Objectification

There’s a struggle right now between celebration and objectification. My new project “The Sacred and the Profane” continues to edge closer to search for the Feminine, and less into an exploration of what I am recognizing as very patriarchal religions – the ones from Jerusalem.

After staging large elaborate scenes and images I find the details more interesting than the whole. But if I take certain key elements, will I be understood? Will a naked woman – or simply an exposed part – be mistaken for a misogynistic image? I’ve been completely misunderstood once before, I was startled by it at the time, but have worried about it so much that I have second-guessed my creative choices. I know as an artist I should be free of what people think of my work… but I would be lying if I didn’t acknowledge an awareness.

Also, I’m moving from the Narrative to the Abstract, or so it seems…

3_web_sRGB

… and there is this …

2012 07 19 DARK Medea 13650_A3_360dpi_adobeRGB_sharpened_web_sRGB

… something like this …

2013 01 09 DARK Corinne Goddess2404_hochkantcrop_filter CROP web

Thoughts?

6 comments

  1. Ramin Moshrefi said:
    2013/05/25
    11:36

    wonderful, fantastic, beautiful, masterwork, love it <3

  2. mikekpr said:
    2013/05/25
    21:14

    Hi Yoram, these are beautiful and painterly, but I am curious as to your question on stepping away from religion and more into the feminine. To me these have more of the symbolism of the old religious days than a lot of your work (forbidden fruit, sacrifice, virginity – original sin). As a result, to me they present the feminine as symbolic of of spiritual beauty with a head-nod to vice. This to me seems almost condescending in today’s day and age, so I am really quite fascinated by your visual statement here. Nonetheless, it is beautiful work, as always, and my thoughts are merely that: one person’s thoughts.

    1. lettersfromberlin said:
      2013/06/01
      06:25

      Hi Mike, sorry it’s taken me so long to respond… You’re assessment is right. I’m making this difficult because I’m not really showing many images from the new series. But in a nutshell, the project started out as religious iconography, with a modern twist. Tell me which element you perceive as condescending, I’m interested… it seems like there is creative-fertile ground there… There is a nod to vice, but the real vices supersede Judeo-Christian religions. They are part of a human moral code, which supports the argument that morality is possible beyond religion – which in turn undermines religion’s self-professed raison d’etre.

  3. Benjo Arwas Photography said:
    2013/05/26
    02:01

    Yoram, ze madhim!

  4. Medea said:
    2013/05/31
    08:36

    who are the models???

  5. mikekpr said:
    2013/07/03
    10:18

    I think condescending was the wrong word. I guess I just find them very ‘religious looking’! I agree there is much to be made of the fact that morals can exist outside of religion (I mean, why not? You just subtract religion and faith and you still have the morals!). I guess the problem is, I sense actual religious iconography here (the wound in the side as in JC’s death, the innocent care for animals – very franciscan etc… not sure about the pomegranites! that one is out there! But I assume it revolves around the virgin image and thus nods at original sin…) Now of course these are the dominant mythologies of our age, so its almost impossible to sidestep them. Your work though is so painterly here that it almost could belong in an Italian cathedral! Perhaps there is no answer!! I think I give up! It’s beautiful work nonetheless and has got me thinking!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: