"Annie Lennox insists 'twerking is not feminism' and that modern music is 'disturbing' and 'exploitative' as she criticizes Beyonce
Annie Lennox has responded to recent comments she made about Beyonce, saying that the singer was not a 'feminist' but rather 'feminist lite'
The legendary Scottish singer told NPR that 'twerking is not feminism'
She went on to say she finds modern music today 'disturbing' and 'exploitative'
Annie Lennox does not seem to be a big fan of today's young pop stars.
The legendary Scottish singer, who found fame as one half of the internationally acclaimed group the Eurythmics alongside Dave Stewart, was asked in a recent interview to further explain comments she made earlier this year that Beyonce was not a 'feminist,' but rather a 'feminist lite.'
And Lennox did not hold back.
Scroll down for video
+6
Round two: Annie Lennox (performing above with Dave Stewart as the Eurythmics) has again spoken about her belief that Beyonce is not really a feminist in a recent interview
+6
SHARE PICTURE
+6
Putting it bluntly: Lennox (seen at the Grammys in 1995 on left and the 2004 Oscars on right) told NPR that 'twerking is not feminism'
'Listen, twerking is not feminism,' said the 59-year-old artist.
'It's not - it's not liberating, it's not empowering. It's a sexual thing that you're doing on a stage; it doesn't empower you. That's my feeling about it.'
In addition to Beyonce, twerking has been a big part of musical artists like Rihanna and Miley Cyrus' recent stage and music video performances.
In the interview, with NPR's Steve Inskeep, the singer also broke down just what her problem is with pop music these days.
'The reason why I've commented is because I think that this overt sexuality thrust -- literally -- at particular audiences, when very often performers have a very, very young audience, like 7 years older, I find it disturbing and I think its exploitative. It's troubling. I'm coming from a perspective of a woman that's had children,' she explained.
+6
Queen: Of course, the biggest twerker of all is Miley Cyrus (seen above performing with Robin Thicke at the 2013 MTV Video Music Awards)
This whole debate began when Lennox was asked what she thought about the 33-year-old labeling herself a feminist while on stage at the MTV Video Music Awards back in August.
'I just love her performances - but I'd like to sit down [with her]. I think I'd like to sit down with quite a few artists and talk to them. I'd like to listen to them; I'd like to hear what they truly think,' Lennox said at the time to Pride Source.
Lennox also seems to be well aware of how polarizing her opinion on the subject is, telling Inskeep at the end of their interview, 'Maybe this is a good thing because it creates debate.'
The singer was on the program to promote her new album, Nostalgia.
At a book-signing in Wellington, New Zealand today pioneering feminist Germaine Greer was ‘glitter-bombed’ by an LGBT rights group.
New Zealand group The Queer Avengers showered Greer in glitter to protest her ‘transphobic feminism’.
‘Transphobic feminism is so 20th Century,’ Stacey of the Queer Avengers stated on their website. ‘It wasn’t okay then and it’s not okay now. Women’s liberation must mean the right to refuse imposed gender roles, to fight for diverse gender expression.’
The group stated that Greer ‘has a history of denouncing transwomen; outing prominent transwomen and describing them as “ghastly parodies” of womanhood’. They were referring to Greer’s objection in 1996 that fellow Cambridge University academic Rachael Padman should teach at a women-only college when she was born a man.
‘Nowadays we are all likely to meet people who think they are women, have women's names, and feminine clothes and lots of eyeshadow, who seem to us to be some kind of ghastly parody, though it isn't polite to say so. We pretend that all the people passing for female really are. Other delusions may be challenged, but not a man's delusion that he is female.’
Kate Bornstein, American author and gender theorist, who identifies as neither male or female responded to Greer’s statement saying: ‘Germaine Greer's tragedy is that she has not considered as even possible the theory of gender fluidity’.
The Queer Avengers, who recently stormed Fairfax Media headquarters in Wellington for airing anti-trans statements, also handed out leaflets at Greer’s book-signing that said ‘transphobia is bullshit’. Greer was arrested in 1972 for saying ‘bullshit’ and ‘fuck’ during a speech on tour in New Zealand.
