Chicago Reader [Chicago Reader Book Swap - May 28 at Cobra Lounge] [Chicago Reader: Best of Chicago -- VOTE NOW!]

 

Reader Info
Advertising, subscriptions, staff, privacy policy, contact info, freelancers' guidelines, etc.

[Chicago Reader: Best of Chicago -- VOTE NOW!]

[THE WELL - Click here for drink specials]




Digg! Digg this | Post to del.icio.us | E-mail E-mail this to a friend


Amber Hawk Swanson and Amber Doll

Amber Hawk Swanson and Amber Doll

Amber Hawk Swanson and Amber Doll

Amber Hawk Swanson and Amber Doll

Amber Hawk Swanson and Amber Doll; scenes from Brown Bunny, Irreversible, and The Accused

Mireya Acierto (1), Amber Hawk Swanson/Colin Lyons (2), Amber Hawk Swanson/Misty Winter (3); Amber Hawk Swanson/Colin Lyons (4)


Diamonds at Dusk
When Sat 8/4, 8:30 PM
Where 6325 N. Lakewood
Price $7
More Proceeds help fund a documentary on trans musicians by the duo Actor Slash Model.

When Amber Met Amber

An artist’s complicated relationship with her look-alike sex doll

By Kelly McClure
August 3, 2007

AMBER HAWK SWANSON met Amber Doll on January 25 and the two were married the next day in matching rented gowns at the Aladdin Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas. Swanson noted a few gawkers as she wheeled her bride through the casino and into the chapel, “but people who are in Vegas are already ready to sort of have something wild come at them,” she says. “I only got one real look of disgust.” Swanson, a video and performance artist, had ordered her bride online: Amber Doll, a lifelike sex doll, was specially made to look just like her. Their wedding video and other footage documenting their relationship will screen for the public this week.

Swanson, who’s 26, earned two BFAs at Iowa State University and an MFA at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. She studied printmaking, drawing, and painting, but never video. The doll project grew out of a response to a job she had before grad school designing for Stride Rite. Disturbed by the elongated figures of fashion sketches, Swanson wanted to caption them with the words of real women and began videotaping her sorority sisters to generate quotes. She ended each interview with the same question: “How do you define feminism?”

Intrigued by their responses, Swanson began talking to more women and by 2005 she herself was in front of the camera. “Feminism?” consists of ten shorts in which she quotes from interview transcripts while participating in her own objectification. One short, Not a Feminist Way of Thinking: Daddy’s Little Girl, re­creates a scene from Lolita; in it Swanson’s real-life father paints her toenails. Two others, That’s Deep and That’s Deep Again, show Swanson being penetrated from behind—in one video by a man, in the other by a woman—while repeating “That’s deep,” one woman’s answer to her final question. “I was interested in the cultural phenomenon of young women rejecting feminism,” Swanson says. “In some ways I took on the character of a young woman doing so—either rejecting feminism or being naive about it.”

“Feminism?” toured colleges and film festivals and is now part of the collection at the Museum of Contemporary Photography. Reaction was understandably intense. “I put myself in my own mock porns. I was not only sexualized but I was also hyperfeminized,” Swanson says. “People conflated the persona of the work with me. There was so much attention, positive and negative. I was excited to get attention but also overwhelmed by it.”

That’s when Swanson began researching Realdolls—whose scale, molded features, silicone skin, and adjustable joints make them eerily realistic—as a tool for exploring the boundary between the real and the fantasy. “I was looking for a receptacle for the onslaught of attention and negative feedback—a stand-in for myself,” Swanson explains. “It was just the right amount of crazy to order a $12,000 doll.”

It took some convincing to get the San Diego-based company to go along with her vision. Customers can dictate everything from the style and color of their Realdoll’s hair to his or her shoe size, but making a doll in a particular person’s image is considerably more costly. Last July 4, after several weeks of negotiation, Swanson put $6,000 down on a doll that would be four inches shorter than her, with a waist six inches smaller, but have a face identical to her own. (A full body replica would’ve doubled the cost.) She set the date for her 3-D facial scan—executed by Burbank-based Cyber F/X, which caters to Hollywood—to coincide with her birthday so she and Amber Doll would share the same one.

In the months before the doll’s arrival, Swanson prepared her home, buying the doll gifts of jewelry and clothing that often matched her own. “I increasingly began thinking about her as my ideal woman and eventual wife,” she says. “I would lie in bed and rub my hand on the sheets where I knew she’d be lying soon.”

Swanson began to recognize herself in the people who detailed their relationships with their sex dolls online. “I identify with the other owners in a real genuine way,” she says. “Whether it’s dating related—not being able to have romantic relationships or whatever—or that desire for companionship as well as to enact violent fantasy.” She had her wrist tattooed with the word “Bully” and had Realdoll paint the word “Prey” in the same font on the doll’s wrist.

In January she got word that her doll was nearly finished. “The total time from the beginning of my discussions with them to eventually picking her up to be mine was nine months,” Swanson says. “Which of course cracks me up, thinking about her as my twin, my wife, and a baby of sorts.” She flew out to the Realdoll warehouse in California to film the final four days of production and then packed Amber Doll in a car and drove her to Vegas, shooting the entire way. Footage from the warehouse and the wedding ceremony are included in the video To Have, To Hold, To Violate: The Making of Amber Doll, which screens Saturday at “Diamonds at Dusk,” an outdoor showing of films by local queer artists.

