Sunday, October 29, 2006


1. There's a story circulating in the art world about a Holocaust survivor who wants the works she made for Dr. Mengele back, and the museum at Auschwitz won't give them to her. The story is, Dr. Mengele needed to illustrate his "theories" about Gypsies, and the photographs he had weren't good enough. He approached this woman to make a series of paintings for him. She agreed, but in exchange, he had to protect her and her mother from the gas chamber. He agreed. They lived, and he got his paintings. They are on display at the museum in Auschwitz. She wants them back. They won't give them to her. Now, if it were any other situation, I might be siding with the museum. Technically, those paintings were commissioned works, and thus the ownership lies with Dr. Mengele (or at least his estate.) However, THIS WAS NOT VOLUNTARY. She could either make these paintings, or die. As my boyfriend so aptly put it, "if you get mugged, and they catch the person who robbed you, you get the money back. Yes, you gave them your stuff, but it wasn't voluntary." The curators are arguing that her paintings are helping to illustrate Auschwitz, that these paintings are a part of Auschwitz history. Auschwitz was not a fucking children's book! It doesn't need illustrations! To use these paintings to "illustrate" life at Auschwitz is no better than how Dr. Mengele wanted to use them in the first place. Those paintings tell a story that, while I think it should be told, it should be told at the discretion of the artist. Simply tacking those on a wall could never come close to revealing their true meaning than if she were to present them herself, if she chose to show them. And if she decided to keep them, hide them, burn them, or somehow prevent anyone from ever seeing them again, that's fine too. Can you just imagine what those paintings might mean to her? What they represent? Good or bad, they must be incredibly intense. Now, in situations like this, emotion and sentiment rarely play a role. I appreciate that the curators are loyal to the stories their museum is trying to tell, but their lack of sensitivity to the circumstances, and more importantly, their blatent stupidity with the lack of realization that, you know, maybe she didn't actually want to make these paintings because, you know, they were terribly hateful and she would DIE otherwise, just baffles me. Goddamn it.

2. My shoots on Friday averaged out to be only so-so. One was good, one was bad, there was lots of exhausting travel and that bus accident, but I got a good shot for the magazine, which I desperately needed. I have a lot of mixed feelings, but I think it'll make for a good story. A good story that will be included in the book....

3. The book is going well. A little slow, a little directionless, but right now, I'm more concerned about just getting it all out on paper. I'm thinking it will be divided into two sections, one section on stories about actual shoots and pictures, and one section on thoughts and essays regarding erotic art.

4. I've received about 15 emailes from people about modeling, but I haven't actually scheduled anything yet, including anything for my interview. My fingers are crossed.

5. I have five masturbation portraits done, and I'm looking for a few more. My deadline is Tuesday, but I should be fine. They look good.


Post a Comment

<< Home