This may be tangential, but I found this article on Sarah Cwyer's new exhibition really fascinating in relation to what we have been discussing particularly re. materialism/ commercialism + post-feminism;
https://hyperallergic.com/375854/the-color-palette-of-materialism-from-rose-gold-iphones-to-millennial-pink-shopping-bags/
“What is the right way to talk about something? Do people understand more if you communicate with things bought and sold?”
“Several male artists I know have told me I am having a moment,” the female voice says in the film, “as if the moment will pass soon. Rose Gold is having a moment too.” Commercial trends extend to artists and artworks, to social movements and political causes. But where does the wildfire of a trend stop, and what’s left after it burns out? Is there any lasting power? The final line of the film lets this question hang: “Is the Rose Gold iPhone a totem?” the male voice muses. “Maybe you won’t even remember it at all.”
I'm still not able to post, only comment :/ So here's one of my core posts:
ReplyDeleteFor this week's post, I'd like to focus on Butler's work on the politics of inclusion in postfeminism. When discussing identity, it is necessary to discuss what particular movements are trying to exclude, in order to identify what it is trying to uphold. For example, as Butler states, post-feminism itself "the idealized postfeminist subject is a white, Western, heterosexual woman" (47). Butler also interrogates this by claiming that television is a clear avenue for women of color to enact postfeminism. (48) Although this is true in many ways, women of color are often critiqued harshly for displaying their sexuality and being open about their needs, wants and desires. People like Amber Rose actively discuss the intersection of sexuality, race and gender quite frequently, more notably by starting up her version of "Slut Walk LA".
Butler claims that public discourse states that post-feminism is seen as "linear, backlash or sex-positive", which according to her are all insufficient. (43) I agree with this idea since post-feminism is certainly more than a response to previous generations of feminists. Instead, defining post-feminism as a "reworking" of previous feminist movements and also as a "historically specific discursive formation" makes more sense. (45) Post-feminism has the ability to stand alone as its own separate movement, while still recognizing that it is still part of something larger. My major question is what is after post-feminism? Are there other movements that come from feminism that are trying to either separate itself or expand the movement? Does history have to change drastically for new forms of feminism to grow as well?