Bestiary

Bestiaries were popular during the Middle Ages, as people, scientists in particular, worked to build systems of classifications, so that humans could then "possess" knowledge about those beings/things which were classified.  A bestiary is a compilation of knowledge about beasts, or, to put it more concretely, a natural history encyclopedia about animals, that sometimes included birds or even rocks.  These volumes were considered valuable, because each illustration or description was usually followed by some form of a moral lesson.  Therefore, the bestiary, itself, was inherently tied to Western Christianity, and often contained references to the Septuagint or the Bible.  I see this not only as a way to classify creation from a religious standpoint, but also as one of the avenues through which classification became consumed in a moral language--thus often leading to narratives of "good" and "evil", "clean" and "unclean," etc. 

This is why the work of Mateo de la Rioja is quite interesting.  He has filed his erotic photography under the title of "Bestiary."  He calls his work an "incomplete bestiary," and claims to be merely documenting human beings as the "beasts" that they are.  That entails,  de la Rioja explains,  "exploring their frailty, their capriciousness and their tenderness."  In his work one sees the revelation of human passion and desire, as well as human fear and vanity.  What makes his work interesting is that, unlike the bestiaries of a time long ago, there is no moral lesson.   Sex is natural.  The body is natural.  Desire is natural.  These concepts are not cast as "sinful", "dirty," or "immoral" in his photographs. These concepts become the objects of beauty; a way to view life as mysterious and magnificent when viewed through the lens of his camera.

There are some criticisms, of course. His work is predominantly heteronormative.  That is, most of the photographs that depict sex are between men and women. That, however, does not mean that they can be enjoyed and appreciated by one gender. At the same time, there is always the classic feminist anti-porn narrative, in which these photos could be read as the objectification of women and men.  I, however, reject that particular narrative concerning these photographs.  The purpose of a bestiary is, in a sense, objectification.  In many of the photos, the intent does not appear to be one of domination of a body, whether it is male or female, but rather the glorification of bodies, both male and female, as both beautiful and natural.  This can be identified in just the titles of the three photographs I have used in this post: 1) The Trinity; 2) Under Her Mantle; 3) Lunar Ascendancy.

So, feel free to be appalled at all the genitals and caught scenes of copulation, if you like. I, however, appreciate any attempt made to make us comfortable with our bodies, and all attempts to make us realize that sex IS NOT shameful and something secret to be hidden and discussed in dark corners.

Bodyscapes

I don't remember where I first came across the work of Jessica Harrison, but have been intrigued with it for some time.  Her work pushes understandings about the body, the body's connection to materiality, and the body's relationship to space.    In a description of her philosophy behind her work she states:


"The things I make are about the body: the body in space, the space within the body and the space in-between the two.  The body is something we all share in one shape or form, the filter through which we all experience the world around us and the objects in front of us."  


I think it also points to the cyborgian relationship human beings have created with "things."  Our possessions or things come to be a part of who we are; a part of how we define ourselves.  Some of her work literally uses recognizable pieces of the human body to construct everyday objects.  In many ways it appears absurd, but is still recognizable as something utilitarian and normal.

Harrison further notes that her work is about experimenting with boundaries:


"I am exploring the significance of surfaces in our construction of knowledge through making and experimenting, playing on our instincts and assumptions built from an historical optical hierarchy and propensity to touch what catches our attention. Our surfaces do not just act as boundaries between our inside and outside, between ‘us’ and ‘that’, but play the most vital role in our perceptions of the world around us.  The objects I make attempt to unpack these perceptions and interrupt these interfaces to bring our assumptions to the surface."


Her objects serve as a point of rupture, where we question what we are seeing and feel discomfort from the disruption of normalized boundaries related to the body, to death, and to the ordinary.  If only I still owned my dollhouse from when I was a child.....