Feinin's prosthetic body after Cindy Sherman' photograph, "Untitled #255"
For some time I struggled over this work, I was drawn to the orifice which was made from cardboard panels then sewn together. This is a cleaner version, the original gave me a good laugh. Yeh it was to have the likeliness of a prosthetic suit like in the nude life size sex doll ...I am assuming of Cindy Sherman's "Untitled #255"
Cindy Sherman explains ....Sherman places herself in the roles of B-movie actresses. Her photographs show her dressed up in wigs, hats, dresses, clothes unlike her own, playing the roles of characters. While many may mistake these photographs for self-portraits, these photographs only play with elements of self-portraiture and are really something quite different. In each of these photographs, Sherman plays a type -- not an actual person, but a self-fabricated fictional one. There is the archetypal housewife, the prostitute, the woman in distress, the woman in tears, the dancer, the actress, and the malleable, chameleon-like Sherman plays all of these characters.
For a work of art to be considered a portrait, the artist must have intent to portray a specific, actual person. This can be communicated through such techniques as naming a specific person in the title of the work or creating an image in which the physical likeness leads to an emotional individuality unique to a specific person. While these criteria are not the only ways of connoting a portrait, they are just two examples of how Sherman carefully communicates to the viewer that these works are not meant to depict Cindy Sherman the person. By titling each of the photographs "Untitled", as well as numbering them, Sherman depersonalizes the images.
Of cause there were problems with this shoot... I will not go into the detail only if you ask...hmm, but I love it. Remember I am using what I have and completing a work of art everyday. See the earlier Feinin of her in her later career
Star struck like Sherman's stills are composed to give a sense of importance intended as a visual caricature of Americana. If these Feinin self studies are termed conceptual portraits, they are to me by means of the detail. Everything means something in reference to the work, but I rather call them anthropological portraits. They are to demystify our conditioning over conceptual art. The more I can parody, the less I value.
If Cindy Sherman's portraits as she states are not of her persona, then whats the point? I rather have a still photo of the movie star she pretends to be. Artists should be careful who and what they portray. I found this out in the fenin studies that showed my melancholy. it was a depression I had to fight alone, you see it in the work. Art imitates life, one has to be mineful not to end up dead in a Hotel room strangled by a lover conceptualised in their mind and played out as a self portrait many years before.
Yes I understand what you mean, "Being Fucked Over" I rather liked the review by Kim Clune with the term, "Preening" and "life of a starlet", the first Feinin of her says it all. Remember, I am in character, there is no gender, I am just a inanimate sex doll waiting to be fucked.
Hypothetically, if by your window, you notice a man rolling in the garden with a strip of cardboard between his legs, what would you think? And there is something more,..he is naked. These are the issues I face with these studies as they are self portraits photographed by a timer. I have to get in position, I can not see what the camera sees, nor can I guarantee that the camera will focus correctly or actually fire the shot. Further to the complications of holding the piece together when the camera fails, I have to get up and do it over again. I really need proper equipment to execute these feinins. Did you notice the leaves that were tangled in the vagina, and how damaged the "box" was?