFORMING. A SUBSTANCE THAT ACTS ON ANOTHER BY FERMENTING IT. I TRY TO INFLUENCE SOCIETY AND THOUGHTS.  

I AM MYSELF A KIND OF FERMENTATION. AS AN ARTIST QUESTIONING SOCIAL PHENOMENA, I’M LIKE A FERMENT TRYING TO ACT ON ANOTHER SUBSTANCE: THE SOCIAL BODY, WHICH I TRY TO SOW WITH A FERMENT TO CREATE A SFUMATO BETWEEN FIGURATION AND REFIGURATION.  

FOR ME, THIS CREATIVE PROCESS IS AT THE HEART OF MY THINKING. THE LATTER REVEALS THE CONCEPT OF MY WORK. MY PROCESSES ARE DIVERSE, EVOLVING AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY…  

THE WHOLE PROCESS CREATES A NEW REALITY, TRANSCENDING THE LIMITS OF THE WORK, THE BODY AND THE HUMAN BEING IN EFFERVESCENT, MULTIPLE TRANSFORMATIONS.

FERMENTATION IS A METABOLIC PROCESS THAT GENERALLY CONVERTS CARBOHYDRATES INTO ACIDS, GASES OR ALCOHOLS IN AN OXYGEN-DEPRIVED ENVIRONMENT. THIS PROCESS GIVES RISE TO AN EVOLUTION OF MATTER, TRANSFORMATION, TRANSMUTATION…

FERMENTATION IS A NATURAL, CHEMICAL PROCESS THAT IS GOOD FOR US. 

FERMENTS CHANGE COLOR, TEXTURE AND TEXTURE. THERE ARE LACTIC FERMENTS, SULFURIC FERMENTS, ALCOHOLIC FERMENTS (PUT MORE CASES OF FERMENTATION AND …) AMONG OTHERS. THANKS TO ARTOGENESIS AND THE ARTOBIOTE MADE UP OF READINGS, EXPERIENCES, INFORMATION, EMOTIONS, INTERCESSIONS, MEMORIES, DECISION-MAKING CONCEPTS… IN MY WORK I’LL BE TALKING ABOUT ARTISTIC FERMENTATION, BECAUSE “WE HAVE ART SO THAT WE DON’T DIE OF THE TRUTH” (FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE).

I’VE BEEN WORKING AT THE FRONTIER OF ART AND SCIENCE FOR A LONG TIME, AND THE CHALLENGE IS TO MEET SCIENTISTS AND INSTITUTIONS INTERESTED IN SUCH COLLABORATIONS. AS WAS THE CASE WITH THE SYMBIOTICA GROUP LABORATORY (UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA’S SCHOOL OF ANATOMY AND HUMAN BIOLOGY) OR CNRS, ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE AND BIOTECH EXPERT JENS HAUSER.

IN MY WORK, EVERYTHING IS FERMENT, EVERYTHING IS THE SEED OF METAMORPHOSIS AFTER METAMORPHOSIS AND CHANGE AFTER CHANGE. I QUESTION MY APPEARANCE IN THIS CONTINUOUS METAMORPHOSIS; SINCE MY OPERATIONS-SURGICAL-PERFORMANCES WHERE I WANTED TO REINVENT MYSELF, DECONSTRUCT MYSELF IN ORDER TO RECONSTRUCT MYSELF, UNTIL MY POST-OPERATIVE SELF-HYBRIDISATIONS, WHICH INCLUDE THE IMAGE OF MY FACE WITH THOSE TWO BUMPS ON MY TEMPLES.

I CONSIDER HYBRIDATION AS BEING A FERMENT THAT SHOWS THAT 1 + 1 IS NOT 2 BUT EQUAL TO 3, BECAUSE THE OTHER IMAGE THAT EMERGES IS A NEW IMAGE THAT COULD NOT HAVE ARISEN WITHOUT THE OTHER TWO FERMENTS. THIS NEW WORK WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GERMINATE IF THE OTHER TWO HADN’T EMBRACED, EMBRACED…  

MY BODY BECOMES FERMENT, TOOL, SUPPORT AND WORK OF ART. I’M A BODY, NOTHING BUT A BODY, A WHOLE BODY, AND IT’S THE BODY THAT THINKS.  

