October 14th, 2009 / 2:38 pm
Snippets
Snippets
Roxane Gay—
Conceptual artist Richard Whitehurst is creating a “rape tunnel” which will go live on October 30th. I struggle to take this kind of thing seriously. And yet, I have no doubt someone will enter this sad little tunnel just to “see what happens.” Under such circumstances, were they asking for it?
After breaking an aspiring model’s nose: “…I’m still having an impact on this young lady’s life, something not many other artists could claim about their work.”
This is really beyond stupid. I don’t even know what to say.
After breaking an aspiring model’s nose: “…I’m still having an impact on this young lady’s life, something not many other artists could claim about their work.”
This is really beyond stupid. I don’t even know what to say.
The whole thing is a hoax. Do some research.
The whole thing is a hoax. Do some research.
its not real.
http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/09/artlurker_explains_rape_tunnel.php
its not real.
http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/09/artlurker_explains_rape_tunnel.php
if it were to exist and someone were to attend they would know what it was because they were there
and wouldn’t that just be consensual sex?
if it were to exist and someone were to attend they would know what it was because they were there
and wouldn’t that just be consensual sex?
unconsentual consentual sex….
unconsentual consentual sex….
the rape tunnel is a hoax
although a really interesting hoax
the rape tunnel is a hoax
although a really interesting hoax
Eh. Not that interesting. I did think it was weird that Columbus had an art museum named after the The Elements of Style guy, though.
Eh. Not that interesting. I did think it was weird that Columbus had an art museum named after the The Elements of Style guy, though.
i’m tired of hearing about rape and tao lin on this site. let’s hope no one makes a post combining them both.
i’m tired of hearing about rape and tao lin on this site. let’s hope no one makes a post combining them both.
a lot of the things that guy said were completely idiotic and made no sense.
a lot of the things that guy said were completely idiotic and made no sense.
me too. Or rather, I thought, “Is that the Elements of Style guy? Weird,” since I didn’t know his first name.
me too. Or rather, I thought, “Is that the Elements of Style guy? Weird,” since I didn’t know his first name.
Before I realized it was a hoax, I was thinking, “The question regarding the nature of consent is way more interesting to me than the question regarding the impact of contemporary art, and if he was foregrounding the consent question rather than the art question, I’d find him a bit less repellent and would be more interested in participating in a conversation abt his work’s ethical implications.” I also thought, “This reads like a subpar Dennis Cooper story,” and then I thought, “This Richard Whitehhurst is kind of cute, and how does he know what I do or do not find unpleasant?”
Before I realized it was a hoax, I was thinking, “The question regarding the nature of consent is way more interesting to me than the question regarding the impact of contemporary art, and if he was foregrounding the consent question rather than the art question, I’d find him a bit less repellent and would be more interested in participating in a conversation abt his work’s ethical implications.” I also thought, “This reads like a subpar Dennis Cooper story,” and then I thought, “This Richard Whitehhurst is kind of cute, and how does he know what I do or do not find unpleasant?”
So I can’t talk about the time Tao Lin raped me?
So I can’t talk about the time Tao Lin raped me?
if you want to, i guess. aren’t you too traumatized to talk about it, though? eeep.
if you want to, i guess. aren’t you too traumatized to talk about it, though? eeep.
Tao Lin Raped me in going to be the name of my short story collection, I think
Definitely a hoax, though the fact everyone thought it was real pretty much sums up contemporary conceptual art, doesn’t it?
Tao Lin Raped me in going to be the name of my short story collection, I think
Definitely a hoax, though the fact everyone thought it was real pretty much sums up contemporary conceptual art, doesn’t it?
by everyone I mean, when this story was originally posted and I saw it all over the internet on various boards and sites, not htmlgiant.
by everyone I mean, when this story was originally posted and I saw it all over the internet on various boards and sites, not htmlgiant.
seeing as this is a hoax, this is might be one of the greatest pieces of literature I’ve ever read. the project that it undertook of causing reader reaction under the received framework of “real life” should be the ultimate project of every writer or artist.
just recently I read in the new york times an article about how psychologists are finally getting to work analyzing how people receive and mentally react to absurd information. basically it’s good for us. something about after reading Kafka people are better at finding patterns in data or something. but how can art in general have any power as a (in the case of literature) two-dimensional object?
DADADADADADA we have to break boundaries if we want to be effective artists, but you can’t do that simply by creating a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic. this on the other hand demands reader-response for the work to be complete.
can you think of any other story you’ve read that functions like this?
No, it should be called “Tao Lin Rape.”
interesting because it questions what exactly consent is.
or at least i find it really interesting.
seeing as this is a hoax, this is might be one of the greatest pieces of literature I’ve ever read. the project that it undertook of causing reader reaction under the received framework of “real life” should be the ultimate project of every writer or artist.
just recently I read in the new york times an article about how psychologists are finally getting to work analyzing how people receive and mentally react to absurd information. basically it’s good for us. something about after reading Kafka people are better at finding patterns in data or something. but how can art in general have any power as a (in the case of literature) two-dimensional object?
DADADADADADA we have to break boundaries if we want to be effective artists, but you can’t do that simply by creating a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic. this on the other hand demands reader-response for the work to be complete.
can you think of any other story you’ve read that functions like this?
No, it should be called “Tao Lin Rape.”
interesting because it questions what exactly consent is.
or at least i find it really interesting.
before i saw it was a hoax, i thought it was interesting and it raised the same questions in me i think they wanted to raise. I’m interested in things that try to change what art can do and be and mean. it wasn’t totally unbelievable that someone would do this, or at least consider doing it. I remember a while ago there was an artist who hid somewhere amongst his sculpture and masturbated during the exhibition. Did I read that in the Believer? Anyway, I like that there are people in the world that do these kinds of things.
before i saw it was a hoax, i thought it was interesting and it raised the same questions in me i think they wanted to raise. I’m interested in things that try to change what art can do and be and mean. it wasn’t totally unbelievable that someone would do this, or at least consider doing it. I remember a while ago there was an artist who hid somewhere amongst his sculpture and masturbated during the exhibition. Did I read that in the Believer? Anyway, I like that there are people in the world that do these kinds of things.
i agree with bobby
i agree with bobby
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2005/11/7larson.html
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2005/11/7larson.html
a lot of people would read it, at least. :)
a lot of people would read it, at least. :)
I think the questions they wanted to raise is how silly is it that this is the kind of stuff that passes for high art these days?
Punch in the face tunnel is hilarious though.
I think the questions they wanted to raise is how silly is it that this is the kind of stuff that passes for high art these days?
Punch in the face tunnel is hilarious though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seedbed_(performance_piece)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seedbed_(performance_piece)
oh, it was supposed to be satirical?
I think it does still raise interesting questions about what is art, etc.
oh, it was supposed to be satirical?
I think it does still raise interesting questions about what is art, etc.
that’s it. thanks!
that’s it. thanks!
No offense, but I think the idea that something like this raises interesting questions about art is exactly what was being satirized.
No offense, but I think the idea that something like this raises interesting questions about art is exactly what was being satirized.
i get that. none taken.
It’s petty to trivialize this idea by making it satirical I think. I think it functions as an interesting hypothetical. People should be interested in the question of what art is, how far should art go. No one should be laughed at for thinking that way. No one should ever be laughed at for anything, actually.
i get that. none taken.
It’s petty to trivialize this idea by making it satirical I think. I think it functions as an interesting hypothetical. People should be interested in the question of what art is, how far should art go. No one should be laughed at for thinking that way. No one should ever be laughed at for anything, actually.
It’s still interesting to talk about.
Ha!
It’s still interesting to talk about.
Ha!
actually, no I don’t agree with that. Or maybe I do but I misread what you were saying.
I actually think writing should strive to be as impactual as the hypothetical in the story. I want there to be a book where the words actually come out of the page and gang rape your face.
actually, no I don’t agree with that. Or maybe I do but I misread what you were saying.
I actually think writing should strive to be as impactual as the hypothetical in the story. I want there to be a book where the words actually come out of the page and gang rape your face.
“Adam Robinson—
No, it should be called “Tao Lin Rape.””
or Tao Lin ‘Rape’
“Adam Robinson—
No, it should be called “Tao Lin Rape.””
or Tao Lin ‘Rape’
Thanks for the link, Darby.
Thanks for the link, Darby.
I find it interesting too. Fucked up, but interesting.
I find it interesting too. Fucked up, but interesting.
All this talk about rape these days! Some people throw it around just for shock value or to get you to buy things. It’s complete fucking bullshit.
Tyrant 7 (The Rape Issue) out mid November
ehhhhhh
All this talk about rape these days! Some people throw it around just for shock value or to get you to buy things. It’s complete fucking bullshit.
Tyrant 7 (The Rape Issue) out mid November
ehhhhhh
Very nicely played
Very nicely played
Shit like this is why you are my favorite spice girl gian.
Shit like this is why you are my favorite spice girl gian.
