What would it be like if you knew your partner the way you know yourself?
What would it mean if you saw yourself act in different situations? To kick the other and watch yourself shrink back in pain, anger or disgust? One tends to stick to certain rules in a relationship with an other person, not to cross certain lines, but why would you hold back in any way when the other is you?
there is an Italian renaissance painting of two sisters, half naked, and one pinches the nipple of the other; it was of course convention that people could be pictured naked in paintings, but that would be mostly when the model was playing the role of a figure that was mythical in one sense or another. The sisters were pictured as themselves, and though sexual acts between women were probably so extraordinary that this painting could easily be made without generating fantasies, it does make me wonder what it could all have meant. Nothing? Or was intimacy between women as much a standard fantasy among men then as it is now? Was there a short period during the Italian renaissance where all fantasy was open? I guess I should re-read the Decamerone for advice.
But all this is now becoming too Italian. The photo is definitely a reference to the painting, but as you can see from the other photos intimacy between the two versions of myself also became physical. Fear of others is one main reason, much more than narcissism. Or maybe I'm kidding myself and this is a study in failed narcissism, and fear of others is just part of that.
endless accounts by psychologists on why people are fascinated by Napoleon Bonaparte. I haven't studied those accounts, and I wonder if they would be accurate about an 8 year old boy.
There are large numbers of websites, or rather fansites, for people all over the world who adore Napoleon. You would expect older men and younger men, but I was surprised to find young girls declaring their love for the emperor. I am currently making a film with one of them, a film in which she can tell her story to him. She was less interested in the Napoleonjacket my mother made for me when I was 8 years old.
Me next to Napoleon, edited into a filmstill from the 1970's
The mimicking of Napoleon's expression did not work out perfectly, which is fine, as I would not be able to mimic his character. Not that, by now, I would want to. I am sure a number of ambitious artists share some of his characteristics, and so will many other ambitious people. And many younger people, I should think, would crave the attitude and strength that makes one able to turn the world upside down. To make my own world was my fascination.
The mimicking itself was the point. Nevetheless: I cheated with the means a photo-artist has: my tongue is Napoleon's
In "Balls of the Angel" Tijs Goldschmidt writes how horses in Iceland drop their faeces over the faeces of other horses in order to establish their dominance. The practical goal is to erase the scent of the other with one's own. Now there are horses that are dominant and show it this way, and there are horses that may make an attempt at dominance. Would there be horses that are simply vengeful? Are there horses with a mistaken conception of their own strength?
Goldschmidt makes a link with artists that make an attempt at other people's work (that's where I feel spoken to). An unknown Belgian artist who uses a Magritte canvas because there is nothing else to paint on, and erases Magritte with his own crap. A young Russian artist who sprays a dollar sign over a Malevich; an important artistic event or the attempt of an inferior to attack the dominance of the master? Robert Rauschenberg who erased a Willem de Kooning drawing, mostly a conceptual act because he first asked de Kooning for his permission.
There is a lot to do about the new and the former generations of artists. In many cultures the young are supposed to look up to the masters and follow their example. At my academy, the young were supposed to poop over the scent of those who had last established the rules.
What can I say? I have no wish to erase Satyricon, which to me is the film of films. I had rather be part of it. I would love to take it over, but I'm not ready yet to do anything but cooperate, to integrate. My steps have been carefully taken, maybe too carefully. But they have been taken, and I'm waiting for the right moment to share dominance.