Since the wedding Swanson has put Amber Doll to use in a project exploring the interplay between fantasy and reality in sexual relationships. The finished work, which is still untitled, will contrast stills of intimate “partnership” scenes with video reenactments of rape scenes from movies such as Irreversible and The Accused. Unlike “Feminism?” which spoofed sexualized depictions of women in popular culture, Swanson’s latest videos are meant to mimic them as closely as possible—with one main departure. In the rape scene reenactments, both Swanson and Amber Doll will be dressed as the victim in the film. She gets most of her costumes from Forever 21 and H&M, including dresses similar to the one worn by Monica Bellucci in Irreversible. “These places had the majority of the ‘asking for it’ outfits I was looking for,” she explains.

She aims to wrap up the project by May, when she’ll have a solo show at Locust Projects in Miami. After that, it seems like she might need a break from Amber Doll. “In so many ways she’s a huge hassle,” Swanson says. “I already spend so much time taking care of my own body, and it takes triple that to care for the doll.”

Taking the doll, which weighs 135 pounds, off her wheeled metal stand is a trick in itself. “It’s beyond a hassle,” says Swanson. “It’s so difficult just to lift her off. Or to even put her face back on; it velcros on and falls off all the time.” And since Amber Doll’s skin is made of silicone rubber, “everything sticks to it. I use tape and rubbing alcohol to clean it. It just gets so dirty.”

The honeymoon, however, is not entirely over. Later this month Swanson and Amber Doll will host a joint birthday party and belated wedding reception for friends. A tent will be set up and there’ll be wedding cake.

Swanson is still toying with ideas for what to do with Amber Doll once the project is finished. “I’ve thought a lot about it,” she says. “It does seem like there needs to be an end to the body. I had a dream where I shot her in the face and it ricocheted and killed me.

Send a letter to the editor.

Comments

Flag as inappropriate

Michelle at 6:34 PM on 8/3/2007

Is this Joe Francis sister? How else could she get $13k to buy a doll for performance art? The only this body of work challenges is my patience. There are far better feminist artists to profile.

Flag as inappropriate

Sandra at 6:41 PM on 8/3/2007

I think what she's doing is fantastic. It's fresh and different and shocking and leaves the viewer with many questions. That's art to me.

Flag as inappropriate

Samantha at 9:28 PM on 8/3/2007

Gotta love art and artists. This is definately different. I like.

Flag as inappropriate

JOHN at 12:30 AM on 8/4/2007

B O R I N G

Flag as inappropriate

jared at 2:49 AM on 8/4/2007

yeah, unless it's fireworks or something loud and bright and shiny it's boring. Yaay everybody ever.

Flag as inappropriate

Jeremiah Jehoesephat at 7:36 AM on 8/4/2007

It's not boring. It's stupid. Get your insults straight there buddy.

Flag as inappropriate

ARTISDEAD at 8:57 AM on 8/4/2007

YOUJUSTKILLEDIT,THANKS!

Flag as inappropriate

Matilda at 9:06 AM on 8/4/2007

Instead of just throwing insults out, does anyone care to explain WHY they think it's stupid?

Flag as inappropriate

NO at 12:05 PM on 8/4/2007

IT'S JUST STUPID

Flag as inappropriate

PBR at 12:07 PM on 8/4/2007

It's stupid because I'm not having sex with it.

Flag as inappropriate

DaddyM at 12:12 PM on 8/4/2007

Am I the only one turned on by all of this?

Flag as inappropriate

Amy at 12:13 PM on 8/4/2007

This project sounds brilliant. As a feminist, it's so refreshing to see art that is challenging and innovative get recognized. Michelle:it's called a grant.

Flag as inappropriate

Rob at 12:13 PM on 8/4/2007

Interesting project. Who can say its not art, or just some fantasy she's playing out?

Hat off to her, i'd bone them both if she wants to fly me out there :-)

Flag as inappropriate

gunjack at 12:16 PM on 8/4/2007

PBR - lol

Flag as inappropriate

Tarliman at 12:24 PM on 8/4/2007

Art is never stupid. Only the people seeing it are. That having been said, Amber's work pushes the boundaries of what has been done before, although I am reminded of the "Doll" sequence in an old issue of The Question. Commitment to an inanimate object is common in our culture. How deeply do we commit to what we own? Do we own our significant others? How much of ourselves do we project onto our possessions? Amber raises some questions that obviously need some thought.

Flag as inappropriate

yes at 12:40 PM on 8/4/2007

amazing article!

Flag as inappropriate

pfanzler at 12:40 PM on 8/4/2007

this is important work because it is provocative. beyond being sexually provocative this provokes thought and dialog. art should raise questions, not answer them. she is not making statements about feminism, property, fantasy, and relationships as much as she is forcing the audience to make their own. if you find this boring or stupid it may be because you don't like to think. have your mother read you a story and pet your belly with a soft white glove while you suck a lolly.

Flag as inappropriate

Jeffrey Smale at 12:55 PM on 8/4/2007

Lame. I take pictures with my Real Dolls every other night. She should have spiced it up with a little gore, or something. Just sayin'.

Flag as inappropriate

Alan at 1:12 PM on 8/4/2007

What an AMAZING idea. Reflexive goodnesses abound. Sometimes I read about an art that just clicks with me. This is it. Amazing. I wish I were in Chicago to see the movie.

Flag as inappropriate

araneae at 1:24 PM on 8/4/2007

DaddyM- no.

