Katter vs Katter

This is the image that has sparked so much controversy in the lead up to Queensland's election next week. It was used in a television advertisement by Bob Katter of the Katter Australian Party against Campbell Newman. The photograph in question was taken by a photographer who had no idea his image would be used to discriminate against the friends of his he was photographing,

I believe this quote sums it up correctly:
"this is not about political correctness. Katter did not get permission to use this image of these people. Why? Everyone knows you cant publish without a consent release - and this goes to the core of the issue - Katter doesnt see gay men as real people, as worthy of getting their consent...it shows how lowly people like Katter think of gay people and its this level of disconnect which also explains why people like Katter just dont understand gay marriage. Katter is the issue here not gay marriage or being politically correct."

Bob Katter's half brother has responded to the issue with this advertisement, which I think is extremely calm, reasonable and educated:

I think of this issue in light of other recent events. Namely the terror against minority groups in Iraq and  the graffiti attack on the office of Labor MP Curtis Pitt.

To be honest, my initial response was to think that people for gay marriage are organising rallies, and support days, and people against gay marriage are making illegal attacks, and taking advantage of situations that have no merit to their politics to get ahead in polls. I know which side I'm taking.

*Videos and images embedded from respective websites.

Cartoon Supermodel: Polly Bean

Meet Polly Bean, the first Cartoon Supermodel by Neil Kerber.

*Images sourced from above link, credited to Neil Kerber.

Primary Research

I was thinking about the Rally for Marriage Equality, and how mostly everyone took it as an opportunity to dress up and show their "true colours" in the company of people who also shared their views. I began thinking - what would we wear if we had no fear of judgement?

I asked a few people to describe for me what they would wear in an environment where they had zero inhibitions, zero fears of judgement and zero desire to fit in with social norms. Here are some visual representations of the answers I got:

 

Interestingly I feel like I got two variants of responses - those who would simply not bother with clothing or wear pyjamas and baggy shirts, or those who would be wearing traditional clothing from different eras, or extravagant styles or clothes worn by famous historical icons. Few people said they would wear things in between the two extremes - nobody said they would simply want to wear a t-shirt and jeans. So if our desire lies in the two extremes, why does the general population end up somewhere in the middle?

I asked this too, and most people seem concerned with social conventions, dressing in what makes their body look good, the expense of extravagant clothing, or lack of practicality. It seems we're not seeing people's true nature through their clothing.

*All images sourced from Google.

Self Esteem - Narcissistic?

I read this article on the push for body image equality last week.

The way I read it, the author seemed to be saying that total body image equality as being pushed by the feminist society, is equal to narcissism. This concept outraged me - firstly self esteem is not necessarily just a feminist ideal - it's a human right. Self esteem is a huge part of a person's mental well being, and every single person has that right.

Obviously a person who is well outside the range of "health" is not going be conventionally beautiful. But beauty is, or at least, theoretically SHOULD BE a subjective term. Healthy is an objective term - it can be brought down to numbers and medical researched opinions, but beauty is not objective. The author seems to be saying that telling someone who is very overweight they're beautiful is wrong because they should be trying to change the fact that they're overweight. Okay, but generally people need to have self esteem in order to better themselves. Someone who is already overweight in all likelihood has self esteem issues already stopping them from helping themselves. Generally, someone who feels beautiful on the inside, as a whole, is going to be able to try harder to make themselves healthy (and thereby conventionally beautiful) on the outside.

Also, the above only relates to weight in terms of unhealthiness. A person with certain illnesses or disabilities with which they were born, which put them outside the ideal of conventional beauty, technically cannot seek to better themselves. Should we really be excluding them from the ability to feel beautiful? I really think not - in fact that probably borders on discrimination.

Lastly, we're assuming that beauty is merely a physical attribute, when it is certainly not.

I think my point is that there are things people think, things that pass through everyone's head, that should never be said outloud. Okay, so we're constantly fed images of what it beauutiful and what is not, and you pass someone in the street who plainly does not fit those characteristics. It's fine to think that, it's not fine to say it. And I think this author is pushing that boundary.

