Added some green and some flesh tones.
Why is there so little art, especially abstraction, that directly engages in what it means to be alive, to be human in this, our time, the way Picasso, Matisse, or for that matter Monet and Manet, did in their time? Why do we not innovate instead of transform?
After reading this brilliant essay I checked out Stone’s work. I was disappointed to find that most of it just looks like a mashup of random female body parts.
Misogyny: every time I step out of women-only spaces I run right smack into it.
Just as a reminder to the budding artists out there:
This handy quiz will tell you if your image sexually objectifies women.
1) Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?
2) Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?
4) Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person that can’t consent?
5) Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?
6) Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity (something that can be bought and sold)?
7) Does the image treat a sexualized person’s body as a canvas?
Further explanation, including examples, can be found in the original blog post I quoted above, which can be found here.