Flag as inappropriate

jeffu at 1:35 PM on 8/4/2007

DaddyM - I'm gay and this turns me on.

Flag as inappropriate

Kitwilly at 2:30 PM on 8/4/2007

I would so hit it. I mean them. Both of them. At the same time. You know what I mean, dammit.

Flag as inappropriate

Questioner at 2:48 PM on 8/4/2007

I was just wondering ... does she get Health insurance for her or flat repair insurance thru AAA?

Flag as inappropriate

J.P. at 3:12 PM on 8/4/2007

This is funny, creepy and sexy all at the same time. Great idea.

Flag as inappropriate

Colin Lyons at 4:08 PM on 8/4/2007

She has accomplished more than me this month! The work addresses American sexuality on several levels, and I think it is hitting some seriously tender areas.

Flag as inappropriate

bing at 4:12 PM on 8/4/2007

matilda:

it sucks because it's didactic, heavy-handed, gimmicky, preachy, derivative, sensationalistic, and utterly predictable.
her claims to be making some sort of important feminist statement are belied by the fact that her whole stock-in-trade is prurience and sexual commodification.

Flag as inappropriate

Matilda at 4:28 PM on 8/4/2007

bing: She's taking control of her own sexuality, and that is what feminism is all about. Just because you may not like the work, or agree with it, doesn't mean she's not doing a good job.

Flag as inappropriate

Joe at 4:39 PM on 8/4/2007

Guess they don't have plus sizes in real dolls

Flag as inappropriate

Luke at 4:54 PM on 8/4/2007

The work is good, strong conceptual art for the obvious reasons. Maybe its boring because of that. But we know that art such as is this is never boring. Its social sexual confrontation is just what the art doctor ordered. The conceptual basis is boring done and tried, but at least it's sexy. So many artists are using or abusing their own bodies and images to propogate their art it all seems like so much self aggrandization. And not to pin it all on feminist art (the dudes are guilty as well), but it seems that is where the flag is being flown most vigorously. Frida Khalo's reevenge. Masterbation while staring hard into the mirror is the only way the climax proper and everybody must share in my self indulgence.

Flag as inappropriate

Rei at 5:46 PM on 8/4/2007

"She's taking control of her own sexuality, and that is what feminism is all about."

I was under the impression that feminism was about liberating women from a male-dominated society and allowing them to achieve equality to their male counterparts. I'm thinking the advanced sex doll is just for show - literally. In this context, one could effectively argue that pornographic actresses are also artists taking control of their own sexuality.

Flag as inappropriate

Frank at 6:08 PM on 8/4/2007

Joe: If your comment means what I think it means ... you should be ashamed.

Flag as inappropriate

Norman at 7:07 PM on 8/4/2007

Feminist or not, the real message of this article, to me, is that we're living in a society which is so absurdly wealthy that it is manufacturing these dolls, and the only people who can be "artists" seem to those able to afford them - not to mention flying to LA to pick them up, getting married to them in Las Vegas, and throwing themselves a big party for their friends.
Feels like I'm watching a really aed reality TV version of Vanity Fair.

So maybe she's asking good questions, but let's get over ourselves and find a less detached, less narcissistic way of raising them, shall we?

Flag as inappropriate

aaahhhhh at 7:45 PM on 8/4/2007

Fascinating. Her "identical" doll is so much better looking than her. And I imagine more interesting as well.

Flag as inappropriate

Ray at 7:59 PM on 8/4/2007

I can't believe that people are actually making personal attacks against this artist. I'd love to see what you guys contribute to the world other than noise and bowel movements.

Flag as inappropriate

Gene at 8:01 PM on 8/4/2007

I think this is a great commentary on where the future is headed. For the time being it's dolls, eventually it'll be robots that people will purchase for the opportunity to have, to hold and to especially violate, rather than try to be in a real flesh relationship with someone. That and I wouldn't mind seeing her get it on with a doll, sounds hot!

Flag as inappropriate

Jesse at 8:08 PM on 8/4/2007

I can't believe you people know how to read.

Flag as inappropriate

Kyle at 8:57 PM on 8/4/2007

Haven't facsimile dolls been available for 4 y/os for the past 20 years? This conceptual art fails the 'interesting for more than 5 minutes at a dinner party' test while blatantly passing the 'I'm an attention whore (but not as much as my more attractive silicon sister)' test.

Flag as inappropriate

Rich at 9:07 PM on 8/4/2007

Reverse the roles. Amber is Adam, a macho gay guy. People would say it's disgusting narcissistic porn. There is something sublimely appealing about girl-on-girl even it is girl-on-her sicko submissive alter-ego sex doll.

Flag as inappropriate

Rowan at 9:07 PM on 8/4/2007

good to see Amber getting some press. good article

Flag as inappropriate

HANK at 9:09 PM on 8/4/2007

Frank: It means she's a fatty McFaterton. (Are you blind?) Jeez, who wouldn't want to hide their bologna pony in their skinny twin? All you guys need to grow up. P.S I'm 12 :) AND I CAN Read!!!!

Flag as inappropriate

Anna D. at 9:51 PM on 8/4/2007

this message is for Hank.. My dear, you are much too young to be on the internet at 9pm. If I was your mother I would certainly reprimand your deviant behavior. First and foremost, your "Fatty McFaterton" remark is not only demeening to the overweight people in this society but also to the Irish, and I AM 1/8 Irish. Certainly you have the most growing up to do!