Word of Words

Words associated with my project:

Polemic - Contentious - Controversial - Remonstrance
Dogmatic - Political - Opinionated
Critical - Satirical
Protest - Debate - Confrontation - Defiant
Assertive - Guerilla - Unconventional - Radical
Ideological - Idealistic - Quixotic
Revolutionary - Ground-Breaking
Dangerous - Unafraid
Rebellious - Daring - Challenging - Provoking
'Rebel-with-a-Cause'
Provoke - Evoke - Rally
Stimulate - Activate
Stimulate - Inspire - Motivate - Instigate
Prompt - Propel - Elicit

Rebellious 

Confrontational

Revolutionary 

Guerilla

Instigative

*All images embedded from original URL.

Back to Basics

I need to research Satire itself. So What exactly do I already know?


"Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.^[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.
A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"^[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, and media such as lyrics."

"Because satire criticises in an ironic, essentially indirect way, it frequently escapes censorship in a way more direct criticism might not. Periodically, however, it runs into serious opposition, and people in power who perceive themselves as attacked attempt to censor it or prosecute its practitioners." -From Wikipedia.

"It may be objected here that not all satire is meant to be corrective, because satirists occasionally attack foibles or failings basic to man's nature which cannot be changed, or for which change is unlikely. But it can be argued in reply that such satire of inexpungible vices is still corrective, for it seeks to establish proper moral attitudes toward those vices. For example, if it be impossible to rid men of jealousy or egotism, the satirist will try to make men despise those feelings, resist them, and cease encouraging them. In cases where the satirist ridicules man because of the necessity for eating or elimination, or some other condition basic to man, he seeks to correct man's view of himself--to reduce mankind's pride by reminding him of his limitations and his humble human lot." From the Purpose and Method of Satire

The only satire I've actually studied is George Orwell's Animal Farm, and a little of The Onion in high school, and of course it's common knowledge that The Simpsons and South Park are satiric comedies often mistaken for children's programs. But I didn't know that Catch-22 or Lord of the Flies were also considered satire, both of which I've read/ seen and possibly need to do so again.

Some other interesting satire: The Polish Beer Lover's Party, The Slate, L'il Abner.

A few pieces that caught my eye: Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie arrive on Oscar red carpet 12 hours early, Tattoos gone wrong: Permanently lost in Translation, Runway Caption Contest.

There seems to be plenty on satire at the uni library, which I'll check out tomorrow.

"I Do" Support Marriage Equality

Today was I DO day! Lots of inspirational photos from Australians who support marriage equality.

[All images sourced from the I Do Day facebook page]

And some meaningful words from George Clooney;

“One day the marriage equality fight will look as archaic as George Wallace standing on the University of Alabama steps keeping James Hood from attending college because he was black,” he reasons. “People will be embarrassed to have been on the wrong side.”

“Every time we’ve stood against equality, we’ve been on the wrong side of history… It’s the same kind of argument they made when they didn’t want blacks to serve in the military, or when they didn’t want blacks to marry whites.”

A Political Standpoint

It has come to my attention, from my classes today on correct professional practice, that anything posted on the internet is essentially published on a public arena. It's not that I didn't know this fact before, but rather I didn't know the real consequences that can come from speaking out against or "rubbishing" for lack of a better word, another person or their work.

Now, my project is going to force me to tread carefully on this issue. I am seeking to satirise and criticise the fashion industry. That is not going to earn me a lot of friends through popularity. Obviously, the goal of any designer/ artist is not to alienate the design world. So I wanted to write a post specifically on this issue, to illustrate my particular standpoint.

I have constantly heard over the last few days that industry professionals are seeking graduates with creative innovation that looks forward and comes up with ideas that could change or revolutionise their field of work. This is precisely my intention, and my only intention. I endeavour to contructively criticise the industry through way of social and psychological commentary that seeks to make individuals and industry question the way they practice. I realise that in undertaking such a project, I am taking a political standpoint on certain issues.

What I do not intend, is to put down or rubbish any specific product/ work/ brand/ individual or company, but rather to politely highlight the realities of what it means to be a designer/ artist/ student/ company/ model/ photographer/ advertiser or any other person who works in or comes across the industry of fashion in an increasingly consumerist world. I truly hope my work will be taken positively, and in the spirit in which it was created. If it is not, I am entirely happy to revisit my work and take a look at it from another's perspective. Please contact me if there is a need for me to do so.

I am a student, and that means I'm on a journey of learning. I hope I can be forgiven for anything I may do wrongly that is part of that learning process. I am currently researching the details of differences between educated satire and unsubstantiated denoucing or accusation. I will be holding myself and my work accountable to be polite and constructive.