RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [syndicate] MOUCHETTE - Franklin Furnace's first "Future of the Present 2003" Artist

[Ivan Pope]

Eryk,
I have no idea why really you want to make this 'analysis'.
You seem to accept that the site is the work of an artist, thus not, I
presume, a real, naive, 13 yr old girl.
Yet, you say, then, that we are 'directly encouraged to participate in
virtual interactions against a young girl'.
If it is the work of an artist, then there is no young girl, just maybe our
notion of one.

You say you do not want to censor any artists.
Yet, you say that you think the primary message of the piece is 'putting out
the idea that children are capable of seducing adults'.
If you do not want to censor, what is your point?

You say 
> http://www.mouchette.org/touch/plush.html is a piece in which we are
> encouraged to look through a plethora of childrens toys to find "a pink open
> mouth" [which resembles a vagina] and a "striped penis." I am wondering what
> we are supposed to interpret the message of this piece to be?
yet there is no striped penis, there is no open mouth. There are just
childrens toys and words. You wonder how we are to interpret this, but you
have just told us. You interpret them as penis and vagina, as you are
instructed by the text.

I think the piece is clever, strange, funny, disturbing and above all,
knowing. I hardly think the world of paedophiles needs this sort of art to
promote its agenda.

Cheers,
Ivan


> From: "Eryk Salvaggio" <eryk at maine.rr.com>
> 
> A Critical Analysis of Mouchette.org
> 
> After a request from an artist claiming to be responsible for Mouchette.org

> I want to be careful in explaining that I am not intending to accuse the
> artist responsible for Mouchette.org of being a pedophile,

> with Mouchettes website, we are directly encouraged to
> participate in virtual interactions against a young girl.

> I want
> to be perfectly clear: the subject is ... simply whether or
> not the site can be read as mainstreaming, putting out the idea that
> children are capable of seducing adults, an extension of the classic "she
> was asking for it / dressed for rape" defense by male rapists. My conclusion
> is that this can be read as the primary message within the work.
> 
> 
> I am not attempting to censor any artists, nor do I believe that art
> addressing the real impacts of sexual abuse would be problematic; nor that
> explorations of sexuality are "immoral". I am not a defender of policies
> which aim to child proof the world, nor do I believe in a world of 100%
> political correctness. I believe that we have to begin to look at net.art as
> a real art form that is interested in ideas and messages, and that we begin
> to evaluate such work on the merits of these intentions. To do this, we must
> look at the ideas and messages that artists are putting across in the work,
> for better or for ill.

> http://www.mouchette.org/touch/plush.html is a piece in which we are
> encouraged to look through a plethora of childrens toys to find "a pink open
> mouth" [which resembles a vagina] and a "striped penis." I am wondering what
> we are supposed to interpret the message of this piece to be?

>Another piece is: http://mouchette.org/music/index.html where we
> hear either "whimpers" or "moans" depending on your interactions,
> specifically, where you put your mouse icon. This takes on sinister new
> meanings when combined with the idea that your mouse is your hand, as
> described in this text:

> I can't really see any other interpretation for "music" that is made with
> the sounds of little girls crying or moaning depending on where you
> "penetrate" the screen with your "finger." There are also numerous pieces
> where the Mouchette character encourages the viewer to engage with her
> through the screen. In one piece, "flesh and blood", at:
> http://www.mouchette.org/flesh/tong.html for example, we are invited to tell
> the 13 year old girl what her tongue tastes like. When we do- with a button
> that says "come closer," we are treated to a close up of those lips sucking
> on a finger.
>