Misogynistic artwork

[Fambo Number Mive]

In 2013, an artist recorded around 5,000 women on a university campus, numbered them according to how attractive he found them and made a seven-hour long video.

It was recently shown in an art gallery in Shanghai, which has removed the "artwork" and apologised. The artist, Song Ta, says "I think I have the right to tell the truth" - it's not "truth", it's one male's view of how attractive he finds random women.

I'm not really sure how this is art. It reminds me of the Brass Eye sketch where a man is shown photos of women and asked "which ones he'd hump", only this is a lot grimmer and more public. It must be very unpleasant for the 5,000 women in the video and it does feel like toxic masculinity, to try to claim that taking videos of women without their knowledge, ranking them according to how attractive you find them and displaying them publicly is art.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-57532264

[bgmnts]

I suppose it's his 'truth'.

[buttgammon]

This sounds less like art and more like a perv chancing his arm by coming up with an excuse for making unsolicited recordings.

Legend Gary pulled the same stunt, and that's how he got a police caution and a major retrospective at Tate Modern.

[imitationleather]

Wow.

[imitationleather]

But is it any different from the PHWOAR! thread?!?!

[steveh]

In 2013, an artist recorded around 5,000 women on a university campus, numbered them according to how attractive he found them and made a seven-hour long video.

Might have got away with it if he'd started a social media company instead.

[JamesTC]

No Ta.

[The Bumlord]

That video must really start to slump somewhere around the third hour.

[popcorn]

Of course it's art, it just sounds like really shit art. Whenever someone comes along with some immoral or moronic art piece like this it always triggers a lot of debate about "but what is art" and "what are the limits of art" and I just think it's besides the point - just because you're calling your thing a piece of artwork doesn't mean anyone has to like it, tolerate it, accept it, or think it isn't making the world worse.

It's like that art installation a few years ago that was (IIRC) just someone letting a dog starve to death slowly. Is it art? Sure why not. Is it animal cruelty that should be illegal? Yes.

[JaDanketies]

It's still art in my eyes. Art that shows off the bad parts of the creator is still art, but I've always preferred the broadest definition of art anyway. Surprising that anyone would publicly reveal themselves to be a big shithead like this but  I don't know the culture. This would be far more likely to put a black mark against your name than Piss Christ or putting a urinal in an art gallery or shitting in Tracey Emin's bed.

I don't blame any gallery for wanting to give this a very wide berth though and it's weird that any gallery gave it the time of day to begin with.

[thenoise]

Doesn't seem remotely interesting enough to be dragged into the age-old debate of what is art. Plenty of art been made about ladies attractiveness or mens appreciation of such. And video shown in a gallery is obviously "art" in the most basic sense. But is it shit? (Clue: yes)
The artist doesn't even claim a greater or more profound point, just encourages people to get there early in order to catch sight of all the hotties.

[JaDanketies]

Here's an interview with the artist about this piece pre-controversy.

I'll copy-paste the translation below in case anyone needs it.

As early as 2013, the Ullens Art Center exhibited a video work called "Uglier and Uglier": artist Song Tuo recorded nearly 5,000 girls in the school with a video recorder, and according to personal aesthetic preferences, The girls are sorted from beautiful to ugly. The video was placed from the first to the last, and it took more than eight hours to finish the broadcast, and it could only be broadcast once a day.
From the opening of the art gallery, the first group of viewers were able to see the school flowers, but soon the screen was occupied by almost the same mediocrity. As night fell, the exhibition space was filled with inferiority and depression. It was "a hell on earth." The scene".
With the blessing of "art", audiences often give tolerance before they don't understand the aggressive behavior of artists. Even so, "School Flower", which ranks 5,000 amateur girls, has no flesh and blood or challenged taboos. It just adds a line of pale numbers under each girl's image, and the effect of irritating the audience is still getting better after 6 years. .
Image"School Flowers", Song Tuo, single channel video, 425'12'', 2013, image courtesy of the artist