I’m with Lincoln. The quote from the interview has a clear instability: “The problem with most of today’s art is that it’s being created for a world that doesn’t want or need it. So many other lesser modes of expression have taken the place once held by art in the culture. I’m trying to totally reconfigure art’s importance in the world and make it meaningful.” This artwork is something people simply would not want, that the punch-in-the-face (!) and the rape tunnel be meaningful is frankly laughable, whilst simultaneously those who do want the rape undermine the very stability of the artwork due to consent. A paradox par excellence really, to the extent that it is impossible for it to exist outside of a hoax. The notion that people found the artwork interesting – outside of these concerns and questions of conceptual art – that perhaps rape is interesting, need to seriously re-think their own individual ethics.
I’m with Lincoln. The quote from the interview has a clear instability: “The problem with most of today’s art is that it’s being created for a world that doesn’t want or need it. So many other lesser modes of expression have taken the place once held by art in the culture. I’m trying to totally reconfigure art’s importance in the world and make it meaningful.” This artwork is something people simply would not want, that the punch-in-the-face (!) and the rape tunnel be meaningful is frankly laughable, whilst simultaneously those who do want the rape undermine the very stability of the artwork due to consent. A paradox par excellence really, to the extent that it is impossible for it to exist outside of a hoax. The notion that people found the artwork interesting – outside of these concerns and questions of conceptual art – that perhaps rape is interesting, need to seriously re-think their own individual ethics.
Did someone say rape was interesting? I missed that (whoever said that: call me!)
I don’t agree with Bobby Alter, either. People were only reacting to the hoax because it was presented as real, that is not great literature, it’s a design. Great shit doesn’t need to lie to provoke you, it makes you forget all about truth and reality on its own merit, without frameworks.
I don’t know, I think.
Did someone say rape was interesting? I missed that (whoever said that: call me!)
I don’t agree with Bobby Alter, either. People were only reacting to the hoax because it was presented as real, that is not great literature, it’s a design. Great shit doesn’t need to lie to provoke you, it makes you forget all about truth and reality on its own merit, without frameworks.
I don’t know, I think.
well, I’ll understand that position, but when you say “People were only reacting to the hoax because it was presented as real,” and then proceed to describe it as a design, I wonder… shouldn’t the point of literature be to pretend to be real? And shouldn’t it be… designed? generally my disappointment with art is the fact that before one begins the reading/viewing process the mind is already set on some sort of “this isn’t real” mode, and the fact that it doesn’t necessarily do that for a hoax is what delights me. especially given the context of all the gibberish in the article. When you open up a Kafka short story you’re open to anything happening… that being a loose rule of what literature, perhaps more specifically surreal/absurd literature, is.
The fact that a great deal of people experienced an actual struggle of trying to place a punch-in-the-face tunnel into their idea of their reality is nothing but awesome to me.
well, I’ll understand that position, but when you say “People were only reacting to the hoax because it was presented as real,” and then proceed to describe it as a design, I wonder… shouldn’t the point of literature be to pretend to be real? And shouldn’t it be… designed? generally my disappointment with art is the fact that before one begins the reading/viewing process the mind is already set on some sort of “this isn’t real” mode, and the fact that it doesn’t necessarily do that for a hoax is what delights me. especially given the context of all the gibberish in the article. When you open up a Kafka short story you’re open to anything happening… that being a loose rule of what literature, perhaps more specifically surreal/absurd literature, is.
The fact that a great deal of people experienced an actual struggle of trying to place a punch-in-the-face tunnel into their idea of their reality is nothing but awesome to me.
see, yeah I like to think that a story can hypothetically do that. not physically, but mentally. forcing you into a feeling is different that saying something that causes you to react with a feeling (like, text that makes you feel violated, rather than you being shocked by someone being violated in a story).
see, yeah I like to think that a story can hypothetically do that. not physically, but mentally. forcing you into a feeling is different that saying something that causes you to react with a feeling (like, text that makes you feel violated, rather than you being shocked by someone being violated in a story).
this is sort of a problematic argument for me.
first: who is the “we” you are invoking?
i don’t understand how what we are receiving here is “absurd information.” rape happens pretty frequently; it is a fairly familiar concept. you should ask a rape victim how many dimensions they were raped in.
what do you mean by “a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic”? i feel like every work of art creates “a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic,” if i follow you.
re: your concluding question, the hoax we’ve got on our hands is no less performative or interruptive than an amy hempel story or something. see DFW’s “sextet,” where he lays out how it is impossible for a work of art to break the fourth wall in any important sense.
