MODERN DANDY

(Slides 1-3)

The dandy–conventionally defined as a strikingly attractive man whose dress is immaculate and manor is dignified–has been around since the late eighteenth century. Often misunderstood as superficial, the dandy is rather a space of creative possibility where men and women can perform a persona in ways that reach far beyond the narrow binary constructs of masculine and feminine. Indeed artists like Oscar Wilde, Charles Baudelaire, H.H Monro and less recognized women such as the American painter Romaine Brookes and her cohorts found Dandyism to be a liberatory space not only for appearance but more importantly, for a life of independence that did not necessarily adhere to a deterministic heterosexual model of marriage and children. Examples of modern dandies include Andy Warhol, Quentin Crisp, Grace Jones, Tilda Swinton and Janelle Monae. My many years focusing on gender, race and constructions of beauty led me to dandyism as a radical position for art making and social critique. Indeed, dandyism’s subversive aesthetic of beauty disrupts normative gender in fascinating ways. Beauty is defined in almost all contexts as the domain of femininity which is commonly understood as frivolous, weak and passive. The dandy is neither traditionally feminine or masculine. Rather, the dandy is an aestheticized androgyny available to men, women and transgender individuals. Herein lies it’s power and it’s danger.

ON BEAUTY

(Slides 4-6)

From the series On Beauty which looks at the gendering of aesthetics and how the concept of beauty is tied to sexual objectification. I utilized male models–living representations of idealized masculinity–in order to explore the semiotics of the construction of gender. I was curious to see what the result would be if I photographed men using the unspoken rules that dictate the way women are conventionally posed in photographs and paintings. As viewers, can we look at aestheticized vulnerability without inserting a gendered, sexual agenda onto it? What does a rejection of the feminized man reveal about misogyny?

I am interested in the gendering of aesthetics and how the concept of beauty is tied to sexual objectification. I utilized male models–living representations of idealized masculinity–in order to explore the semiotics of the construction of gender. I was curious to see what the result would be if I photographed men using the unspoken rules that dictate the way women are conventionally posed in photographs and paintings. Shorter than most of the models, I used a to ladder to shoot them from above while directing my subjects to look at me only with a soft expression. Mostly I asked the models to look away– to be looked at. I asked them to hold their arms close to their bodies as if they felt vulnerable. This was not 'natural' for them. In my photographic approach, I strove to uncover aspects of their masculinity which might otherwise be downplayed for fear of appearing effeminate. The tactics of revealing a man's body, directing his emotions into the realm of what is considered feminine, while posing him in a relatively prone position resulted in a non-normative display of masculinity. As viewers, can we look at aestheticized vulnerability without inserting a gendered, sexual agenda onto it? Do beautiful men fall victim to the virgin/whore dichotomy or does their masculinity protect them from this reduction? What does a rejection of the feminized man reveal about misogyny?