Tomorrow lunchtime The Queer Avengers are holding a press conference on media coverage of gender variance. "
My Thoughts:
Okay. I will be the first to say that I have a problem with the transgendered. But I know that its wrong, and biased, and unfair, and I am trying to work past that. The only reason for this is because when I discovered the guy I was about to marry was sleeping with the entire community of transgendered women from craigslist, the idea, the sight, of a man as a woman, literally made me feel illl, because all I could do was imagine in my mind, and wonder why that was what he wanted, and if any of what we had was real. But sooo over him, and for that reason, and slowly working my way past those feelings, its easy for me to see why what Germaine Greer said was wrong. I believe that being a woman, and believing in the ideals of gender equality, is accepting that we have a choice. And that choice is whether we choose to identify as a man or as a woman despite whatever parts we came with.
It seems to me like her views become so extreme that they become more about man hating, and discrimination, than upholding women's rights. To the point where she is neglecting a completely under represented group.
In a conversation in a group tutorial there was a discussion about whether we think gender should exist.
My response was yes, I do, because I am proud to be a woman, and I don't feel like that title shouldnt mean anything anymore. However, at the same time, I feel that gender and what is assigned to it is the problem, the stereotypes, expectations, discriminations, and limitations that come with it, are the problem. And getting rid of gender won't change that because people will just find another category to use to help them draw up the world into neat little boxes and labels.
What needs to change is openness, acceptance. And expectation: in that there should be none. (sorry Germaine, you need to get with the programme). In an ideal world, being a man, or a woman, or a human, should mean whatever we want it to mean, should come with a blank slate, with a choice each individual makes according to whats right and natural for them.
When the subject of my very pink clothing came up, it was mentioned that perhaps I am buying into what is being sold to me, as part of girly-ness, and innocence. But the fact is, again, that comes with my choice. That is simply what I am attracted to, and I would be attracted to it if I was a boy too, and I will be attracted to it when I am a granny, and it has nothing to do with what the world is trying to sell to me, or with what I am being told is 'male' or 'female. Because in fact, I feel like the world has been trying to sell me something different my whole life, something more serious and grown up, and it was never me and never will be. And neither, as my tutor thought, are my Pink choices a reaction of rebellion to any of that, to doing the opposite of what I am being told. The only reaction to the way I was raised and all the "you cannot"s I was given, was that for many years I tried to do exactly what I was being told I had to, and suppress all my inner pinkness. And no more. I am free now. And believing in woman's rights doesnt mean I have to reject what I find attractive. It means I have a choice. Yes morally I may object to what barbie does to female body image, and yes I would add a few pounds to her weight, but her eyes and her hair and her clothes and her malibu dream house and her pink convertible give me delicious chills, and its not because society told me I had to like it. I get to make that choice. And guess what, I like dinosaurs too. And I used take everywhere with me a huge hard rubber mammoth who's eyes used to light up red, and it was sleep in my bed next to a fluffy white cat plushy. (sad my mother threw it away)
I can be all these things, and love all these things, and still advocate womens rights, and still make work that says something MORE than that.
"Hannah Altman's photo series And Everything Nice is either an extremely pretty or an extremely ugly middle finger to society and the pressure it puts on women to look cute. We're not sure which. And that's the point. In her images, Hannah (a photography student from Pittsburgh) substitutes brightly colored glitter for an array of bodily fluids including blood, vomit and tears. The goal, she explains, is to draw attention to the deeply rooted instinct she sees in society to sanitise and ornament women's bodies. Women are not, her title implies, made of sugar and spice, and they're certainly not made of glitter.
Hannah spoke toi-D about what the series and its reception have meant to her.
What has the reaction to And Everything Nice been like since it went viral?
The feedback has been incredibly humbling and moving. Most importantly, I'm excited that such a wide audience is relating and reacting to the project. It seems like everyone from social activist magazines in Germany to BuzzFeed have readers that can relate to the images — which further proves the point that gender roles are an international issue.
Who are the women in the pictures?They're my best friends. We're all artists in our own rights, so when my roommates walked into the bathroom and saw me sticking glitter in my teeth (which was the first photo I shot from the series), they were all for it. I think the idea of using loved ones as a subject creates an intimacy in the photos that wouldn't exist otherwise.
What message do you hope the photos are spreading?The series is about giving an unflinching analysis of the standard for female beauty. These are women in states of affliction; their bodily fluids (including blood and vomit) have been replaced with glitter to help the viewer visualise the pressure that girls experience to be attractive regardless of what might actually be happening. It's a pictorial representation of the unreasonable standard of female beauty.