Flag as inappropriate

Marc Arsenault at 9:52 PM on 8/4/2007

There's an old saying that a BFA is the most worthless degree you could get... But two?!

Flag as inappropriate

Jimbo at 10:04 PM on 8/4/2007

Right on marc! This girl didn't really need the $12,000 for a doll to pork everynight if she already spent $100,000+ on education to make softcore porn. I know a girl that does that without a GED! I bet she was such a nice little girl when she grew up in Iowa, her parents must be proud!

Flag as inappropriate

redbedhead at 10:08 PM on 8/4/2007

Wow, sheesh. This is an example of too much money and too much time. I'm an artist, and a political one to boot. I'm all for subtlety and "raising the Difficult Questions" as they say. But when stuff is so totally inaccessible as to be only of interest to a tiny, isolated minority of people then it really defeats the purpose, I would say. There are more effective ways to get at the social issues she's raising that don't leave the artist open to charges of onanism (ie. wanking off), elitism and self-promotion.

Flag as inappropriate

Port of Entry at 11:25 PM on 8/4/2007

So the doll has a 6" smaller waist than real Amber but still weighs 135 pounds? Wow. How do pervy nerds throw those things around if they weigh that much?

I've also wondered about eventual disposal. (Amber's going to tire of this affectation soon enough.) Imagine the cops finding a Real Doll in a dumpster. I suppose this one could be re-sold as less used than normal. Ew. How weird would it be to have a Real Doll of yourself out there? How protective of the doll is she?

Yeah, she's presenting some interesting questions with all this.

Flag as inappropriate

arnold r. lane at 12:45 AM on 8/5/2007

as a performance artist..i must say she displays a certain amount self love and conceit...insest has nothing on this..doing "yourself"? this bird is cooo-cooo crazy and willing to do anything for... ehem..exposure. when she's finally famous..she can simply go into rehab to get publicity.

Flag as inappropriate

cest.la.vie at 12:45 AM on 8/5/2007

Those of you who support this artist-- you keep mentioning that she's raising "good questions" and "feminist issues". Color me blind, but what exactly are these questions and issues?

All I see is a spoiled, rather imbalanced young woman engaging in an extravagant show of attention-seeking. You call it art; I call it a waste of time.

Flag as inappropriate

cneg at 12:51 AM on 8/5/2007

if a male did this, it would not only be stupid, it'd be gay and that person would be out $12k. Yay double standard. That said, I'd love to see her f* herself.

Flag as inappropriate

JujuBee at 2:19 AM on 8/5/2007

She's not fat people. She's morbidly obese AND ugly. Ugly is just like wearing black clothes in that it's slimming.

Flag as inappropriate

Jamie at 3:00 AM on 8/5/2007

The photos are provoking and the idea of it, however the artist view of the doll/object are skewed and misdirected.

Flag as inappropriate

Franklin Dupont at 3:06 AM on 8/5/2007

These comments are better than the article.

Even better than the art itself. . .

Hooray Internet!

Flag as inappropriate

Mr. Me at 3:41 AM on 8/5/2007

Art is so amazing.I could get a monkey to throw it's own crap at a canvas. Slap a price sticker on it and call it art.

All the other things aside- reading this article was worth it just to get to the last couple of lines- "It does seem like there needs to be an end to the body. I had a dream where I shot her in the face and it ricocheted and killed me."

Flag as inappropriate

Maverick at 5:14 AM on 8/5/2007

I'd totally poop on her chest. How do you clean one of those things? I cant believe the world is so lame as to allow crap like that to be called art.

Flag as inappropriate

Trace at 5:36 AM on 8/5/2007

This is narcissism at its very worst!

Flag as inappropriate

this is awesome at 5:54 AM on 8/5/2007

amber and amber doll are hot...super hot... and they are especially hot together... particularly when amber doll is being violated. i think the implications of this project are, as amber once quoted "deep" and should be appreciated for pushing boundaries... because thats what art is... right? i am impressed, amused and inspired... this work explores our understanding of ourselves as women in this society, feminists, the living and the un-living... plus that article was REALLY well written. congratulations to amber, the doll and the author for capturing such a unique and intriguing project.

Flag as inappropriate

AactionJackson at 6:41 AM on 8/5/2007

Doing stunts like this only hurt the feminist movement to the general public's eye. It's like gay rights parades where they jaunt around in assless chaps and act stupid/out of control. If you are trying to make a statement to help a cause, don't try to confuse the public on the issues.

Flag as inappropriate

Marley at 7:48 AM on 8/5/2007

She has nice teeth.

Flag as inappropriate

johnnyonthespot at 7:55 AM on 8/5/2007

Something in all of this seems to be a mechanism for masturbation through voyeurism. However, she can touch Amber in her most private places while touching herself. All I can say is I've got a woody.

Flag as inappropriate

pandaba at 9:03 AM on 8/5/2007

I'm hoping she doesn't shoot or immolate the doll. Lock it away in storage for a few years but wheel it out every now and then.

It is, after all, a reverse Dorian Grey, and I would love to see photos of her fortysomething or sixtysomething self with the doll, forever a twentysomething. If done right, could be a beautiful comment on aging and mortality.

Flag as inappropriate

fciron at 10:15 AM on 8/5/2007

This is a fascinating project to me. There is far too little discussion of the objectification of women in the last ten or twenty years. This a topic that is going to be increasingly important for the next generations that do so much more of their socializing and socialization online.

