http://chicaandhervan.blogspot.com/
my work is not yet at the quality as yours, but I’m inspired and improving.

xo chica

I have this article
nailed on my studio’s wall…

cheers from spain!

:]

__________________________________________________

“La intención es lo que cuenta…”
__________________________________________________

“Intention matters…”
__________________________________________________

Cheers to Both of You!

(The Offended & The One On The Defensive)

PS - Sorry for the intrusion! But my faults outweigh my virtues!

__________________________________________________

I never said I disliked the article or regretted being in El Pais, all I have done is discuss the opinions of my viewers - viewers who know the newspaper well, and also even the journalist’s past work.
What I have done is allowed a discussion of these viewers’ personal interpretations of the article, whilst trying to prevent myself from having any opinion of it really. I just want to appreciate being in the newspaper, and let others decide whether the text can be criticised. Is it wrong for people to respond intelligently to a text in this way?

Besides, like Arty says, there’s a difference between the ‘press’ and a journalist. I am not criticising the writer herself, just as in the same way, I would not criticise the BBC reporter who interviewed me last year, who though was an communicable and intelligent person, narrated a somewhat glib final piece. That’s because of the limits of editing, which I understand in this case have not allowed Beatriz to give a fuller interview and impression of me.

I appreciate the way the press works, but that doesn’t mean we can’t openly discuss and evaluate their notorious ways. No one should be personally offended in the process, and I apologise if anyone has been offended.

While it’s very easy to criticise the press, your message served as a timely reminder that journalists are people too.

I can’t believe what you are saying about her article that, by the way, gave lot of entries in your Flickr. And I’m sure that if her newspaper knew what you were going to say, they wouldn’t have published a word about your art.

She is one of the most open-minded journalists of that old newspaper, and you can’t imagine the problems she had to convince the editors to publish it. I know, also, that she made you a long interview but couldn’t write everything she wanted because of the few words they let her.

After reading this blog I think you need more humility and do less value judgement without knowing the context.

This is a reductive and demeaning introduction, as we all know there was and is a lot more than sexy poses and a “bit of Photoshop” being used in your work. It is, however, fairly typical for the opening paragraph of any piece of journalism. It grabs the attention, and invites the reader to find out more, which is found lower down in the article.

“It kind of gives the impression that all my work is nude, and that my nudity is what made me popular.”

I suppose it does, but one only needs to look at your “600+ Faves” set on flickr to see that, generally speaking, the nudes are more popular. Of the sixteen images currently in that set, eight are nude or topless, and four more have strongly sexual connotations, as they focus on your bare legs.

People don’t look at your photos just because of the nudity (and you seem to generate just as many comments, if not more, when you are clothed) but to deny that the nudity is not an important factor in your popularity would be futile.

I don’t know if there was a press release prior to the Spanish show, which could have planted a seed in the journalist’s mind, but I think you will continue to be questioned about the sex-art nexus for as long you make “beautiful images of a beautiful woman”. The old BBC clip seemed to be all about the “controversy” of nudity in your art. Perhaps, this debate needs to be left in the past. Controversy has helped you gain publicity, but I think it’s probably best not to bring up the tired old subject when you next have an interview. If and when the journalists ask you about nudity or pornography, just tell them politely to read your blogs and flickr profile for your well documented views, and request questions on other subjects, since there is more to you than tits n’ arse.
Make the journos work for a living!

BUT
Ive just read it once and once again (beacause of this thread) and I must say the article is not as bad a it seemed at first read. Indeed with all that nudity, erotic and soft porn allusions in the first paragraphs the journalist is complaining about what people on Flickr sometimes say about Miss Anielas stream (nudity, narcisism etc). Then the journalist makes a contrast in the last paragraph. Its like: Whats behind all this vehement opinions? And she writes about Natalie´s point of view. Thats nice and neutral. Ive been searching more articles writen by this woman. I found some, and she uses always the same structure. She seems to love contrasts.

Im afraid people can get a wrong first impression as I did. But in the other hand I think this is a great publicity, the title and images themselves catch the attention of thousands and thousands of readers.

Congratulations for your exhibition Natalie.

Arty you say
“your art is “infuriating” in that it can’t all be bracketed as one thing. It’s not all erotic, or wholly narcissistic, or wholly (old school) feminist. If it was entirely predictable, I’d probably get bored by it.”

That is exactly why I felt (and I assume why others felt) a dscomfort with the focus entirely on the nude parts of my work. Like you say, Eva, “they focus the attention on her nudity and based her success on that.” It kind of gives the impression that all my work is nude, and that my nudity is what made me popular.
However, I do not necessarily see ‘And’s’ reading into the article, that there is ’something wrong with nudity’. I agree that the article is not saying anything negative about my work. But the fact that is approaches only the nudity is a suggestion, an invitation, for the viewer to read my work as soft porn. Maybe some will, maybe some won’t. Yes, they can go to my site and see for themselves. I don’t think the article tells us what to think about my nudity, but it provides a narrow outlook by talking only about the nudity. However, I do accept that this is the angle taken by the journalist, and I’m not angry, that would be futile as interpretations will always be varied from person to person (and journalist to journalist). In thie case I am lucky to have people (my viewers who come to the article with pre-knowledge of my work) can intelligently recognise where biases naturally occur and make their own personal response. That’s why I left this article on the blog for people to make up their minds, I’m realising more and more (especially in the last couple of months) to relax and let the viewer see make their own interpretation of everything an ‘artist’ does, not to worry about trying to impose your personal views onto them! Let them talk amongst themselves. Whether or not I join in, is now the hanging question…

Lol @ the arse Turner Prize.

ps: and glad you understand the translation.