Now Song Tuo doesn't do art anymore and wants to make money. One evening in mid-July, I met Song Tuo, who is no longer an artist, in a shopping mall in Futian District, Shenzhen.
"Maybe it's because I'm too perverted, so I don't want to let it go." Former artist Song Tuo commented on his perseverance to shoot nearly 5,000 girls.
"Then what do you think I can rank among 5,000 girls?" I quickly asked the question I care about most-although Song Tuo doesn't seem to be trustworthy in other respects, I still believe in his aesthetics. .
"Then you have to put the photos in the article, or I will put them in vain." Song Tuo bargained with me.
"Okay."
"It also needs to be placed between the two people before and after you." Song Tuo was even more energetic.
"Fine."
He became serious, took a quick but deep look at me, then lowered his head, muttering something incomprehensible, and his two thumbs were overlapped, shaking slightly like some scientific instrument for counting.
It is not an exaggeration at all, Song Tuo called the database of 5000 samples, which must be a huge calculation.
"277." About 2 minutes later, Song Tuo gave me the answer.
ImageSong Tuo deliberately turned out the 276, 277, and 278 of the year. Thank you Song Tuo.

After this question, the interview can officially begin.
VICE: How did you think of taking pictures of all the girls in a school?
Song Tuo: It 's fraternity, it's just going through it all. I think it's not good to ignore them. We always feel that there are not so many ugly women in life. This is a kind of ignorance. The one in the front of the row is quite beautiful, but when you really get it in the row, you will find that the only thing that can be seen is very rare. Use data to speak.
According to you, taking pictures of the ugly is still a kind of care?
It's possible, but I didn't intend to care about her. I made this work more for fun. The whole school is changing from beauty to "pork chop", which means "dinosaur" in Cantonese. This process is very interesting. There is a sense of sporty modeling in it, which is very vivid.
ImageSong Tuo is obsessed with change, and is good at gradually revealing and capturing this change by laying out a large amount of textual information. In Song Tuo's graduation thesis "The Facial Representation of Leprechaun Adults", Song Tuo studied the fairy tales that changed from animals to humans, and how their faces inherited the characteristics of animal facial portraits in the process of change. In order to study the relationship between the fox and the fox-mei fairy, Song Tuo watched a large number of films and historical materials of the type above. This is a bit different from photographing 5000 girls. Song Tuo should be a perseverance-type artist. The picture is taken from Song Tuo's paper "The Facial Representation of Leprechaun Adults".

So many people, how do they rank?
This is quite complicated. I took a sum of money for the exhibition and paid for 3 assistants. First divided into three big folders: beauty, middle, and ugliness. Throw it inside if you shoot it. After the three large folders are full, they are divided into the United States, the United States, the United States, the United States and the Ugly, the United States, the Chinese, the Chinese, the Ugly, the Ugly, the Ugly, and the Ugly, and then they are further subdivided...
This process takes a lot of time. The big classification is divided by three assistants. One assistant is only responsible for the beautiful. He is very happy, but the ugly one is also good, because he is a bit disgusting and interested in this, the one in charge is the worst.
In the beginning, our folder names were "beautiful beauty" and "beautiful ugliness". Later, there were "forgivable ugliness" and "unforgivable ugliness", and "unforgivable ugliness" was divided into "absolutely unforgivable". "And "Reluctance can still be forgiven." The names are getting longer and longer, more literary, and some are like poetry.
ImagePart of Song Tuo's classified folders

