*plants mint directly in your dash* heehee :3
*returns to their blog after a one hour nap*
.... FUCK
“Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) is a 1991 piece by Felix Gonzalez-Torres in the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago. It’s a spilled pile of candy.
“Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) represents a specific body, that of Ross Laycock, Gonzalez-Torres’ partner who died of AIDS in 1991. This piece of art serves as an “allegorical portrait,” of Laycock’s life.
The pile of candy consists of commercially available, shiny wrapped confections. The physical form of the work changes depending on the way it is installed. The work ideally weighs 175 pounds (79 kg) at installation, which is the weight of Ross Laycock when healthy.
Visitors are invited to take a piece of candy from the work. Gonzalez-Torres grew up Roman Catholic and taking a candy is a symbolic act of communion, but instead of taking a piece of Christ, the participant partakes of the “sweetness” of Ross. As the patrons take candy, they are participants in the art. Each piece of candy consumed is like the illness that ate away at Ross’s body.
Multiple art museums around the world have installed this piece.
Per Gonzalez-Torres’ parameters, it is up to the museum how often the pile is restocked, or whether it is restocked at all. Whether, instead, it is permitted to deplete to nothing. If the pile is replenished, it is metaphorically granting perpetual life to Ross.
In 1991, public funding of the arts and public funding for AIDS research were both hot issues. HIV-positive male artists were being targeted for censorship. Part of the logic of “Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) is you can’t censor free candy without looking ridiculous, and the ease of replicability of the piece in other museums makes it virtually indestructible.
As of late September 2022, the Art Institute of Chicago has changed their exhibit label on this piece to remove any mention of AIDS, Ross Laycock, death, or his relationship with Gonzalez-Torres (via willscullin on Twitter).
Left: old wall text. Right: new wall text as of 9/28/22.
The language they’ve changed to use, talking about “the average body weight of an adult male” is the kind of careful language that art museums might use when we don’t know for sure what something is about – but in this case we do know exactly what the Gonzalez-Torres intended this to be about. (Take it from the Smithsonian if you don’t want it from me!) The museum hasn’t attempted to offer any explanation why, although I cannot think of any unless they wanted to give in object lesson that erasure doesn’t stop even in death.
man. remember early in the pandemic, shortly into the telework phase, when a lot of women started vocalizing “wow, i didnt realize just how much time, energy, and even money i was wasting on dolling myself up for work every damn morning, until i didn’t have to do it anymore. i don’t think i’ll go back to doing that when we return to the office? i won’t be a slob or anything, of course, i’m just not going to go out of my way to look pretty at work" and then,
so many people proceeded to lose every last crumb of their shit about it, writing the most asinine crybaby articles ever where they were just. utterly horrified by the possibility that more and more women might become comfortable looking natural/plain and completely opting out of the expectation to look as appealing as possible at all times, even when all they’re doing is spending all day in a cubicle. that was bonkers. lmao.
some ladies were like “during lockdown, i saw myself in the mirror without makeup much more often, and got used to it, so now i don’t feel as anxious for others to see me without makeup on either. i’m comfortable with the face i have, it’s fine just the way it is”
and some absolute dork ass losers heard this and went “truly, this is the death of femininity”
TERFS who think they’re welcome on my posts: you’re not. the freedom to reject conventional beauty standards should apply to and be shared with trans women as well, moreso, in fact, because trans women are literally held to an even harsher, stricter standard when it comes to rando third parties feeling entitled to meticulous over-performance from them - demanding they put every last possible ounce of resource and effort into altering their appearance just to be seen as acceptable, demanding they “prove” their validity through excessive glamour, to ensure they are not “faking” - and the consequences for a trans woman if she does not flawlessly comply with these demands can be so dire as to be lethal for her.
That should not be the reality these women have to endure! That is a horrifying injustice, and anybody who not only lacks compassion for that, but promotes the ideologies that enable it, is not welcome here. I will not debate with you on the matter. Get lost.
so this post is making the rounds again, but only the version without this very important addition on it, so, as a reminder,
old gods are waking
this news is from 2012! here is a natgeo article on it and here is the journal article in proceedings of the national academy of sciences which also has more pictures :-)
Life in Code: A Personal History of Technology
by Ellen Ullman
a while back I made a post along the lines of "every STEM major should have a required 'history of science' course that's just all about previously wrong and bad scientific theories like sperm all containing homunculi and spontaneous generation" and I got a lot of responses like "but STEM majors already have gen ed requirements!" and would not understand why I was specifically asking for a course that would teach people about why science is not infallible and does not exist in a vacuum and THIS IS EXACTLY WHY ACTUALLY
It takes work to curate your online spaces, but if you don't do it, corporations will do it for you using a couple harmful key principles. 1) Negative emotions hold your attention better than positive emotions. 2) Calm/contented people are less likely to spend money.
Curate your online spaces starter pack:
- Blacklist, block and mute at will. You don’t owe anybody anything.
- Turn off those notifications.
- Decide when you log on. Don’t use social media at breakfast if it will stress you out all day. Don’t use it before you go to bed if it will keep you up. Find a fun ritual to replace it, like a video game or craft thing.
- Consider which platform allows you to avoid topics that upset you. For example: tumblr is kinda shit for fan fiction because everything ends up in the same tag. The older forum-style platforms are much better for finding content you enjoy and avoiding content you don’t.
- Leave online communities that don’t spark joy. You don’t need to stay in a place where everyone is always fighting. You don’t need to stay in communities where you are afraid to speak your mind or to make mistakes.
- Ask yourself: could this ‘debate’ also be a conversation instead? Don’t debate people who seek debate to upset you. Don’t debate people who seek debate to get an audience for bigotry. Don’t debate people who seek debate to win instead of to learn. Don’t debate people who do not acknowledge your humanity.
- Repeat to yourself: doomscrolling is not activism. Nothing in the world gets better just because you read, liked and reblogged posts about how terrible things are.
[Tweet by Kingfisher & Wombat @UrsulaV: “O best beloved, if you are doomscrolling Twitter today, ask yourself if there is anything you can personally do. If there is, do it. If there isn’t, remember that anxiety is not activism. Your misery does not improve the world a single iota.”]
theres something so beautiful about things becoming dirty from their job. like a painter's desk being covered in paint stains, or a gardeners pants having mud stains that wont wash out, or a cutting board being stained from all the foods that have been cut on it. just a clear, distinct telling of "this was used as intended and it shows" an object clearly showing it's been used and loved