There's been a wave of young artists in the last couple of years who are outspoken about being feminists and making feminist art. What role do you think the internet plays in this new generation of feminism? And do you think that role is meaningful?Feminist artists have been creating work for all of history, but we have never been exposed to as many different ideas as we are now. The internet means these ideas are able to reach a larger audience than they ever have before. And I think this explosion of sharing really has created a stronger sense of community, which encourages female artists to speak out, in a real way, about oppression but also their triumphs.
Has the reception changed the way in which you work?The support I've received for the series has really opened my eyes to gender issues that exist on an international level. I love the idea of art being a universal way of connecting with each other. So in June I will be traveling to Israel to document creative work in artisan villages there. I'm excited for my work to continue to evolve as my awareness does!"
The series is an unflinching analysis of the standard for female beauty. The ongoing series consists of women in states of affliction. The body fluid of the models – which includes blood, tears, and vomit – has been replaced with glitter in order to visualise the concept of girls invariably needing to seem attractive regardless of what is actually happening in each scenario.
What message did you hope the photos would give?
The project is intended to be a pictorial representation of the unreasonable female standard of beauty. By creating set-ups that would normally be considered grotesque would it not be for the glitter, the sparkle stands out because it is the only facet of the photo that is abnormal. The women models do not seem to acknowledge the glitter as something any different than natural body fluid, which supplements the idea that women have been conditioned to go to any length in order keep up an attractive appearance. The project is meant to raise the awareness of such a ridiculous standard, and to question its morality."
The digital age of the selfie and iPhone apps that let you instantly edit your pictures and add manga/decorations
use of GIF
Bright, strong colours
Faded pixellated images taken with iphone-- amateur home-video style
Very little 'set up' in the images, the work to them to add things and make them surreal and stand out as added after
Interesting and unusual use of collage, creating strange juxtapositions
Illusion of "You can't buy me" film GIF, kept trying to click on it to play it, but i 'CANT'. Interesting concept that film and performance are something that is hard to buy or sell, artists who do this make very little money.
USE OF FILM!!!!! OMG YES YES YES
Use of overlaid imagery of home Selfie videos, with screen filming, filming her mundane actions and intimate behaviours
Her doing a makeup tutorial, lots of screen filming and capturing her behaviour and routine etc
A lot of self-examination : we live in a very self absorbed world, where everyone is fascinated with themselves, and with oversharing, and with the people on their tiny screens, celebrities, instagram and twitter followees and followers, living our life looking through lenses and screens and mirorrs, and the films and images really capture the ridiculousness of it, and give me a sense of voiyeurism as a watcher.
She was one of the first artists to sell the sort of DIY digital art that’s typically given away for free. She’s been called a “YouTube star” and a “Tumblr sensation.” Rolling Stone listed her as one of “50 Things That Millennials Know That Gen-Xers Don’t,” and whether or not you trust Rolling Stone as your authority on 20-something tastes, Molly Soda’s work epitomizes a powerful strain of the multimedia, curated, animated, interactive zeitgeist of the 2010s.
It’s not just the gallery scene that’s starting to embrace Molly Soda and the Net-centric group of artists with whom she shares her practice: in a list posted to BuzzFeed’s Community section, a user points out how Molly Soda’s self-exploratory, unapologetic, sometimes anarchic yet deeply sincere modus operandi has been the direction in which Miley Cyrus’s compass has been pointing during her Bangerz-era transformation from polished pop star to free citizen of the Internet.
I called Molly Soda at her home base in Detroit, and we talked about her college-town upbringing, her art-but-not-art-school education, and her busy schedule of present and future projects.
Let’s start from the beginning. I read that you grew up in Bloomington, Indiana, and your parents were both professors. What did they teach? Do they still live there?
Yes, and they’re still in Bloomington. They’ve been there for a long time. My dad’s a Spanish professor, and my mom’s in the Department of Speech and Hearing. Specifically, she’s in speech pathology.
How was it, growing up in Bloomington?
It was cool—pretty suburban. There’s a nice mix there. It’s a college town, and a liberal kind of place, which is cool because I had a lot of access to music and interesting things to do. When people think of Indiana, they think it must feel like the middle of nowhere, which it doesn’t.