Flag as inappropriate

coment at 11:11 AM on 8/5/2007

cest. la vie. if you took the time to think about what the concept of the project was, then you could see what good questions it raises about the feminist issue.

the project is fascinating on many levels. it examines the relationship between the living and the inanimate, it explores the self destructive relationship that we often have with ourself. it mocks the society that we live in where real live women actually do get raped and violated...ones who are alive and can feel that they are being assaulted - both physically and emotionally. damage like that stays with a person for life...with amber doll she never even will know.it is fascinating -like i said- on many levels an i would explain my take on it more but i have to go to lollapolooza.

Flag as inappropriate

silvergalena at 12:24 PM on 8/5/2007

How is it that suddenly feminism became a pursuit of ever-increasing skankiness and sexualized behavior. Isn't feminism supposed to be about the pursuit of female equality in a male dominated world. Making yourself into more of a sexual freak just marginallizes your position and how are you supposed to be taken seriously, say in the work force? If a guy did this, you'd probably put him on some kind of sex-offender watch list. This neo-feminist movement seems completely counterproductive and agaist what the original progressive feminists in the 20's were fighting for. Pornstars, sexfreaks, and hookers don't promote the female agenda, nor does Paris Hilton.

Flag as inappropriate

Barb at 12:45 PM on 8/5/2007

Ya gotta love farting - it's awesome.

Flag as inappropriate

lister at 12:59 PM on 8/5/2007

Ray: Hey, my bowel movements are ART. Think I can get a grant?

Flag as inappropriate

Mary at 1:46 PM on 8/5/2007

My goodness, but Chicago Reader commenters have interesting ways of expressing themselves, and some even seem literate and thoughtful!

Flag as inappropriate

happeningfish at 1:49 PM on 8/5/2007

Lister, it's already been done. See Piero Manzoni's work around 1960.

I think this work is great - touching on narcissism, sexuality, and taking on lots of assumptions.

Silvergalena, I don't think it's about making oneself into a "sexual freak" as it is about doing something very out of the ordinary as a means of exploring our basic assumptions. How would you make a victim out of yourself? Why is it that a project like this sorta turns me on?

And I don't really think it's marginalized - Paris Hilton, Britney & co. are not at all marginalized women in our society, yet they are given about the same role as Amber Doll.

Flag as inappropriate

Port of Entry at 1:57 PM on 8/5/2007

Pandaba that would be interesting, but as narcissistic as the artist is, my bet is that it will be destroyed in some spectacular way rather than be allowed to exist once their appearances diverge. She should do the big finish at Burning Man.

As for the haters, think of this as a play or a monologue, and not art in the conventional sense. Certainly this is more artistic than, say, one of those leaden Tim Robbins plays.

Flag as inappropriate

Jack at 3:11 PM on 8/5/2007

God. If I were her, I'd definitely want to marry someone far cuter.

Flag as inappropriate

mitch at 3:34 PM on 8/5/2007

Well, it's definitely polarizing.

I find it erotic and visually appealing. I'm not really interested
in debating it. Most people who think about art are stubborn in
their views of what does or does
not have artistic merit. For me, it
is good art because it makes me think about the self compared to
the imagined, projected, or idealized self.

Flag as inappropriate

doggo at 5:07 PM on 8/5/2007

Man, oh man, whatta lot of bile. Based on an article about the art, not having actually seen it. Typical Internet 'tards. How many of you commenting about whether or not this is art has any clue whatsoever about what constitutes art in the first place? You blather on about your opinon of what the artist looks like. And oh, the outrage! It cost her money to create part of her piece? Ye-ah. Omigod! If you knew anything about how art is produced, you'd know that $13,000 is a drop in the bucket to produce a piece of art.

So, if you really have no clue about art, feminist theory, or aesthetics in general. And you really just want to spout mean-spirited shite about topics and people you're ignorant of. Why don't you just go on down to Wrigleyville and drink yourself insensate with the rest of your baseball hat friends instead of commenting here.

Flag as inappropriate

spoolington at 7:38 PM on 8/5/2007

the doll is no where near identical- it is so much more attractive. this girl is delusional.

Flag as inappropriate

chasqui at 8:12 PM on 8/5/2007

This is as smart / interesting / insightful as the ideas you read into it. It is provocative. It is art. Good art? That depends - if it makes you ask questions you feel are relevant. If not, it is as has been commented, "just dumb".

Flag as inappropriate

Cabinfever at 10:40 PM on 8/5/2007

I want to see where she goes with this. I think anything new to shake up this world is needed. Bring it on.

Flag as inappropriate

Tee at 1:36 AM on 8/6/2007

The camera adds like ten pounds so obviously there were like ten or fifteen pointing at her at the same time.

Flag as inappropriate

johnnyonthespot at 3:10 AM on 8/6/2007

Clarification: My woodie is not for her but for the doll. She's just another chick on the street who needs to hit the gym. The doll is a hottie 'and her wannabe' !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flag as inappropriate

Jeff at 5:21 AM on 8/6/2007

I bet all of these rude comments are being made by the same bored teenager. I think Amber is very beautiful, but guess what???? Not really the point of this article ... is it??

Flag as inappropriate

Afro Diva at 6:49 AM on 8/6/2007

Well I'm no art expert, but I really like this concept. I'm not sure if it's the voyeur or the Narcissist in me, but Mamma Likey!!

