Richard Kern at Feature Inc: Premature Reactions?

by Art Fag City on October 1, 2008 · 24 comments Events

kern.jpg
Richard Kern, Upskirts, 2008; inkjet print; 34 x 57″ ed. 3

While photographer Richard Kern has had an unjustly tough row gaining full acceptance in the art world, I can’t say this new show (opening tomorrow at Feature Inc) doesn’t worry me a little.   The best of Kern‘s work not only presents a clear portrait of heterosexual male desire, but reveals it to be more complex than just a love for tail.  Model Release for example, a collection of his photographs published by Taschen in 2000, demonstrates that the language of porn is flexible enough to capture the erotic in imperfection and individuality.  A model’s underwear doesn’t fit perfectly, her breasts aren’t perky, she wears braces; all of these details prove surprisingly sexy.

Given this, it’s hard to understand the rationale for work that seems almost indestinguishable from porn — maybe the booming amatuer market has made hot imperfection seem pervasive and boring — but I’m hoping the exhibition will prove my jpg evaluations wrong.  Cliche photographs like Divided Beauty (H&M) however, don’t bode well.

{ 24 comments }

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 7:35 pm

Actually, I dont find it sexy at all. As a VERY virile and heterosexual male, reknowned in basketball circles for his fine black women, I see nothing arousing about this at all. And not pornographic. but like most art these days, its a fetish. Into anorexic girls with no vitality, and underwear. For me, the best underwear is that which comes off the quickest.

This is for voyeurs with sexual performance issues. No hot blooded hetero would be turned on by this at all. Even porno sites would turn away, they got much more agressive works, and far better looking women. Models are waifs these days, belemic and boring. Hetero males are attracted to fertility, youth, vigor, sexuality. I see none. So not really porno. But a sub set of sexually impoverished boys with Napoleon complexes.

Just weird, and certainly not art. Erotic can be great, if handled in a way that strikes more than just the groin region. Sexuality is part of who we are, and a legitimate subject. But not in the hands a of a perv, with performance issues.

Boring, actually.

Art collegia delenda est

truth teller January 8, 2011 at 6:55 pm

donald’s a middle aged white guy who lives in long beach. he’s on his second marriage. this time around he’s married to a much younger black woman. now he thinks he’s a brother.

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Actually, I dont find it sexy at all. As a VERY virile and heterosexual male, reknowned in basketball circles for his fine black women, I see nothing arousing about this at all. And not pornographic. but like most art these days, its a fetish. Into anorexic girls with no vitality, and underwear. For me, the best underwear is that which comes off the quickest.

This is for voyeurs with sexual performance issues. No hot blooded hetero would be turned on by this at all. Even porno sites would turn away, they got much more agressive works, and far better looking women. Models are waifs these days, belemic and boring. Hetero males are attracted to fertility, youth, vigor, sexuality. I see none. So not really porno. But a sub set of sexually impoverished boys with Napoleon complexes.

Just weird, and certainly not art. Erotic can be great, if handled in a way that strikes more than just the groin region. Sexuality is part of who we are, and a legitimate subject. But not in the hands a of a perv, with performance issues.

Boring, actually.

Art collegia delenda est

Art Fag City October 1, 2008 at 7:43 pm

Donald you’re wearing my patience.

Art Fag City October 1, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Donald you’re wearing my patience.

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Sorry, a slow day today. Been swamped for the last two. Just say down boy, as I am housetrained. But what i said is true, from my perspective. Take it as you will.

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Sorry, a slow day today. Been swamped for the last two. Just say down boy, as I am housetrained. But what i said is true, from my perspective. Take it as you will.

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 8:53 pm

Premature ejacula, er sorry, reactions? LOL! Sorry I missed that one. Not bad.

Donald Frazell October 1, 2008 at 3:53 pm

Premature ejacula, er sorry, reactions? LOL! Sorry I missed that one. Not bad.

Jesse Patrick Martin October 1, 2008 at 10:25 pm

Conventional wisdom—and Art History 101—tells us to consider the POV of the artist, and in the case of Upskirts it’s that of a naughty little boy looking up a lady’s dress. It seems like all of Kern’s work in the Feature show are from this pre-adolescent perspective. Also, it’s hard to look at Upskirts and not be reminded of Courbet’s The Origin of the World, but with a Warholian, soft-core, catalogue bent.