And then you went to NYU. How did you decide to go there?
I wanted to get a degree in photography. When I was in high school, I didn’t even think I wanted to go into art at all, until I took a photography class at Indiana University, super randomly, and I became obsessed. I decided I wanted to do photography, and I started looking at schools that have photography programs but aren’t art schools. I didn’t want a program with a foundations year or anything like that. Once I was at NYU, I realized I didn’t only want to do photography—I started doing video work, Web design, and other stuff. When you’re 17 and trying to figure out what to do with your life, it’s overwhelming; I wasn’t open to other forms of art until I went to school and realized I can’t just think in pictures.
But you graduated with a degree in photography.
Yes, in 2011. My thesis project was Tween Dreams.
Then you moved to Chicago?
Yeah. I’d just graduated, and I didn’t want to stay in New York—I like to move around quite a bit. I wanted to move somewhere new, to live in a different city and see how it was. I knew some people in Chicago, so I moved there. I enjoyed it; I was there for two years.
And you moved to Detroit, in fall 2013. How did that happen?
It was the most impulsive move I’ve ever made. I didn’t plan on moving here. I had just quit my retail job in summer 2013, and I decided I wanted to support myself full-time as an artist. I was working at a vintage store, and I sort of realized I wasn’t making as much work and I wasn’t as happy with it. I decided I’d rather make what I like and be broke. My lease had ended and I’d just broken up with a serious boyfriend, so all things were pointing for me to move. I’d been to Detroit once, super randomly, in February 2013—I went to a monster truck rally. I met some people and I went back to visit, and I enjoyed Detroit so much that I decided to say.
Has it been good, living in Detroit?
Oh yeah, 100%. Everything fell beautifully into place when I moved here. I was super broke and living out of a duffel bag for a while, but then I started putting more work out and people were receptive—I started getting more of a response.
Is there a strong artists’ community there?
Detroit’s pretty amazing. It’s super small-town vibes, in a way. Everyone’s great, very receptive and supportive. Not all of my friends are artists, but everyone’s super genuine and sincere. It’s an easy place to make friends: there’s no air of pretension, no social climbing, no exclusivity or VIP parties. You don’t feel like people are always sizing you up—I always felt that in New York. There are good vibes here, good energy. Everyone’s very positive, willing to help—willing to be a friend.
Is the community of artists growing?
I think so. As an artist, I live here cheap. It’s low-key. I travel a lot, so it’s nice to have this be my home base. People aren’t as ready to move here, though, because the city itself has such poor infrastructure and there’s not a lot of opportunity. There’s no public transit, no high-paying jobs. It’s not a high-density city, and that’s less inviting to some people.
You’re known as a photographer, a blogger, a GIF maker, a YouTube star…the list goes on. How would you describe yourself now?
I think I’m a bit of a performance artist. The work that I do, the way I interact with people on the Internet, is very performative. When you think of “performance,” you think of things that aren’t sincere, but what I do isn’t fake. I’m super stoked with the reception I get online. I feed off people seeing my work; I feed off my social media interactions. It’s positive reinforcement, and even when it’s not positive, it’s a push to keep me going.
How would you say your work has changed over the years?
It’s just become more all-encompassing. Before, when I was in school, I was doing things for school. I took a video art class, and a Web design class…my mind was blown by websites that existed purely as pieces of art, like 90s Net art. I was super interested in the idea that you could have a picture that wasn’t a painting or a photograph: something that just existed for the Internet. None of the work I’ve made recently, apart from zines, has been physical. I wouldn’t call myself a photographer, though there are images involved in my work: I’m not shooting on a nice camera, I’m not making prints.
Do you think the art world is catching up with your style of work?
It’s come a long way. I think that before, I would never have understood how or why anyone would want to buy digital work. I’ve sold a decent amount of my work, so people are more receptive—but it’s not commonplace. A lot of digital artists still incorporate physical media: a lot of artists will still do paintings, but digitally. Paintings, prints, things they can sell…which is smart, and I’m not against that in any way. I don’t mind things being physical, but what enticed me about digital art was access. Because you have these tools readily available to you, and you don’t have to go buy expensive equipment, it’s lowbrow in a way that’s important and special.
