(click the red icon in the lower right hand corner, or press the “F” key at any time, to switch to the full screen version)
Victor Ben Tzvi – Israeli Women
ISRAELI WOMEN is a photo-poem in developing stages about western woman in the modern cultural climate; a dialogue between the phenomena and the abstract feminine essence. The project is not a candid documentary work uncovering the phenomena through personal stories. In fact, my sitters are Personages – synthesis of their authentic characteristics and thematically attributed narratives. In a way, the Personage becomes an idealized figure, reflecting my imagination and their own rarely exhibited self-perception. Through these vibrant photographic masks, i want to simultaneously represent motives of woman glorification and women disposition in modern society.
Our eclectic cultural ground, with existential tension, a largely superficial use of overwhelming information, lead us to a complicated and at times absurd positions. The position of modern woman is not immune from complexity either. Some fighters for women freedom disregard the notion that motherhood is at least as feminine as the most powerful man-like career. Others trying to isolate woman’s sexuality from women, although few women who would not like to be femme-fatale, or at least attractive by instinct. Paradoxically, during those loud and barking tones, women became not only plain sexual objects, but consumeristic dolls selling skinny sex with anything at hand. Sometimes, it feels as though women freedom became a matter of dogmatism and demagogy, rather than liberal rights and beliefs. Other times it feels as though the feminine grace and charisma is getting either faint or rare. By the way, “charisma” translates from greek as “god-given-gift”.
In my current projects, including the Israeli Women, I have adopted a position of “idealism in art”. In practice, I am not looking to literarily express my criticism of psychological, social, and philosophical aspects of human affairs in the contemporary western culture. With in-depth studies of the beautiful and the ugly, I prefer to suggest an alternative view referring to the themes that fascinate me. Instead of typical escapism or pessimism, I believe the idealistic attitude emerges an insightful and positive understanding of our eclectic cultural ground, allowing richer personal and collective introspection.
Bio:
Born in Georgia (USSR) in ’77. Repatriated to Israel with my family in ’90. Formal education in Politics and Philosophy with a Master work in Epistemology (Genuine perception and cognitive content formation).
During my academic studies i become interested in photography, especial in Black and White medium, mastering this traditional art and craft. Participated in the international photo-festival in Europe (Estremoz, Portugal 2007).
Currently, I live in Israel and develop several photo-art projects – among them Israeli Women and Israeli Landscape (the selected project for support by the Israel Lottery Council for the Art and Culture).
Photographs: Victor Ben Tzvi
Website: web.mac.com/victorbt
Editor’s Note: Please only one comment per person under this essay.. Further discussions should take place under Dialogue..
Many thanks… david alan harvey
Why do you keep calling it semantic nit picking? You know, you have consistently downplayed all shortcomings with your work. When we brought up the artist’s statement, you said it doesn’t matter, and hat anyway you just did it in 5 minutes so its not a big deal. When people bring up the technical quality of the photos you downplay that too, oh, its just a low res draft scan, who cares about the dust spots or blocky shadows. In the end if YOU yourself admit to the work being poorly presented and described, why do you get defensive if others bring it up?
And yes, the artist’s statement IS important, Victor. The artist’s statement is supposed to fill us in on what the work is, aims to be, what it means, etc. There should be some parallel between the statement and the work. If there is too much of a divergence then there is a problem. Its like buying a car. If I want to buy a Volvo and one salesman tells me about the Volvo, I will listen. if I go to buy a Volvo and the salesman starts describing a Ferrari, I will roll my eyes. You claim many things in your statement that I just don’t see in the work. What bugs me about your work most is that in the statement you tell us about the objectification of women yet your work shows me more of that. Typical roles of women, mother, femme fatale, smiling sweetheart, tough girl…where is the depth? This work seems to me to parallel a bit of Cindy Sherman yet without the variety and depth of Sherman who managed to go beyond stereotypes and cliches. And much like in your work, Sherman had one model. The thing is with Sherman’s work that doesn’t matter, the physical model isn’t important, she was able to create that illusion. With your work, there is a lack of balance in how half the shots are of one woman and then randomly we see somebody else.