basically, a drag show would be just as effective in demanding reader response as the rape tunnel.
this is sort of a problematic argument for me.
first: who is the “we” you are invoking?
i don’t understand how what we are receiving here is “absurd information.” rape happens pretty frequently; it is a fairly familiar concept. you should ask a rape victim how many dimensions they were raped in.
what do you mean by “a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic”? i feel like every work of art creates “a surreal or uncomfortable artistic logic,” if i follow you.
re: your concluding question, the hoax we’ve got on our hands is no less performative or interruptive than an amy hempel story or something. see DFW’s “sextet,” where he lays out how it is impossible for a work of art to break the fourth wall in any important sense.
basically, a drag show would be just as effective in demanding reader response as the rape tunnel.
literature has pretended to be real for a while. “realism,” dude.
the keyword is pretend. how can something be effectively “real” if it is pretending to be real, i.e. subordinating itself to “the real”?
literature has pretended to be real for a while. “realism,” dude.
the keyword is pretend. how can something be effectively “real” if it is pretending to be real, i.e. subordinating itself to “the real”?
i think a rape tunnel art show is ripe for satire
i’m not interested in how far “art” like that will go. if you told people you were going to rape/mutilate/murder an 18-year-old girl online…you’d get any number of sick f’s to watch.
I think at some point the prurient interest involved in certain “art” must be curtailed in the name of sanity and safety.
i think a rape tunnel art show is ripe for satire
i’m not interested in how far “art” like that will go. if you told people you were going to rape/mutilate/murder an 18-year-old girl online…you’d get any number of sick f’s to watch.
I think at some point the prurient interest involved in certain “art” must be curtailed in the name of sanity and safety.
Someone told me that you are running a fake Alice Sebold piece in your issue. For shame, Gian. I will not read that portion of the issue. I owe Susie Salmon that much.
Someone told me that you are running a fake Alice Sebold piece in your issue. For shame, Gian. I will not read that portion of the issue. I owe Susie Salmon that much.
If it were a real project, it were ridiculous.
Since it’s a hoax, it’s genious: the reception and perception of art by viewers vs. an artist with inferiority complex.
If it were a real project, it were ridiculous.
Since it’s a hoax, it’s genious: the reception and perception of art by viewers vs. an artist with inferiority complex.
i wouldn’t call any amy hempel story really interruptive other than the harvest.
it’s the only one where she stops the story and addresses the reader.
which other hempel stories were you thinking of?
but certainly octet
which as really a sextet
but was supposed to be an octet.
i wouldn’t call any amy hempel story really interruptive other than the harvest.
it’s the only one where she stops the story and addresses the reader.
which other hempel stories were you thinking of?
but certainly octet
which as really a sextet
but was supposed to be an octet.
oh yeah, octet, forgot.
oh, i mean, i guess i just re-read the harvest so i had that in mind, but i’m more thinking of the “impact of art in general” as interruptive or something. like every short story interrupts reality, i guess.
oh yeah, octet, forgot.
oh, i mean, i guess i just re-read the harvest so i had that in mind, but i’m more thinking of the “impact of art in general” as interruptive or something. like every short story interrupts reality, i guess.
I think the idea of actual rape or actual murder in the name of art would be ripe for satire. But that’s not what this is because its consensual. At its most utilitarian function, it’s nothing more than a free sex tunnel. And a murder tunnel would actually be an assisted suicide tunnel (although I admit there is an ethical gray area there). But the artist is choosing to call it rape, and I think that’s an artist’s right. In this case, there is a disconnect between actual rape and an artist’s rendering of rape.
I almost agree with Bobby that the most impactual element of this whole thing is that people were being made to believe something that didn’t exist, reading fiction as though it were non. But that’s not what I’m really interested in. I’m more interested in the potential of the hypothetical construct itself. Take away any confusion over ethical implications, and the construct is intrinsically interesting in the way it engages the viewer. Let’s call it a kissing tunnel, where everyone who goes in gets a kiss on the cheek. In order for the art to exist, it depends completely on whether anyone decides to go in. If no one goes in, does the art exist? Does the art exist in the potential of someone going in? I’m interested in these sorts of things, art that engages the viewer in interesting ways. I don’t think it’s wrong to be interested in that.
I think the idea of actual rape or actual murder in the name of art would be ripe for satire. But that’s not what this is because its consensual. At its most utilitarian function, it’s nothing more than a free sex tunnel. And a murder tunnel would actually be an assisted suicide tunnel (although I admit there is an ethical gray area there). But the artist is choosing to call it rape, and I think that’s an artist’s right. In this case, there is a disconnect between actual rape and an artist’s rendering of rape.