How do you shoot, are the people who were photographed willing?
Just like fashion street shooting, no nonsense, just shoot directly.
What's more, we are shooting video, which is the kind of single-screen video with the wheelbase from the front to the back. In fact, everyone who was photographed could notice that the girls I invited to shoot at the time did not look so perverted when they were photographed.
Why is there no first and second place in the edited version of "School Flowers", and there are no last few places?
on purpose. The most beautiful ones will not be put in, just treasure them and keep them for yourself. And the only people who can see the first place at the scene are me and the staff responsible for turning on and off the machine.
Generally, the videos on exhibitions are played repeatedly. I thought at the time that if there was a video that was only played once in the morning until the closing of the museum, it would be great. I cut this video for just eight hours, unless someone is a pervert or a fan. For this work, you can only watch it after opening the door at the entrance of the art gallery. When most people go to watch it, it has already been put in more than a hundred.
The last thing is too scary. In fact, they are also normal people. They are not the kind who have no arms, ears or only one eye, but they are very ugly, and others seem to be unsuitable. Few people will find that there can be 50 such ugly in a school, only in my art.
How to ensure the objective ranking?
I can only guarantee that it was objective in those few months. Later, I felt very embarrassed when I watched the exhibition. It should have been ranked out of 2,000, but at that time it was ranked 500.
After half a year, my taste has changed. I liked a certain type of girl very much, so I put this type of all in front. Later, I felt that this type of girl was a bit boring.
Ever wondered why you have the power to rate 5000 girls?
I have no power, I just make a work, and this work is not a real thing. I am ranked No. 3,500. It doesn't matter if you think that you are No. 1. You are happy.
Anyone can oppose my ranking, and only those who are high-pressure and have no room for opposition are called power.
Anyone can object, but how can I object? You have a greater right to speak, you have the opportunity to be exhibited, you have audiences, and you have funds. This is also a kind of power.
Yeah, what should I do.
But I think I still have the right to tell the truth. I think telling the truth is a very proud thing, really.
ImageSong Tuo subdivided and adjusted the ranking, and under the category of "beautiful", a range of "water" was drawn. According to Song Tuo's words, "Water is parallel imports, it is fake and inferior, it looks good, but it is actually A goods", but the specific standard, "the meaning is extremely rich, can only be understood!"

Do you think you hurt those ugly people?
It hurts, but she is like that in my eyes. I have to believe in myself, never compromise, and never compromise in my own eyes.
As if there is a male version of the list, how much do you think you can be ranked?
I never thought about it, I don't look in the mirror, I'm not so narcissistic.
What do you think about "objectified women"?
It doesn't matter to materialize women, everyone has a material side, and everyone is materializing others, regardless of gender. The key is that you have to materialize each other fairly, just like I ranked you 277th. I thought for so long, it's not that easy. There are thresholds for precise and responsible materialization.
I object to you with my heart and soul, which is also a kind of respect. I won't just say that you are ranked first, that is disrespect for you, that is clever rhetoric. And the last one, I put them in the right position, this is to respect her, especially respect.
You said you were a feminist before? What's the matter?
Yes, I named myself. As far as I think women should have power, the word "feminism" itself, I think it must be cool. And the feminist movement has exposed some bad people, which is really good.
But what I think is really stupid is that women's rights are divided very finely, and they also fight each other. People are no different at first. After adding physical sex, they are divided into two types. Then they add other classification standards, making it more complicated, and the correct place becomes narrower and narrower. Therefore, in order to be "right", they can only make some more correct decisions, but they are restricted. In fact, there is no need to make it so complicated, as long as there is a point of view.
If you are to say, then what is this point of view?
Women have power. Just these six words.
You call yourself a feminist, what have you done for the female community?
Anyway, I admit that I can only look at it from a male's point of view, I can't become a woman. I can't have that sensitivity when it comes to women's issues. What issues do women care more about? I can't get it. Women's innate sensitivity is something like a genius. Even if I had sex reassignment surgery, I couldn't reach that level. I also doubt the kind of man who pretends to know women well.
I feel that there is not so much understanding between people. It is more about fighting for rights and getting the other gender to compromise and accept it convincingly.
Do you mean that women should fight for their rights and let men accept and compromise?
Yes, women's rights can only be fought for by women, and men cannot empathize with each other and can only cooperate. Let's cooperate.
Image"One is worse than One", Song Tuo, 2013

