Currently I'm taking a late modern art history class and the controversial topic of glitter came up the other day. The professor was showing slides of Lynda Benglis' work from the 1970s, some of which uses glitter and other shiny things. It was dark in the classroom, so I don't know who did it, but there was an immediate sound of disgust "ughh" much like that when this piece was shown.
Now it might not be my favorite thing ever, but I do think that it's a beautiful sculpture and the glitter works. The whole point here is that I got kinda upset that MATERIALS are discriminated against. How stupid, shouldn't you judge the piece as a whole and not just immediately dismiss it because of the glitter?
And this is bigger than glitter. I'm talking collage, paper mache, and embroidery as well. All techniques that I've heard criticized lately as being too "elementary school" or "crafty". I think it depends on the artist, and a truly creative person can make beautiful legit fine art out of anything. No matter how sparkly it is.
To combat this indiscretion my incredible artist friend Kaitlyn and I will be making something both beautiful and elegant out of paper mache, collage, glitter, sequins, and other poorly respected materials. We are even going to find a way to incorporate macaroni and yarn while preserving our integrity as art students. So there.
This proposed sculpture is in the planning stages in my head, but when it's finished I will most definitely post photos. It WILL be beautiful and it WILL NOT look like something that Elton John puked up.
On an unrelated note, I had a male teacher call my artwork feminist simply because he could, "tell that a woman had made it." Direct quote. Does that make any sense?!