I almost agree with Bobby that the most impactual element of this whole thing is that people were being made to believe something that didn’t exist, reading fiction as though it were non. But that’s not what I’m really interested in. I’m more interested in the potential of the hypothetical construct itself. Take away any confusion over ethical implications, and the construct is intrinsically interesting in the way it engages the viewer. Let’s call it a kissing tunnel, where everyone who goes in gets a kiss on the cheek. In order for the art to exist, it depends completely on whether anyone decides to go in. If no one goes in, does the art exist? Does the art exist in the potential of someone going in? I’m interested in these sorts of things, art that engages the viewer in interesting ways. I don’t think it’s wrong to be interested in that.
Totally get that and it does sound pretty awesome. I think what I was getting at (maybe poorly) is that you had to be told it was real to have that sort of reaction. Whereas with Kafka, to take your example, even though I went into it full well thinking ‘it’s just a book’ – I totally got lost in it and forgot about the line between real and unreal because the surreality of it highlighted the absurdity of reality all the more. That’s just one way of doing it. I’m sure there’s tons of other ways (hoaxes being another, I guess, though not my favorite).
Totally get that and it does sound pretty awesome. I think what I was getting at (maybe poorly) is that you had to be told it was real to have that sort of reaction. Whereas with Kafka, to take your example, even though I went into it full well thinking ‘it’s just a book’ – I totally got lost in it and forgot about the line between real and unreal because the surreality of it highlighted the absurdity of reality all the more. That’s just one way of doing it. I’m sure there’s tons of other ways (hoaxes being another, I guess, though not my favorite).
isn’t everything ?
isn’t everything ?
i don’t know that i understand.
i don’t know that i understand.
[…] Rape tunnel is a hoax. HTMLGIANT has a conversation about it. It got me to thinking. I am now writing a story called “Tao Lin […]
like how DFW says in octet that the metafictionists break no fourth wall; metafiction is performing on no less of a stage than any other mode of storytelling. same thing in the harvest: when amy hempel interrupts the story, it is not amy hempel but a textualized version of the same. consequently, it’s the force or movement of art itself that breaks up reality, not technique or content.
when i read a story, i’m at once in and outside of my body. bobby alter wants a story which “demands reader response,” but wouldn’t you say that i, as a reader, am always responding to the story as soon as i agree to play by its rules or something? isn’t my “physical reality” always violated in the reading of a story, insofar as i am taken somewhat out of it and commanded to collaborate with the “physical reality” of the story at hand?
i guess what i’m trying to say is: if throwing around the word “rape” stimulates aesthetic conversation, then so does reading and discussing “the harvest”–perhaps more, because it is simply a better story.
like how DFW says in octet that the metafictionists break no fourth wall; metafiction is performing on no less of a stage than any other mode of storytelling. same thing in the harvest: when amy hempel interrupts the story, it is not amy hempel but a textualized version of the same. consequently, it’s the force or movement of art itself that breaks up reality, not technique or content.
when i read a story, i’m at once in and outside of my body. bobby alter wants a story which “demands reader response,” but wouldn’t you say that i, as a reader, am always responding to the story as soon as i agree to play by its rules or something? isn’t my “physical reality” always violated in the reading of a story, insofar as i am taken somewhat out of it and commanded to collaborate with the “physical reality” of the story at hand?
i guess what i’m trying to say is: if throwing around the word “rape” stimulates aesthetic conversation, then so does reading and discussing “the harvest”–perhaps more, because it is simply a better story.
“Let’s call it a kissing tunnel, where everyone who goes in gets a kiss on the cheek. In order for the art to exist, it depends completely on whether anyone decides to go in. If no one goes in, does the art exist?”
Gotcha, yeah that is a cool question. I was getting caught up in the actualities of rape and murder. I watched it again last night and see more of where you’re coming from. Apologies for the righteous indignation. I “get” this whole thing better now.
“Let’s call it a kissing tunnel, where everyone who goes in gets a kiss on the cheek. In order for the art to exist, it depends completely on whether anyone decides to go in. If no one goes in, does the art exist?”
Gotcha, yeah that is a cool question. I was getting caught up in the actualities of rape and murder. I watched it again last night and see more of where you’re coming from. Apologies for the righteous indignation. I “get” this whole thing better now.
pretty good joke.
Not surprised that people don’t get it
pretty good joke.
Not surprised that people don’t get it