– Cultural exchange – Interesting examination – Hm, difficult to define. I think everybody (as the videoclip proves) has their own definition. I added parts from the interview I made with the Chinese women. 文化交流? I was thinking of the word 交流 and it reminded me of the question where I asked to define “性交”. And in addition, I thought Ouyang’s definition of cultural exchange was also very special…and fits to this question.
m:你是怎么理解做爱的?你介意么?
interview1: 你是指两个女生么?我ok的。如果抛开孕育下一代这个想法,这是人的基本的生理需求,很正常。
m:你觉得做爱和性交是一个意思么?
interview1:我觉得意思差不多,是不是一个褒义一个贬义啊?呃…不太知道。
m:为什么是性交会有贬义?那个性是指什么?交是交流吗?
interview1:呃…交,交换一下东西吧。交换一种感受,一种体验吧。可能有些感触只能是通过异性来带给你的。
m:那如果是两个男人在做爱,你可以用性交来形容吗?
interview1:呃…..不知道,应该可以吧。性没有规定是只有异性之间的吧,我不太知道这个词究竟应该怎么定义。
m: 那对女的来说差不多,那自慰是做爱吗?
interview1:我觉得做爱是两个人的事情,而自慰是一个人的,可能效果是一样的,但心里感觉不一样吧。
interview1: 因为每个人都对自己的身体很好奇,我觉得很正常。但是可能自慰这个词在我脑海中出现的比较晚,所以我不是很了解,但是当它出现的时候我还是可以接受的。可能如果再出现的早一点,小学初中的话,我就不能够理解。
m:你能用你自己的话来解释一下“做爱”或者“性交”吗?
interview2:是名词解释吗?就是很自然的一种行为吧。然后,那是生活的一部分。譬如说,如果你把兴趣爱好和工作放在一起,然后你的感情生活和性生活又是一块东西。如果说定义的话,就是生活的一部分而已,没觉得有太多别的东西… 其实我也不是经常会有这样的体力活动,但是我们都会希望会有一个稳定的东西,因为那样⋯⋯就像我之前跟你说过的,我觉得两样东西是不可以分开的。(性)是一个你希望它能够稳定而有故事的东西。如果非要解释的话,我会觉得是一种必需品,不一定在每个阶段都会出现,但是它会是必需品。
m:你觉得“做爱”和“性交”的意思是一样的吗?
interview2:我觉得“性交”也包括动物对吗,但“做爱”是人才用的,你不会说,在街上看到两条狗在做爱。哎,但是也可以,好像也可以这么说。“性交”感觉是写在书上的字…“性交”听起来有动物性。你不会跟你的男朋友说,我们来“性交”吧,你会觉得这句话说出来特别楞。但你会说,我们“做爱”吧。
Posted by mon | reply »women chopping wood
a live installation by choreographer Dorte Olesen, yesterday in alexanderplatz, berlin:
“15 Swedish women will travel to Berlin to meet a group of German women. They will have three days to complete their task: transforming 30 cubic metres of logs into imaginative woodpiles. The challenge includes co-operation, communication and getting to know one another across language and national barriers.”
Posted by f | more »女泉主义 Posted by 丫 | reply »
手势检查第二: 捋头发 | gesture study 2: hair-ing
理变奏曲 variations on lǐ
filmed in new york city, autumn 2006. summer 2008 finally got around to… thank you sim-chan and aka-chan and D-chan!
Posted by 丫 | reply »for severality, on fragility 1
To sustain fragility, a stamp on the box or the curiosity of half-opened contents. She says it is a trauma, beyond or prior to event, infliction in mere seconds or unconscious years, is p(h)ys(ch)ical.
He shudders in late afternoon half-sun. Sometimes, somewhere else and longing to be repeated, never repeated, she recoils, not horror. Those prickling sparks of the nerves they call falling asleep, …i’m exhausted.
Fragility means that you might find yourself not on the subjective level (coming, pre-, before you), we are partial to (one another) and we are partial (a many subjectivities). The pieces lay strewn and ambitious! What is already fragmented can beg a prism-like movement, sometimes slight twisting of the wrist to open a new light, from Levinas’ very first illumination (but in the refusal of darkness).
Once we saw three at once, a tunnel lining an enormous thundering sky, and we drove through them all.
