It's so hard to explain to people why every piece can't be Super-beautiful.
I'll get questions from disturbed friends and relatives like... "But why she bleeding!?" or "But why she face so serious?" and the inevitable... "But you think people will want to see that?"
The what-people-want-to-see business is iffy for me. Some of the paintings, poems, movies etc that have truly affected me were those that unsettled me, troubled me, hurt me.... those that I did not want to see.
So, I usually smile, and tell the person that the subject of the piece (usually, some large-eyed woman) doesn't have to be beautiful in order for the piece itself to be beautiful. But then, that doesn't work for me either. Because I usually think that my big-eyed girls are fascinating, and gorgeous.
The word "Beautiful" with a capital "Bee" gets so tiring.
And the older I get, the less it seems to matter. I find people most appealing when they are least fancied up, least posed. And I find my big-eyed girls beautiful when they are broken, growing trees from their bellies, and bleeding streams of colour.
Because, honestly, show me someone real who isn't broken, growing trees, or bleeding colour in one way or another.
It's all beautiful. :)
~D
I love this so...I would love to have all of Frida Kahlo's work, & when asked why (because of it's obvious disturbing subject matter) I said seeing her actively fighting her pain makes me want to continue to fight mine. Your work is gorgeously real & stunning!
ReplyDeleteThank you!! That's why I love Frida too.
ReplyDelete"Because, honestly, show me someone real who isn't broken"--this. Yes. And really, we (some of us, myself included) spend so much time and energy masking the brokenness and patching things badly in a futile effort to not appear that way. Then things fall apart at the seams that weren't properly stitched back to begin with and we wonder why.
ReplyDelete