Flag as inappropriate

sparksart at 8:07 AM on 8/6/2007

"Charles Ray" anybody?

Flag as inappropriate

Dagon at 8:43 AM on 8/6/2007

Can I borrow the doll? She wants to spend a vacation at my place.

Flag as inappropriate

ellen at 10:47 AM on 8/6/2007

It's so strange how childish people become on the internet. I'm sure that if you read this article at Starbucks with your pals (especially your lady pals) you'd be desperately nodding your head and agreeing that this is 'like, so totally deep'.

Flag as inappropriate

Bob at 11:09 AM on 8/6/2007

"It's so strange how childish people become on the internet. I'm sure that if you read this article at Starbucks with your pals (especially your lady pals) you'd be desperately nodding your head and agreeing that this is 'like, so totally deep'."

Or do you mean honest? Feigning to like it to score some points with the opposite gender seems more childish to me.

Flag as inappropriate

anpanman at 11:48 AM on 8/6/2007

kewl. humans can be fascinating at times.

Flag as inappropriate

kaps at 1:05 PM on 8/6/2007

My question is, if a porn star did this exact same project, would we even be discussing it? Would it even be featured in an article, or just dismissed and/or disparaged? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm really asking. Would people say that her "That's Deep" video project was art if it were marketed as porn with no other changes to content or packaging? I don't have a problem with porn--it is what it is. I'm wondering if the only thing that separates this from porn, in the view of its fans, is the fact that the creator calls it "art" and a statement about feminism instead of selling it on the internet as a porno.

Flag as inappropriate

um . . . at 3:04 PM on 8/6/2007

what nobody's pointed out (I think) is that it's probably not that fun for a girl to play with a blow-up doll.

Flag as inappropriate

yermama at 3:57 PM on 8/6/2007

the doll actually looks better than the human....sad, just sad...quit reading comments and go back to work!!!

Flag as inappropriate

Barbara at 4:49 PM on 8/6/2007

I think this is really smart. Women are taught to objectify themselves in this culture, to think of themselves as bodies on display, and this artist is creeping us out by showing what this psychological act might look like. Also, Real Dolls are made for men to enjoy in private. The implication is that real women should emulate them, Real Dolls are the ideal. She's challenging this dirty little secret. The object becomes a subject. I hope this show comes to my town....

Flag as inappropriate

Lorraine at 5:00 PM on 8/6/2007

How is this any different than people vying for their 15 minutes of fame by eating bugs on Fear Factor or pretending to fall in love with Flava Flave? I am so bored/saddened by our current *hey look at me!!* culture.

Flag as inappropriate

lalala at 5:02 PM on 8/6/2007

People are allowed to have an opinion. Just because they don't share the same one as you don't make them ignorant. I studied art in college and I have a B.A. Yet I think this art doesn't say anything relevant to me.

What I want to know is why isn't anyone offended by her "mocking rape"? And how sick is it that she recreated a scene from Lolita with her father? There are "deeper" issues at play here.

Flag as inappropriate

Joseph Suglia at 5:18 PM on 8/6/2007

My name is Joseph Suglia. I wrote a novel, entitled WATCH OUT, that concerns a man who has an erotic relationship with an inflatable love doll made in his own image. The novel was discussed in the Fiction issue (November 2006) of THE CHICAGO READER.

Flag as inappropriate

correction at 6:17 PM on 8/6/2007

Joseph Suglia, you mean BOOKS issue. The fiction issue contains original fiction, not articles about fiction.

Flag as inappropriate

Luke at 6:31 PM on 8/6/2007

Doggo you just make the point that artists have an over inflated sense of self worth. What? The uneducated masses have no right to comment on art if they have'nt dropped a few hundred grand studyin' it? Oh yeah the artist can make social commentary that is sooo insightful and righteous but society has no right to respond? Thats pretty top down and archaic. And if you know anything about art like you seem to claim, you oughta know that great art can be produced on the cheap and that there are artists and movements which reject just that sort of horn-rimmed arrogance. Go back to school, or better yet, get a real job and then come back to educate the internet tards and drunks in baseball caps.

Flag as inappropriate

Seymore at 2:28 AM on 8/7/2007

Wow, THAT is lame. "Video and Performance Artist". Whoo. Didn't see that one comin'. AKA, Feminist Artist with no marketable skills who doesn't need to work for a living. Man, she makes Annie Sprinkle look like Laurie Anderson. No, wait. I meant she makes Lydia Lunch look like, um, Kembra Pfahler, yeah...
God, what sad, uninspired garbage. "I wanna rape me, to wholly objectify myself and cannibalize my body image and it's attendant shame so I can finally OWN it, and not be bullied by this patriarchal society's phallo-centric pyramid scheme of selling away your inner goddess for the false hope of protection, security and fulfillment.". Bet that looked good on the grant app.
I mean, come on. Garbage this cheap should at least make money. Maybe she'll make some 'Video Art'. With her dolly. But can't she just go be a stripper and write a book about it (that she never finishes)like everybody else? At least then there would be something in it for other people. We could laugh at her in real time....

Flag as inappropriate

Stephen at 7:00 AM on 8/7/2007

I want more pics, and then of course the video will be a huge success. As a supporter and urger of womens empowerment, I see this as another view of feminine expressive, shirking ego-narcissist-gratifying men in a most delightfully denying vein. There can never be too much permutation of woman-on-woman-for-woman-forgive-woman pathos. You go girl. I love it.