MY BODY AND THE DNA THAT MADE IT PROPEL FERMENTATIONS. IT IS CONSTANTLY DEDICATED TO TRANSMUTATIONS KNOWN AS “CARNAL ART”, AS DISTINCT FROM TRANSFORMATIONS THAT EXIST ONLY IN THE PIXELS OF VIRTUAL FLESH.

SO THERE’S A TRANSFORMATION OF THE BODY, OF APPEARANCE IN A MORE OR LESS TANGIBLE, MORE OR LESS EPHEMERAL WAY, AS WELL AS A TRANSFORMATION OF THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN THE REAL AND THE VIRTUAL. 

IN LIFE, WE DON’T JUST HAVE ONE BODY, WE HAVE MANY BODIES, ALL VERY DIFFERENT BODY IMAGES, LIKE MATTER THAT TRANSFORMS AND FERMENTS, IT HAS SEVERAL BODIES, AN APPEARANCE IN CONSTANT MUTATION. IT’S A DEVELOPING BODY.  

THESE IMAGES APPEAR THROUGHOUT LIFE—FROM IMAGES OF THE EMBRYO’S BODY TO SCULPTURAL IMAGES OF THE BABY, TO SCULPTURAL IMAGES OF TEENAGERS, SCULPTED IMAGES OF ADULTS, SCULPTED IMAGES OF THE ADULT AND THEN OF THE ELDERLY, THE VERY ELDERLY, AND THOSE NEAR DEATH. AT EACH STAGE OF LIFE, A NEW PROCESS OF TRANSFORMATION BRINGS ABOUT A COMPLETE CHANGE; NATURE SETS AN EXAMPLE FOR ME, SHOWING ME THE PATH OF ITS OWN TRANSFORMATION.

IN MY WORK, IT’S THE SAME THING: THERE’S FERMENTATION, AND FROM GERM TO GERM, CREATIONS EMERGE.

I AM CONSTANTLY ON THE LOOKOUT, SEEKING NEW KNOWLEDGE THROUGH READING BOOKS, ARTICLES, THESES, AND BY ATTENDING LECTURES, SPEECHES, OR ANY OTHER INTELLECTUAL EVENTS… IN THE FIELD OF ART, BUT NOT LIMITED TO IT, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT AN ARTIST MUST TAKE AN INTEREST IN ALL ASPECTS OF SOCIETY. AS I HAVE ALWAYS ASSERTED LOUD AND CLEAR, THE BODY IS POLITICAL, THE PRIVATE IS POLITICAL.

I’VE ALWAYS BEEN DRIVEN BY A DESIRE TO DISCOVER NEW THINGS, TO GO BEYOND MY USUAL FIELDS OF EXPERTISE, TO GET OUT OF MY COMFORT ZONE, TO LEARN AND BOUNCE BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN. 

EVERYTHING SHIFTED AND CAME INTO PERSPECTIVE WHEN I HEARD ABOUT HELA CELLS: MY PERCEPTIONS OF THE STATUS OF THE LIVING BODY AND THE DEAD BODY, OF WHAT THE BODY ITSELF IS, OF BODY MATTER, OF WHAT CONSTITUTES IT AND ITS FUNCTION IN SOCIETY, ALL PUT INTO PERSPECTIVE WITH THE EXPERIMENTS CARRIED OUT BY SCIENTISTS ON BODIES. HELA” CELLS ARE CANCER CELLS THAT CAN DIVIDE INDEFINITELY, AND ARE THEREFORE IMMORTAL.

THEY WERE DISCOVERED IN A TUMOR SAMPLE FROM A CERVICAL CANCER PATIENT. THE PATIENT’S NAME WAS HENRIETTA LACKS, AND SHE DIED OF CANCER ON OCTOBER 4, 1951.  