“Cindy Sherman doesn’t consider herself a photographer nor considers her work as photography. She does not always take the photographs herself. Also, by purposely making her pictures visually uninteresting, she is telling us that photographic documentation is more important than what is in the image. Sherman keeps the information to a minimum, and dismisses photography as the art of the specific and unique. The same lack of detail restrains the viewer’s memory and limits the nostalgia that the viewer typically brings to photography.”
rafal .. get yourself a life …. u dont like this essay … so Why u hang here so eager to express your narrow repeated statements…
“downplayed” …. what is it … a War, a game ??? it is a dialogue … there are points that are interesting in people comments, and those that are less… there are points that i agree and those that i dont … Dialogue… discussion where i mostly enjoyed and learned quite a bit…. not a barbarian pointless and hostile interruption as yours, hiding behind your narrow-minded understanding and talking in the name of hell know what … could be everything if u r so bored to talk so much about essay that u dont like etc….
my Excuses here … Burn is associated for me with David Alen Harvey so, i will try to be as Polite as possible in the following situation:
rafal …. U r a Lier or at least Cheap Demagog.
1. where did u see that i claim that my “statement was written in 5 minutes” ???? moreover, where did u saw that i said that “it doesnt matter” ??? or anything in this spirit …. u simply try to force every bit of information and interpretation in order to make it work for your hostility.
2. where did u see that i say “who cares for dust spots and blocked shadows” ??? again, same hostile demagogy and lie, cause i think i already saw my comments to Gordon L and the other guy later… so it must be a manipulation of words u do here in service of your hostile demagogy… (jealousy too??!!! just a thought for a moment although u already said that u dont like it that much :-) ….
wow wow wow … as already mentioned, i came here for the respect and love to David… and retrospectively, the last thing i would have liked to see here is some one like u :-)
John gladdy … i was looking back to Edwardo Suplemnta comment, and suddenly see your post that i missed completely in “older comments” “new comments” jumps on this page.
yes, i know u liked photographs, and super like some of them, and even called it classic manner, which obviously agree with u, even more so, i am proud of it for that matter.
and glad we nicely clarified the “master print” issue … oh by the way, even if want to do the Best prints “ever seen”, i still dont really concerned about being recognized as “Master Printer”… i want my prints to serve my photographs generally, the impact of the subject and the aesthetics of traditional b/w that i am so passionate about… and, by the way, any time in the future an opportunity appears for u too see my printed work, i warmly recommend u very much to see…
now about the Opening the essay for discussion, as much as i am bored to talk about further… i do not regret it is open… in fact, as u say, there are some really valuable stuff… and again, especially since the project is in developing stage only. so, im more than glad to hear things (be it compliment or criticism equally)…. but there is a point where things go too far… i know it can happen and go out of control, yet, it is never pleasent, not for me, and not for other people who might be looking for nice discussion and then suddenly finding lenghty explanations of what was already explained, and clearification of clearifications etc etc … not to mention things that go simply too personal, manipulative and worse …
so now i will get back to Edwardo, the spanish guy, and his interesting thought… and along the way, maybe we can get back some sportive spirit here ….
5 minutes was obviously an exaggeration, Victor. When I see things like dust spots on your title slide, I can’t help but come to the conclusion you didn’t care or didn’t pay enough attention. As far as being jealous, what exactly should I be jealous of, Victor?
The thing is that again, I keep my criticisms to your work, while you throw personal insults and names at me. is this your idea of civility? I’ve seen plenty of essays on Burn, and while I wouldn’t call yours the worst, because again I will stress that generally it is a good collection of portraits that have yet to become a holistic essay that has something to say, I will say it is one of the sloppiest presented. And I have yet to see anybody so aggressively reject criticisms. For example, I have not yet seen an author on Burn engage in such aggressive and offensive name calling as you have.