Flag as inappropriate

Pat at 12:24 PM on 8/7/2007

I have one question: Does the doll have a F.U.P.A. too?

Flag as inappropriate

Anonymous at 1:44 PM on 8/7/2007

lol women artists

Flag as inappropriate

RMutt1917 at 2:22 PM on 8/7/2007

"Charles Ray" anybody?

- Thanks Sparksart. That's all I kept thinking. Concept that might read well on paper if it were a sitcom plot.


Flag as inappropriate

Cassielmt at 4:26 PM on 8/7/2007

Jimbo...Amber was a very nice girl growing up in Iowa. I had the privilege of knowing her as a kind person and amazing artist then, so seeing what she's done with her talent impresses me even more. She's really taken a risk with this controversial project. Kudos to her!

Flag as inappropriate

angergirl at 5:30 PM on 8/7/2007

I was forced to sit through Ms. Swanson's "work" as part of the judging panel for the Reeling GLBT Festival. I have never seen such an ill-conceived, self-righteous, self-indulgent, and ultimately empty work. The fact that she would marry a doll designed to be her twin is the fulfillment of her earlier vapid series. Oh yeah, and the doll is much hotter than the artist. And probably a better conversationalist.

Flag as inappropriate

noneofurbusiness at 6:14 PM on 8/7/2007

what is the big problem? its art, its not meant to have one definition. to think that some of u people waste ur time badmouthing others bc u dont like their expression is a prime example of knowing when to keep ur mouth shut. if u dont like it, dont look at it, dont watch it, dont buy it. but shut the fuck up bc no one cares about ur damn opinion!

Flag as inappropriate

wonderful at 7:34 PM on 8/7/2007

Hey, I have an idea angergirl. Why not actually try critiquing the work instead of making immature attacks on the artist like some 12-year-old? It makes me feel really good about the Reeling Festival knowing someone like you is out there on the judging panel.

And, hey, lalala, you might want to take a closer read of the article. It seems like you are confusing the two different projects. You kind of sound like an asshole. Oh and Pat, I’m sure didn’t even read the article. I bet you just like to write on bathroom walls.

Flag as inappropriate

Davis at 11:20 PM on 8/7/2007

To each their own, I suppose.

I must confess, however, that I find Ms. Swanson's project childish, decadent, cliched, jejune, and just repellent in every way.

Were any personal friend or acquaintance of mine to embark on such an enterprise, I would quietly cease to associate with that person.

Flag as inappropriate

Brian Babylon at 4:16 AM on 8/8/2007

THIS IS PURE GENIUS!!!!! AMERICA LOOK OUT FOR "DAS HAWK"!!!!

Flag as inappropriate

Stone at 2:51 PM on 8/8/2007

wow, davis, what are you jesus christ? or andrea dworkin?

Flag as inappropriate

lalala at 6:55 PM on 8/8/2007

Okay, wonderful? what two projects was I confusing? This is exactly what I was commenting on.

"One short, Not a Feminist Way of Thinking: Daddy’s Little Girl, re­creates a scene from Lolita; in it Swanson’s real-life father paints her toenails."

Flag as inappropriate

angergirl at 10:39 PM on 8/8/2007

OK, "wonderful," how about this for a critique--the overall tone of the work was one of overwhelming condescension and self-importance. The artist does not examine the current state of feminism or the perception thereof, merely acts in endless vignettes of self-exposure and self-aggrandizement. And thank GOD that there is a diversity of opinion at Reeling. I have a feeling that if you were the sole judge on the panel, the Festival would fast go belly-up from lack of ticket sales.
Oh, and the doll is still hotter.

Flag as inappropriate

yeppie at 9:39 AM on 8/9/2007

angergirl- it is a good thing that the Reeling festival has many judges, because they obviously showed her work at the festival despite your hateful personal attacks on her attractiveness. I think that you should voice your opinion as your own, instead of using your association with the festival to give weight to your remarks. It speaks poorly for Reeling that they employ a judge who "annonymously" uses their position to say vicious things about a filmmaker. You should be thrown off the panel.

Flag as inappropriate

lalala at 3:08 PM on 8/9/2007

I don't understand why it is a crime not to like her art. Everybody isn't going to like everything. I'm sure what I consider art may not be your cup of tea. But it is what I like.

Flag as inappropriate

luke at 4:46 PM on 8/9/2007

Its not a crime to not like her art (especially hers). Not liking art or diagreeing with art is occassionally a part of art critique. However,some folks here think the conversation would be better if we all shut up. Do you understand? good

Flag as inappropriate

Rohkaze at 2:12 AM on 8/10/2007

You are all missing the point. I mean, hooray for Amber's liberated feminist sexuality, but what about the poor doll? It is just an exploited pawn to sex-depraved humans, a slave to someone else's ambitions of sex and power. Poor Amber Doll.

Flag as inappropriate

CasperGhostboy at 10:03 AM on 8/10/2007

Will you Doll Bashers please give a rationale explanation WHY this is "stupid" other than the same old comments? I salute the artist for exploring her sexuality her own way. And as a matter of fact, RealDoll.com will sell you a "standard" doll for $7000, with ten bodies and now 16 faces. So, you don't need to be a rich artist or whatever to get one. So if it is the "same bored teenager" that is making these comments, PLEASE STOP. There is a whole Web community out there that I am a member of that talks about life-sized doll ownership.