SINCE THEN, ITS HELA CELLS (A CONTRACTION OF THEIR HOST’S NAME) HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED, MULTIPLIED, CULTIVATED AND PURCHASED IN LABORATORIES THE WORLD OVER. FROM THE ORIGINAL SAMPLE, OBTAINED WITHOUT HENRIETTA LACKS’ CONSENT, SEVERAL DOZEN TONS OF CELLS ARE NOW SPREADING AROUND THE WORLD, THROUGH TIME AND HISTORY. PATHOLOGICAL CELLS FROM A DEAD BODY, WHOSE VOLUME HAS BEEN CONSTANTLY INCREASING SINCE ITS DEATH, WHILE REMAINING VERY MUCH ALIVE, AND WITH WHICH RESEARCHERS ARE EXPERIMENTING AND INNOVATING.

FROM MY DISCOVERY OF THE “HELA” CELLS, MANY OF MY WORKS ARE DERIVED. 

MY “TANGIBLE STRIP-TEASE IN NANO SEQUENCES” PERFORMANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, DURING WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, I PLACED MY BACTERIA, MY ORAL FLORA, MY INTESTINAL FLORA AND MY VAGINAL FLORA IN CULTURE, THEN PUT THEM IN THE “SUPBIOTECH” FREEZER WITH WHICH I WAS WORKING TO GROW MY MICROBIOTA AT -80° ALONGSIDE THE HELA CELLS WITH WHICH THIS LABORATORY WORKS. SUP’BIOTECH’S SKILLS, RESPONSIVENESS AND THE COMMITMENT OF ITS TEAMS ENABLED ME TO PRODUCE THE MICROBIOTIC CULTURES ESSENTIAL TO THIS PERFORMANCE.

MOST OF MY SELF-PORTRAITS ARE VISIBLE, READABLE BY OUR EYES; THESE NEW SELF-PORTRAITS FEATURE MY HOLOBIONT, MY ENVIRONMENTAL ECOSYSTEM. IT’S AN EXTENDED PHENOTYPE, IT’S THE INVISIBLE THAT I’M TRYING TO MAKE VISIBLE.

IT’S AN ABSOLUTE STRIPTEASE. I’VE CALLED MANY OF MY WORKS STRIPTEASE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT STRIPTEASE FOR A WOMAN IS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE WE’RE ALWAYS COVERED IN APPRIORITIES, PRECONCEPTIONS, STEREOTYPES AND MODELS, AND IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO GET RID OF THEM. “SKINLESS STRIPTEASE IN SKINNED”. TRY TO GO FURTHER IN AN ALL-OUT EFFORT  TO GET RID OF HIS ORNAMENTS AND MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY AGAIN “ORLAN STRIP-TEASE TOUT SUR MA VIE TOUT SUR MON ART” PUBLISHED BY GALLIMARD.

THIS WORK WAS A NEW SELF-PORTRAIT IN THE FORM OF A BIOTECHNOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE IN COLLABORATION WITH ARTIST MAËL LE MÉE, A SHOW WE DEVELOPED TOGETHER AND PRESENTED SEVERAL TIMES, ALWAYS FOLLOWING THE SAME PROTOCOL. 

IN THE AUDITORIUM, THE AUDIENCE WAS DRESSED IN WHITE PROTECTIVE LABORATORY SUITS. THEY ALSO WORE MASKS AND VIEWED PROJECTED IMAGES OF MY OWN MICROBIOTA.

THROUGHOUT THE PERFORMANCE, THE AUDIENCE HAD IN THEIR HANDS LARGE SQUARE KNEADING TROUGHS IN WHICH WAS THE CULTURE OF MY BACTERIA, MY DIFFERENT FLORA. I WOULD THEN TAKE A PUBLIC BLOOD SAMPLE, COLORED SO THAT IT WOULD FLUORESCE, WHICH WOULD CIRCULATE IN A 70-METER TUBE IN THE HALL, UNDER BLACK LIGHT, PASSING FROM HAND TO HAND OF PARTICIPATING SPECTATORS.

MY BODY SPREAD ACROSS THE ROOM, FROM HAND TO HAND, BODY TO BODY.

MY HOLOBIONT AND THAT OF ALL THOSE WHO WORK WITH ME FORM A META-ORGANISM POPULATED BY THOUSANDS OF OTHER ORGANISMS, OTHER LIVING BEINGS, OTHER GERMS AND POTENTIAL FERMENTS. THEY REDEFINE ME, SOMETIMES WITHOUT ME EVEN REALIZING IT. I’M THEIR LEAD ORGANIZATION. MY READINGS ARE PART OF MY HOLOBIONT. DELEUZE AND GUATTARI REFERRED TO THEM AS INTERCESSORS.