Besides their titles and gallery context, I don’t find much difference between Kern’s photos and stock-imagery for many an “alternative” publications, the sort where images of pretty young women drooling toothpaste, pissing, and affectedly getting their anti-fashion vamp on is just business as usual. If this stuff infuriates and/or titillates, it’s low-level and ubiquitous—which leads me to guess that Kern is well aware of the generic smuttiness of his work, if not its continued marketability, and consequently is as complicit as cake. First-wave feminists have adequately dealt with these kinds of images (which are freighted & fraught), but in the end we’re just recycling banality.

Jesse Patrick Martin October 1, 2008 at 5:25 pm

Conventional wisdom—and Art History 101—tells us to consider the POV of the artist, and in the case of Upskirts it’s that of a naughty little boy looking up a lady’s dress. It seems like all of Kern’s work in the Feature show are from this pre-adolescent perspective. Also, it’s hard to look at Upskirts and not be reminded of Courbet’s The Origin of the World, but with a Warholian, soft-core, catalogue bent.

Besides their titles and gallery context, I don’t find much difference between Kern’s photos and stock-imagery for many an “alternative” publications, the sort where images of pretty young women drooling toothpaste, pissing, and affectedly getting their anti-fashion vamp on is just business as usual. If this stuff infuriates and/or titillates, it’s low-level and ubiquitous—which leads me to guess that Kern is well aware of the generic smuttiness of his work, if not its continued marketability, and consequently is as complicit as cake. First-wave feminists have adequately dealt with these kinds of images (which are freighted & fraught), but in the end we’re just recycling banality.

Zach October 2, 2008 at 7:13 am

Hasn’t everyone fallen for this enough times already?

Zach October 2, 2008 at 2:13 am

Hasn’t everyone fallen for this enough times already?

some girl who lives in brookly October 2, 2008 at 3:45 pm

donald, you are really boring. go away and make more bad art. richard kern is in person, very nice. his work is nothing like it used to be but hey, there are very few people who could so obviously abuse their status as artists to make girls (in this case) take off their clothes and have such pervy photos taken.(larry clark ding ding) I look forward to seeing it though.
Zach- i really like your site

some girl who lives in brooklyn October 2, 2008 at 10:45 am

donald, you are really boring. go away and make more bad art. richard kern is in person, very nice. his work is nothing like it used to be but hey, there are very few people who could so obviously abuse their status as artists to make girls (in this case) take off their clothes and have such pervy photos taken.(larry clark ding ding) I look forward to seeing it though.
Zach- i really like your site

Brian Sherwin @ Myartspace Blo October 2, 2008 at 4:14 pm

Is there a reason for him having 20 images in one? Any symbolism behind that number? Thoughts?

Brian Sherwin @ Myartspace Blog October 2, 2008 at 11:14 am

Is there a reason for him having 20 images in one? Any symbolism behind that number? Thoughts?

Donald Frazell October 2, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Sorry baby, took a sojourn from Winkleman I see. Take The Hill back with you, that and ArtForum are the centers for vacuous elucidity. Like that?

Besides, if this guy is gonna do some girls from below, find some with nice thighs and some booty. flat assed, salad tong legged white girls just dont give me that lift I enjoy.

Donald Frazell October 2, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Sorry baby, took a sojourn from Winkleman I see. Take The Hill back with you, that and ArtForum are the centers for vacuous elucidity. Like that?

Besides, if this guy is gonna do some girls from below, find some with nice thighs and some booty. flat assed, salad tong legged white girls just dont give me that lift I enjoy.

Donald Frazell October 2, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Sorry baby, took a sojourn from Winkleman I see. Take The Hill back with you, that and ArtForum are the centers for vacuous elucidity. Like that?

Besides, if this guy is gonna do some girls from below, find some with nice thighs and some booty. flat assed, salad tong legged white girls just dont give me that lift I enjoy.

Donald Frazell October 2, 2008 at 12:43 pm

Sorry baby, took a sojourn from Winkleman I see. Take The Hill back with you, that and ArtForum are the centers for vacuous elucidity. Like that?

Besides, if this guy is gonna do some girls from below, find some with nice thighs and some booty. flat assed, salad tong legged white girls just dont give me that lift I enjoy.

r.a.frazell November 5, 2008 at 1:51 am

Who is and where the @#$%* is Donald Frazell? Sounds like he may be stealin’ ma name…

r.a.frazell November 5, 2008 at 1:51 am

Who is and where the @#$%* is Donald Frazell? Sounds like he may be stealin’ ma name…

r.a.frazell November 4, 2008 at 8:51 pm

Who is and where the @#$%* is Donald Frazell? Sounds like he may be stealin’ ma name…

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: