Androgyny and hybrids are already labelled. It had to happen. Man can’t live without labelling everything for his better understanding. In fact I always thought that androgyny would be the future of human civilization, by the evolution of our own bodies. Men is becoming less masculine and female less feminine and the mix is a new gender, or new genders, no matter if they come natural or by transformation. Hybrids always lived, and we can see the first representations on caves by Palaeolithic with half man half wolf praying the gods to give men wolf’s power, till the Hybrid CDs for Mac or Windows systems.
I have been always fond of this. A wolf doesn’t loose his personality by being half man and man neither. They complement each other.
But everything naturally fuses and merges creating the need of more labels so some part of humanity have it easier to understand. Often we start not knowing what is or what is not. Our mind needs labels to organize a catalogue.
However, even if I always found this natural, I never understood some art movements. Especially the ones that are trying to be something else that are not what they seem to be.
I like coffee, and that’s the reason why I don’t add sugar to it.
We’ve being watching photography trying to be painting. And recently paintings trying to pass as photography. Or drawing so real that makes you’re sure it’s photography. And photography so edited that you think it’s a painting.
I like photography as it is. And painting. And Drawing.
The other day I read an article on digital vs. analogue photography, where the author talks about the bad use of digital trying to be analogue. People didn’t understand so are not taking advantage of digital as a new meaning. I can’t disagree more, however yes, of course that people do digital trying to be analogue, and even in my work is often mix of both as in the same series you can have analogue and digital and you wouldn’t know the difference, because it’s not important as the final result and the concept of it. However, in B Shot by a Stranger, there’s the innovation of shooting through satellite and webcams using digital cameras, or not being in the place that was being shot which couldn’t have been done in analogue era, or without digital.
But lets go back to the crime scene: A drawing with pencil so real that you could see it as b/w photograph doesn’t make any sense. If it’s not creative: it’s technical and shows the magnificent skills of the author of the drawings. It shows that you passed perfectly well through a boring technical academic study. Painting a landscape as if it was real is not being creative, is not being artist: is mastering technique in painting.
Mastering techniques is wonderful only when you’re able to break them and forget them to start being creative.
Till then, you’re only doing it to listen to your granny saying how wonderful my grandson draws. When you have a granny in your own mind.
Now, go and explore, don’t try to do something else that is not anything. Learn the techniques so you can break them. Look at the masters so you get their change feeling, the why they belong in history.
Change yourself. Do not copy. Do not follow. Create by your own. Break the rules. Be honest with yourself. Be unique. Be the difference. Be yourself.
And stop doing something that it isn’t: Make something unlabeled.
It’s the major risk, but you go through or not. People will not understand, but nor they did with the masters, who kept being honest with themselves. The ones who learned the rules to break them all.
Create the unlabeled. Challenge yourself.