FERMENTS ARE INSCRIBED IN EVERY THOUGHT, AND NEW WORDS BUBBLE UP TO CREATE NEW FORMS. FERMENTATION IS, IN FACT, A MOVING PROCESS, A MUTATION, A MODIFICATION OF MATTER TO CREATE SOMETHING COMPLETELY NEW. IT FERMENTS, IT BUBBLES, THE CHEMISTRY WORKS, IT SWELLS, IT GASSES. IN ART AND THROUGH ART, CONCEPTUAL ALCHEMY SERENDIPITOUSLY OPERATES ON MY DECISION-MAKING WILLS.

 

ORLAN

I admire the strength of these works! 

I’d love to meet the artists who designed them!

I like to associate, to make different times coexist, to inscribe myself in these works from another time and try to breathe life back into them, to wake them up in a way and awaken myself to their mysteries with infinite respect. 

“Visit real mystery from world is the visible, no l’invisible“said Oscar Wilde.

This statuary represents real people who were once very much alive. I get closer to them, I feel close to them. As human beings, our DNA is almost identical.  

They help to rebuild me, they penetrate me, transform me, I welcome them and they welcome me. 

It’s a reciprocal hospitality; it’s an encounter.

They disengage me from me-love. They’re friendly, and so am I. We grope around, looking for each other, exchanging ideas and learning from each other. I’m amazed by the visual joy of hybridization, that is to say, by the encounter. Without them, without me, the graceful moment of creation in a third WORK-BODY could not take place. Without these two bodies of thought meeting, mingling and trying their hand at dialogue, and without this beautiful exchange, the work could not have existed. This meeting breaks down the ice walls between cultures and arts. I’ve always wanted to get out of the box and break down the walls between artistic practices. Here, through sculpture and digital photography, between skin colors, between genders, between the old and the new, between men and women, between generations, between those who believe and those who don’t… Breaking down these walls of ice also means understanding the lesson of the Baroque, where everything is based on the “and”. Christian culture asks us to satanize one of the two parties by asking us to choose between good or evil. However, the Baroque shows St. Therese enjoying the angel’s arrow in an erotic “and” ecstatic ecstasy. Lacan talked a lot about it.  

Baroque replaces “or” with “and”. 

It’s not the Mayans “or” me but the Mayans “and” me.

I illustrate this notion in my new works, which could not have been created without the Maya, without the “and” that abolishes the dichotomy between good “or” evil, making them friends and complementary, inventive and generative of a new form by embracing opposition. This exchange enriches and transforms me. Similarly, the Maya hybridized with their predecessors, the Olmecs.  

It’s important to me that in the final work you can see the statuary, the Maya sculpture, to pay homage to it and to the anonymous artists who created it. Artists who, like me, try to create works that reflect their times. I didn’t want them to merge, but to create a new creation in a rite of love, without harming either of them.  

I’m all for nomadic, mutant and shifting identities. 

Identity drift generates opposition, wars…

 

Out of the dark

Out of the shadows

Out of the mists of time

Resurgence, resurgence

Other appearance

Second chance

Entering another world

Reappearance

Renaissance

Refiguration

Understood as a score

Of music and images and sounds

Benevolence and reinterpretation

Like an artist’s kiss

Piercing with its language

The thickness of years

Wall thickness

From century to century

Out of the box

Breaking the cage bars

Out of the shadows

Out of the dark

Stepping out of the mists of time

 

His works have emerged from the bowels of the earth and are made by artists in durable materials such as jade and stone, materials that can withstand the test of time and thus be seen from culture to culture, heritage to heritage. Giving yourself to be seen means taking the risk of interpretation, of translation by others to whom a message coming from afar has to be deciphered. It’s a bottle in this sea of time across the centuries for other civilizations.

* Lyrics to the song “Sortir du noir”, ORLAN featuring Kat May, *Le slow de l’artiste*, 2023