I can make work and anyone can see it, which is really important to me. There are artists who make more physical pieces that I enjoy, but being in a gallery is its own thing—a bit stuffy. There’s something intimate about being on a computer watching a video—it’s more private, and more comfortable. I’m reaching people in a different way.
What’s something someone’s said about your work that made you think, “They don’t get it,” and, on the other hand, something that’s been said that you agree with?
The interesting thing is that when people are negative about me, they’re mostly negative about me as a person—not so much about the work, because the work is so much tied in to me. My YouTube page has like 300 videos of me doing whatever—and it’s me, so people feel like they know me, and that’s fine, I don’t mind. It’s hard to explain, but most people who are negative are commenting more about what I’m doing personally than what my work is saying to them.
In terms of positive reactions, one of the most interesting things that’s been said was in an interview, when someone described the work as “emotional labor” or “intimate labor.” I’d never thought of that, but I researched the phrase and it’s about people who do work that is personal in a way that’s comforting…just someone existing in a way that’s very personal. This idea of intimate labor just seems interesting—I feel like it’s my job to be someone that’s there to help people, in a way. I feel it’s almost my responsibility to be sincere, honest, open with people. It sparks a nice chain reaction of sincerity, love, and openness. If I’m talking about something that makes me insecure, that sparks a chain reaction—people say thank you for putting into words what I’ve been feeling.
You’ve been at the center of some interesting debates about image and ownership on the Internet, but your philosophy seems to be “make something first, figure the money part out later.” Does that sound right?
Yeah, definitely. I’ve always been like, yeah, this is what I’m going to do and I hope people will want to buy it. My approach has been money-later, but I’ve been lucky.
What artists do you most admire? Who influenced you?
A lot of people. Ryan Trecartin’s videos inspired me to pursue making video-based work. They’re consistently good, they’re perfect. Other people who have inspired me are other female artists who are online doing their own things. Petra Cortwrightis someone who made me realize it’s possible to make money from being a digital artist. I’m just constantly into other people I want to collaborate with. I like the Internet because it allows access to so many artists—I don’t shy away from that.
So what gets you out of bed in the morning? What do you enjoy most?
I get excited about everything. I get excited about making work in general, so I start a lot of new projects and that can cause me to spread myself thin: I’ll start working on a project, and then haphazardly forget about it. The biggest thing, for me, is to just keep a good living situation. I’m not going to make work if I’m depressed. I get excited by my interactions online—reading e-mails, just silly stuff—but I like interacting with people IRL too.
What projects are you working on right now?
I’m working on curating a show with my friend Vivian Fu, who’s a photographer living in California, and another artist named Arvida Bystrom. The three of us are working on getting a show together, but we’re just in the beginning stages—the show is hopefully happening in the fall. I’m also getting ready to go to SXSW, where I’m going to be on a panel called “Making Art While Entertaining the Internet.” I’m planning a bunch of other stuff to do while I’m there. I’m working with New Hive to curate a show that’s going to happen in a hotel room—it will be an all-day thing, like a lounge situation.
I’m working on more video pieces…I’m working on a series of videos where I follow YouTube tutorial videos. I’m doing a bunch of “natural” makeup videos: no-makeup makeup videos. I’m interested by the idea of pretending to be natural, of faking naturalness, of trying to blend in, of faking intimacy—the idea of working at something that should come naturally. The videos have been a financial investment too, since I’m buying all the products to see how much it costs to “be natural.” That’s ongoing, and next Tuesday they’ll all officially go live on New Hive. That’s been kind of fun—just an idea that popped into my head that’s been cool. My perspective on the videos has changed a bit. At first, I thought they were funny, but I like how much love and care each girl puts into her face—which is beautiful. I’ll put the same care in, but I look and feel different. I’m interested in different ideas of what makes different women feel comfortable and natural.
Where do you see yourself in ten years?
I hope I’ll be doing something similar, but maybe a bit more established. I don’t know…in ten years, I would like to be owning my own house. Being comfortable, warm and fuzzy. I can’t say. Even two years ago, I wouldn’t have imagined I’d be who I am today. Mentally, I feel like my life has changed so much, even my work has evolved a lot, so I don’t even know where I’ll be in ten years: that’s an overwhelming question. I feel really comfortable with where I am now, and hopefully in ten years I’ll feel even better."