Rafal of course you didn’t name call because you were too scared to open up the discussion on your essay.(grin grin)
Your name calling here didn’t help remember writing that I was too dumb to read etc, so practice what you preach and please get rid of that bitterness…………..
you still haven’t figured out why you are wrong about that assertion that i didn’t open my essay up to discussion, have you Imants. When you do, get back to me, and I will take back calling you dumb. Because right now you do look really dumb. Otherwise …. if you need help, just ask and I will educate you.
And oh btw, does that mean that everyone who hasn’t opened up their essay to discussion is too scared? You are basically now insulting everyone who has not opened up their essay to discussion.
See you are a name caller and you continue to be one it really doesn’t bother me whether you take it back or not …….. I doubt if you have much to offer me, now hmmn, nn yes’ I will place you on my ignore list and please feel free to do likewise,,,,, tootle doo toots
Well, boys and girls, we are now seeing exactly why Jim Powers’ idea of one-comment-per-essay was such a good idea…
Patricia
Thankyou Patricia
PATRICIA
If it was not for the inmates, we would not need the rules.
;=)))
@ eduardo … finally im back to your comment…
i understand what u r talking about …. i have similar feeling/thought regarding those issues occasionally.
well, i will not get too much into epistemology and cognitive psychology, where the explanations for those diversities must be found… but heres my take….
a cognitive content, can be simple, more complex, abstracted… but i think each cognitive content that we behold in mind in real time is ever re-creating (the mind is occupied with it during the episode of that particular consciousness, and the content is ever creating in this duration)… it is done so with intention (directing the mind to some content, or directed mind) and associations – from memory, real time occurrences etc… yet, cognitive contents have a nature of their own, usually related to their original formation – for example, a content with visual nature is different from content with discursive nature (like thinking analytically etc)…
the thing is that with association we mix those things … a photograph with visual impact can bring to us thoughts and sounds etc, memories that have about the same aesthetic association/feeling, details that remind us things from past etc, ideas, new or familiar, and mirrors to our minds….
yet, i think our thought (mind – where every cognitive content takes place), in the search for more clearness, schematize, unity of our contents to form something repeatable and easily recognizable etc – the thought has the tendency to ENFORCE one nature/type of contents over the other, basically, in order to grasp things more confidently and clearly.
there are things that are better be thought in analytic and pragmatic way… others are at best with their visual impact… music has its nature, Beethoven sounds sometimes as though he wrote his stuff not on piano but on some secret instrument that must be made from strings of nerves or something like that…
but, from the other hand … it is the rich and “free” associations we have of diverse contents and content-types that can push our artistic capabilities, or the impact and engagement the viewer has from art work (or music, or book etc)… an attempt to convey an idea through sounds makes us creative, just as much as we enrich our language with the attempt “illustrate” a visual nature with words ….
so if one side of the coin is that rich creative association (of artist or viewer), the other side of the same coin is enforcing one type of cognitive content over the other (usually, it is the discursive thought that pushes hard)… maybe we have to find balance, or loose some restraints sometimes, dive deeper … but in any case, the two are simply on the same coin, so it is easy to flip them, or “confuse” which “side” is which …
The majority of this comment thread is a pretty sad read. Vic, Rafal, Imants… please, take a deep breath, and move on.
Correct, CT. It may even have discouraged people from adding their own comments on the essay.
@ CT and Mark W …
u r rite, i opened this discussion which is great, and is mostly very interesting – a good dialogue. but things got out of control with some unnecessary flames a couple of times. i have to blame myself too in not cooling down comment exchanges immediately in a more efficient way, instead of keeping the argumentation no matter how valid it was. i dont want and dont have control over every one’s manners, but first and foremost, as an author of the essay, it is my responsibility not to be led from diversity into pointless adversity. this loudness takes too much attention from the work and from the discussion on substantial issues and interesting thoughts.
A beautiful series of portraits. It’s all about trust. Bravo!