—-not a means to an object, we pass through what passes through us. Fragility, the broken glass after the break, under but begging the open, makes transparent without needing to be seen. But it is not concealment as such (those chatting at the bar simply do not notice), nor a state to induce fascination (stillness, displacing life) so much as laying bare, not bare or just being there, in the middle of an ongoing process. The prolongation of fragility is not a state of being, but may find itself in the invisible inconsistencies of ritual, the anticipation or the suspension of an event. Its fascinance can never be an isolated moment, for it can only exist in relation to the other, as cause or affect or the relinquishing notion of wanting to be part of all of you. That longing, whether in pain or love, is more real that real itself, for it is the realm of the possible-not-yet.
Fucking phantasy! I owe you one.
1 Martin Hielscher, Hiroaki Kanai, Sean Smith, Fotini Lazaridou-Hatzigoga, Pierre Huyghe, Bracha Ettinger
Posted by 丫 | reply »他说女权
他说的,太… 什么的,所有小东西放了正好,我们每一个都有正好的位子。她的头发散了好看一点。 所有的东西之间都有点间隙,空间的,时间的。冬天也有花开。没想到云雪的天也开冷朗的一种黄色。这也意外的,突然在江边开始化妆。所有是上下文的。我们喝咖啡。换位子。聊。那个字是flaneur. 但不知道flaneur有没有包括女的。我们都有正好的位子吗?
冬天也有花开…
Posted by 丫 | reply »after “The Laugh of the Medusa”: Je suis femme, mais ceci n’est qu’une tentative l’écriture féminine (still learning)
When she was young, she wanted to be a writer. She wasn’t yet a woman, and thus had not yet learned of what she was capable, and of what she shouldn’t be capable. When one is young, emotions and outbursts and all of the new knowledge of the world flow freely as growth, sexless and unafraid. When one is an infant, there is nothing more enchanting, more delicious, more upsetting, or more terrifying than that of the present moment; this is the fearlessness of childhood feeling. Her words, as intensities, would do that to her, unleashed like her stories and streams and “a world of searching”.
But it was ironically when she entered the university that she was suddenly labeled a foreigner in her world of words. Not to say she wasn’t included. She could now count herself equally among the Others: female and foreign.Not until many years later did she realise that this was how easy it had been to shut her up! Her youthful a-sex grew out of her body, and she grew into her silence instead. The spaces within her head had always been loud, but now the reverberations cancel one another so that she forgets, so that she-grown-up-into-woman grows into herself, and that writing that had previously inscribed her childhood fantasies now inscribes into itself, disappearing like the folds of kneaded dough that slowly squash themselves with each turn of the baker’s hand.It was in this sense that she lost the ability to write herself. Writing, as in the inscription of mind to her body, such that each was closed in turn (“Censor the body and you censor breath and speech at the same time”). She had not the idea, young woman, where it was she should find herself: in mind, in body, in words. She had learned to segregate her many selves along this process of becoming woman, because that is the nature of woman, giver, to be able to be “for you what you want me to be at the moment you look at me in a way you’ve never seen me before: at every instant.” At every instant she gives herself away; she, escapee of herself.But to where would she escape? And if she was constantly running, would she ever find? Or does finding necessitate the specificity of time-space-body-mind-word? (“The woman arriving over and over again does not stand still.”) She wanted to be everywhere, just as she wanted to be everyone, to be that “desire-that-gives”. There is a balance to be had in the giving of herself and finding it in anOther. But perhaps she had given herself away too much already.In being everyone, everywhere, in wanting to love, she could not clearly differentiate anymore, because “she doesn’t ‘know’ what she’s giving, she doesn’t measure it”. She was paralysed in that flight. Her communication fell through to a generalised dis-course (lack of inter-course!). She had lost her voice. She had given herself up to the signifiers speaking through her.(“In one another we will never be lacking.”) This consoled her. But it still gave no indication of direction, or balance, her own becoming, and said nothing of where, and how much “she comes in, comes-in-between herself me and you”. But if we can no longer distinguish between ourselves and the Others, she thought, if there is no outside, no distinction, no sex——then maybe we can simply lay equally, yes, “in one another”. Multiplicitous, such that there is nothing given that is not also received——not in order to, but simply, in between ourselves, me and you. This does not imply a disappearance of either identity but a recovery of the Self in the Other. Giving then outlines a wholly newfound space, still, without the requirements of preposition, the directions from you, toward me or at you. Giving, like words as they are being put to paper: “We’ve come back from always.”
And suddenly, she thought to write everything down…
——–
[All quotes taken from Hélene Cixous, “Le rire de la méduse”, 1975]
Posted by 丫 | reply »