Thursday, February 26, 2015

Body Extension Journal Entry on Jana Sterbak

In reading about Jana Sterbak, I was enlightened on her take of obstruction of the body, and the pieces that she has created to highlight the human bodies’ obstruction.  She pulls from what she labels a “colonized identity” to involve “awareness of the limitations such dependency puts on both personal and collective self-determination” into her work.  She also utilizes her pieces to get her audience involved, transforming them from mere viewers into full-fledged participants. 
In Vanitas: Flesh Dress for an Albino Anorectic, Sterbak is able to poke fun at the fashion industry while shedding light onto the aging body.  The dress which is comprised of 60lbs of raw flank steak decays while hanging in exhibition, but before that time it is worn in photographs by your typical, slim model.  The ‘meat dress’ evokes

“…the discourse of fashion, in which the female body is offered as the speculator object of the male gaze.  Because the image of the fashionable woman is one of youth, slimness, and vibrant good health, Sterbak’s piece, with its association of aging, death, and decay, shows the workings of, but also offers resistance to, the disciplinary force of fashion”. 

The piece is said to be a memento mori, which is a metaphor for the aging human body reminding the viewers of their own impending death and decay.  The Vanitas dress is perfect for the metaphor, as the dress being comprised of a dead animal meat that slowly decays as it’s exhibited, we too will all one day be a dead with a decaying corpse. 

In addition to her meat dress, Sterbak has created other pieces that not only entangle the female form into something that is uncomfortable and subjective, but also place the female into a piece that is controlled by another person.  In Remote Control I and Remote Control II, Sterbak constructs a metal crinoline that is motorized with wheels and batteries.  This skirt is reminiscent of the skirt garments that women wore in the 1800’s; very stiff and puffy which restrict the wearer to standing the entire evening.  Remote Control I and Remote Control II restrict the wearer by placing them inside the aluminum frame where their feet cannot touch the ground, and the wearers movements are controlled by a remote control.  While the wearer can control the remote, typically the wearer is controlled by someone else.  First of all, the wearer of Remote Control I and Remote Control II cannot enter the crinoline by themselves, instead relying on 2 men to lower the woman into the devise.  Second, the apparatus suspends the wearer off the ground, keeping the torso in a constrained, rigid position.  Lastly, having someone else control your every move can be quite demeaning to the wearer, which Sterbak designed to be a woman.  This apparatus metaphorically represents a power play; the wearer isn't the one in power (the female), but instead the power is given over to the person who holds the remote (man).  This loss of power explores the typical notion of the female ideal where woman aren’t in “control” of themselves, and seems to highlight that we live in a male dominated where men still hold the power and women are considered powerless without a man at their side.  For example:  a 30 year old single man isn't even blinked at, but a 30 year old single woman is considered “weird”, or people wonder what is wrong with her.  Why can’t she keep a man?  I feel that Sterbak was trying to pinpoint the misogyny in society, but I just don’t see it.  I feel that being able to give the remote to someone gives the wearer all the power.  Needing help to get into the apparatus puts the wearer IN power, because it is their own choice to enter the devise.  I guess I feel opposite about Sterbak’s piece than she does. 

While Sterbak created context of women’s power with the remote in Remote Control I and Remote Control II, she also created power context with the electric current that runs through Seduction Couch.  While Remote Control I and Remote Control II suggests the giving away of a woman’s power, Seduction Couch establishes the “buildup of sexual attraction” with the use of electric currents received from the generator.  This piece is tantalizing, yet revolting.  When the viewer touches the piece, they are given an electric shock which should be repulsive to them.  But they know that they will receive that shock prior to touching the piece, yet they choose to touch it anyways.  It’s the age old tale of attraction to what you shouldn't/ can’t have.  It’s taboo ~ which makes you want it all the more.  It represents sex and sexuality, and how desire stimulates “the injunction to know”.  It’s also been said that Seduction Couch “addresses the role of the domestic space of seduction, the boudoir, in the production of gender”.  While I can agree that placing a woman on Seduction Couch gives the male ample viewing of the reclining female form, I feel that this piece gives the power to the woman.  Sterbak “draws associations between the chaise lounge and the production of docile female bodies through visual representations”.  I guess I see it as the opposite.  While the female body is given to the observer for visual representations, the female is not docile as she lays there.  She is in control, control of herself, her viewer and what they can and cannot see; she holds all the cards. 


Looking at the work that Sterbak has created to show the sexuality, powerlessness, and control that the female embodies, I feel a sense of sadness for Sterbak.  While I loved her pieces, I feel that she is stuck in the mindset that females have no power, and creates pieces to highlight that point.  While I agree that we still live in a male dominated world, I think when it comes to sexuality we all have only as much as we want to have.  If we want to be sexual creatures, we can.  Just because someone holds the power doesn't make the other person powerless.  Sometimes the one that seems powerless is actually the one who holds all the power.         

Works Cited:
McLerran, Jennifer.  DISCIPLINED SUBJECTS AND DOCILE BODIES IN THE WORK OF CONTEMPORARY ARTIST JANA STERBAK. Feminist Studies, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Autumn, 1998).  Received February 26, 2015

No comments:

Post a Comment