In the following year after "School Flowers" was exhibited, Song Tuo planned an art practice called "One is worse than One". "One is not as good as the other" is the live version of "School Flowers". Song Tuo designated 44 female volunteers in the order of the show from beautiful to ugly in the background. According to Song Tuo's previous interview, "One is not as good as one" is "more fleshy" and "more physical" than "School Flowers".
Song Tuo has no desire to compete with others on legitimacy, and the artist does not have to assume the mission of promoting public order and good customs. Therefore, when he is questioned about the power difference between him and the girl who is being photographed, he can only frown and think about it. Helplessly spit out: "Yes, but what should I do?"
Ranking girls is Song Tuo's "first instinct wants to do", and his motivation is "fun". He didn't give much interpretation to the work, but he could feel it only by smelling that women's appearance is a sensitive and extremely tense physical material. It itself is an excellent metaphor for the inequality at the root of everything. It's anything. The most cruel truth that neither "correct" nor hypocrisy can pretend.
He felt that he had the right to tell the "truth". Indeed it is. Is he taking advantage of the power of himself and the girl being photographed? That's right. In this way, "School Flowers" can be regarded as an art project about rights and power. The exhibition we watched wants to express the former, and the invisible power that allows us to see this expression is precisely the latter.
The different experiences that this kind of viewing brings to people can also be explained: some people enjoy it, some people feel uncomfortable, some people think it is really awesome, some people think it is really boring, some people feel cruel, deep and fun, and some people feel uncontrollable anger. And disdain-On the one hand, these two reactions corroborate each other and become the two sides of the complex perception that art brings to people. On the other hand, Song Tuo's self-thinking "right of expression" has become a kind of dominating the whole event. It is even possible to disregard the "power" of the party's right to know, which also makes Song Tuo's mockery of the "political correct" power lose some legitimacy and power.
At the same time, Song Tuo's sensual, savage, and extremely grounded plan cannot circumvent the power relationship between the sexes. For men, the "female face" is a natural "object". A person who is used to looking at women can instantly understand the meaning of "cruel truth" in this ranking, while a woman who is in it and hates being looked at may be possible. Only feel the humiliation of being objectified. The spectator is in a different position in a power field, and the world he sees is of course different. As Song Tuo said, he cannot see a woman's perspective.
However, women's perspective is not singular, or only opposes "reification".
In Song Tuo's view, "being materialized" is inevitable. Various "materialization" standards fix the coordinates of human cognition like anchor points. Once adjectives exist, people cannot escape the fate of becoming described as "objects" and "objects." I quite agree, where is the sexual desire without "materialization"? The goal of love is man, and the goal of lust is the body, and the body is the thing.
In this way, the confrontation between "reification" and "male gaze" may have been a paradox. Diversity does not lie in the absolute avoidance of materialization, but in the creation of more diverse and tolerant "materialization" standards; equality does not lie in the complete elimination of male gaze, but in women also have the desire and mechanism to stare at men (fan circle culture is the product of female gaze , It's just the product of women staring at too little outlet).
Appearance is originally a resource. Human sociality is based on a process of circulating and exchanging oneself as a commodity. Song Tuo revealed this cruel truth. However, the appearance of women is often regarded as the most appropriate and stimulating material for expressing such subjects. This is also a cruel truth. I am very happy to be "materialized" as 277, but if I am 4277, I am a little bit reluctant to imagine.
Song Tuo's work seems to be a mockery of all hypocritical "correctness", as well as a reproduction and playfulness of a certain dilemma. I think his teasing itself is quite interesting. He certainly doesn't mind me saying this-the artist doesn't have to be "right", but he certainly wants to make people think.
After a lot of heart-to-heart, Song Tuo had a premeditated conversation and chatted with me about fashion. I just remembered that Song Tuo, who is no longer an artist, had reluctantly talked to me about art for a long time, because his original intention was to sell clothes.
"I think you are quite annoying. Otherwise, I will write a sentence at the end of the article. This man still sells clothes. If you want to scold him, buy it!"
"This is pretty good," Song Tuo showed admiration, "This idea leaves no trace. Yes, anyone who wants to scold me will buy my clothes. This slogan is very good. I will use yours."
"You steal my idea."
"I'll give you money." Song Tuo suddenly became serious.
Song Tuo wants to take a taxi to the train station, and then take the high-speed rail back to Shenzhen. Before I left, I told Song Tuo about the biggest dilemma I encountered in my short reporter career: "I actually don't know how to write interviews, and I always write people very disgusting."
"You can write me disgusting, it's okay." Song Tuo said, "People are disgusting."
A few weeks later, Song Tuo sent a WeChat request,
"But it can't be fake disgusting, I must be really disgusting."
After reading WeChat and looking at my own manuscript, I was worried that it was almost meaningless. So I finally decided to overweight and ask my colleague to imitate Song Tuo's project and give him a score. It should be noted that, because Song Tuo's database is too large, we only use quantitative index which is too thin, so we have to add qualitative data (ie comments) to supplement it. The photos and results based on the scoring are as follows:
Image
Image"Remove a highest score, remove a lowest score, Song Tuo has 5.4 points", VICE, 2019

Everyone can materialize each other, really~no~wrong~!
According to the interview we talk, he should have to put a Tide brand he founded two-dimensional code, but the editor said he did not give money to advertise what, so there is no two-dimensional code, but you can click here (or search public No. SONGTA) Learn about Song Tuo's fashion brand.

[dissolute ocelot]

If you did that sort of thing in a university psychology department, you'd be kicked out. Mark Zuckerberg did that as a computer science project and was shut down (he dropped out). Maybe art schools need ethics boards too? Street photography is generally legal (unless it's up someone's skirt and there are upskirting laws, or it's part of repeated harassment) but it's still morally dubious.

Years ago a friend of mine was joking about rating the hottness of each art school's male art students as an art project, but nobody would give her money. That would still be creepy and intrusive, but less so than doing the women.

[sevendaughters]

you always hope for an eloquent justification but thet article makes him sound like a massive pillock

[Buelligan]

It must be very unpleasant for the 5,000 women in the video and it does feel like toxic masculinity, to try to claim that taking videos of women without their knowledge, ranking them according to how attractive you find them and displaying them publicly is art.

And not just his direct victims.  All women.  Because when you know something like this exists, it reminds you that there are people out there who see you as animated flesh.  Watching you.  Othering you.  Judging you.  Even when you think you're safe.  Even when you're keeping your head down and being quiet.

What would happen if an artist made a film about Jews and ranked them by how closely they resembled his tropes and stereotypes?  Would that be OK?

[bgmnts]

Is everything art? Is a lamppost art? Is a really loud fart art? Is  a kinder bueno art?

[JaDanketies]

And not just his direct victims.  All women.  Because when you know something like this exists, it reminds you that there are people out there who see you as animated flesh.  Watching you.  Othering you.  Judging you.  Even when you think you're safe.  Even when you're keeping your head down and being quiet.

Perhaps if it it provokes emotion, and illustrates an unpleasant underside of society, then it's not 'absolutely fucking terrible art' even if it's still 'bad'?  It doesn't look like that was the artists' motivation for making it though - seems like the artist is kind of ignorant to what they're revealing about themselves (and society). Maybe this unintentional display of the artist's shitheadedness elevates the artwork above the most base level.

What would happen if an artist made a film about Jews and ranked them by how closely they resembled his tropes and stereotypes?  Would that be OK?

I'm not sure it'd be 'okay' but you could argue it illuminates something. Seems a lot more creative than ranking women.

Is everything art? Is a lamppost art? Is a really loud fart art? Is  a kinder bueno art?

Lamp-post - yes
Kinder Bueno - yes, on many different levels
Loud fart - depends if any effort was put into it

[Buelligan]

Perhaps if it it provokes emotion, and illustrates an unpleasant underside of society, then it's not 'absolutely fucking terrible art' even if it's still 'bad'?  It doesn't look like that was the artists' motivation for making it though - seems like the artist is kind of ignorant to what they're revealing about themselves (and society). Maybe this unintentional display of the artist's shitheadedness elevates the artwork above the most base level.

For Art to be important, IMO, the trick is to say something new or interesting and important.  We all know that women are treated in this way.  This is shit for cunts, a grey and unchanging continuation of millennia of mindless oppression by forgettable little pricks.

[Neomod]

Is everything art? Is a lamppost art? Is a really loud fart art? Is  a kinder bueno art?

I have done a series of art pieces on street furniture, beauty in the mundane and all that.

What this guy is doing is a crass as fuck but loads of art has been inspired by lust/desire so it's nothing new.

[Thomas]

It's like that art installation a few years ago that was (IIRC) just someone letting a dog starve to death slowly. Is it art? Sure why not. Is it animal cruelty that should be illegal? Yes.

Last night I was reading about Rick Gibson, a Canadian artist who - in addition to conducting public cannibalism and making dehydrated fetuses into earrings - planned to crush a live rat between two canvasses, producing a cruel and grisly diptych.

However, before he could go through with it, animal rights activists nicked his equipment. Gibson returned the rat to the pet shop, and one of the activists bought the rat before it could be fed to a snake.

Ultimately, in its recording, Gibson's subverted plan becomes an energetic caper, almost a living act of performance art in itself, with a conclusion and arcs for all involved - especially the rat (who was named Sniffy, for the record). Gibson's role says something about being cruel and shocking in the name of art, and the activists tell us something about our emotional attachments to individual animals. Sniffy, after all, was going to be fed to the snake anyway - but once rescued from art hell, an obligation was felt to save him from his original serpentine fate, too.

I'll conclude this animal-abuse-in-art tangent with a link to a recent thread on the subject.

[madhair60]

Of course it's art, it just sounds like really shit art. Whenever someone comes along with some immoral or moronic art piece like this it always triggers a lot of debate about "but what is art" and "what are the limits of art" and I just think it's besides the point - just because you're calling your thing a piece of artwork doesn't mean anyone has to like it, tolerate it, accept it, or think it isn't making the world worse.

It's like that art installation a few years ago that was (IIRC) just someone letting a dog starve to death slowly. Is it art? Sure why not. Is it animal cruelty that should be illegal? Yes.

It's not art and neither was the dog thing

[Dr Rock]

Is everything art? Is a lamppost art? Is a really loud fart art? Is  a kinder bueno art?

It's art if an artist produces it and says 'this is art'. The discussion is then is it good art, bad art, or fucking shit art.

[JaDanketies]

For Art to be important, IMO, the trick is to say something new or interesting and important.  We all know that women are treated in this way.  This is shit for cunts, a grey and unchanging continuation of millennia of mindless oppression by forgettable little pricks.

Yes. It's a bit like when Alan Partridge is pitching Monkey Tennis to the TV execs. "What about if, instead of rating women out of ten, we rated them out of.... FIVE THOUSAND."

[popcorn]

It's not art and neither was the dog thing

another brilliant "I am simply contradicting you bye" post, thanks for that.

[Thomas]

It's art if an artist produces it and says 'this is art'. The discussion is then is it good art, bad art, or fucking shit art.

Alan Partridge

[Fambo Number Mive]

If we go with Dr Rocks definition, I think we move on to does it matter whether something is art or not, and why is some art worth exhibiting and others not? Is it based on what people want to see?

Whether Song Ma's exhibit is art or not, it is toxic and anti woman and I'm surprised any gallery would exhibit it.The idea that people should know how this one man feels about 5000 women he sees is somewhat disturbing.

Although I dont like the Phwaroor thread, I think this is worse as it is far more publicised.

[Kankurette]

It is art, it's just not very good and an excuse for a perv to creep on women.

[JaDanketies]

For Art to be important, IMO, the trick is to say something new or interesting and important... This is shit for cunts, a grey and unchanging continuation of millennia of mindless oppression by forgettable little pricks.

Also works as a good critique of Westlife's cover of Uptown Girl.

[madhair60]

another brilliant "I am simply contradicting you bye" post, thanks for that.

nothing else needs saying when abuse is being dignified as art

[the science eel]

So according to the transcript, some of these women are categorised as 'absolutely unforgivable'?

Fuck's sake.