Flag as inappropriate

richie rich at 1:36 PM on 8/10/2007

"rich artist"? ahahhahahahahaha!!! that's awesome. does anyone actually know how she paid for the doll? yea, i didn't think so.

Flag as inappropriate

Garreth at 10:46 AM on 8/11/2007

"I salute the artist for exploring her sexuality her own way."

I don't think it's so much a statement about her own sexuality as much as one about everybody(guys) else's.



"Since the wedding Swanson has put Amber Doll to use in a project exploring the interplay between fantasy and reality in sexual relationships. The finished work, which is still untitled, will contrast stills of intimate "partnership" scenes with video reenactments of rape scenes from movies such as Irreversible and The Accused. Unlike "Feminism?" which spoofed sexualized depictions of women in popular culture, Swanson’s latest videos are meant to mimic them as closely as possible—with one main departure. In the rape scene reenactments, both Swanson and Amber Doll will be dressed as the victim in the film. She gets most of her costumes from Forever 21 and H&M, including dresses similar to the one worn by Monica Bellucci in Irreversible. "These places had the majority of the ‘asking for it’ outfits I was looking for," she explains."




Another tired feminist "woman as victim piece". Hurray.
Angergirl hit the nail right on the head.


Flag as inappropriate

bvalthazar at 12:34 PM on 8/11/2007

what a f'n hack. this artist is a walking cliche: the feminist video artist with a trust fund and daddy issues.

Flag as inappropriate

stunned by the troll party at 2:45 PM on 8/11/2007

Wow, this story brought out the trolls in force. A litany of rote invective and reactionary spew with little depth. I guess this art attracts double trolls: those who despise most art as shallow, wasteful, etc. and misogynists who dislike "girly" art.

Many appear not to have read the whole story, let alone show any knowledge of this art or art in general. Only one bothers to drop some names in the insults.

"Condescending" isn't a substance. Claiming a degree doesn't make one-note putdowns honest or deep. Stating one's own assumptions or taste as fact is shallow and dishonest.

Here's a sample: "This appears to repeat and extend Cindy Sherman's work, except more obvious and confrontational. I, personally, don't enjoy graphic rape scenes in any context, so this art doesn't speak to me at all. I question it's validity."

I realize my self-righteous lecture is little better, but honestly, the amount of dumb spew is disappointing.

Also, I doubt "angergirl" is a girl given her immediate attack on the artists looks.

Flag as inappropriate

Twisty at 7:32 PM on 8/11/2007

I would like to hear the artist explain how staging mock rapes is an act of feminist rebellion, or even a version of Feminism-Lite, because it sure ain't clear from the article.

Flag as inappropriate

Aireanne at 8:51 PM on 8/11/2007

I agree with Twisty. When the artist describes certain brands of clothing as "asking for it" that strikes me as quite misogynistic.

I'm disturbed by so many commenters calling the artist 'fat', too. She seems quite normal-sized and I don't get how her appearance actually affects her art.

Flag as inappropriate

shy girl at 11:51 PM on 8/11/2007

I read her comment about the
" 'asking for it' outfits" as sarcastic.

I thought that her point in saying so was that in mainstream films women are depicted as inviting sexual violence by wearing certain styles, while at the same time these clothes are readily available and promoted as day wear in malls across America.

Perhaps it was meant as a comment about how normative both images portraying sexual violence and sexualized clothing are?

(I will admit that by the tone of the article, this point come across clumsily)

Flag as inappropriate

shy girl at 11:58 PM on 8/11/2007

Ack. It should read "daily wear" in my above comment.
And in case I wasn't clear, I find the idea that a person's clothing could ever be considered evidence of their 'asking for it' to be preposterous (and more than a little bit warped).

Flag as inappropriate

Tom at 2:17 PM on 8/12/2007

Doggo says: "Man, oh man, whatta lot of bile. Based on an article about the art, not having actually seen it. Typical Internet 'tards."

So is this how we defend feminist art, by using abusive slang that insults the developmentally disabled? Do you use the n-word to insult those who disagree with you, also?

Flag as inappropriate

Anti-Twisty at 10:29 PM on 8/12/2007

Well the important thing, Twisty, is that all feminism acts just like you want it to and no woman ever has an idea or works through an issue for herself in terms that would surprise you. You will never disagree with or misunderstand a TRUE feminist.

Anyway, out of your personal bubble, this woman is confronting rape, patriarchy, and the fetishization of helplessness in her work. It's unsettling and not nearly as obvious as the trolls - and the Twisties - want to believe it is.

Flag as inappropriate

Darrell at 11:08 AM on 8/13/2007

Aireanne - I imagine all the "fat" comments are inspired by the description that the doll's waist is 6" smaller than the woman's, and that the commenters don't realize that's probably because the doll is *a metal armature wrapped in rubber*.

Flag as inappropriate

Lisa at 8:16 AM on 8/16/2007

Wow, so much blissful ignorance in many of these comments. I'm sure that will be taken as condescending, but what won't here.

The question of the role of fantasy in feminism is incredibly relevant today, and a difficult and humble position for an artist to take is one that takes that on.

I am with "stunned by the troll party", as I also am stunned by the troll party. Go Amber for shaking up the trolls though. Keep up the interesting work and f--* everyone else.

Flag as inappropriate

Jade at 9:05 PM on 8/16/2007

I wasted equal amounts of time trying to understand the trolls as well as the 'stunned by the troll party's. Time completely wasted. I told myself never to read the comments.

Flag as inappropriate

Jenny at 7:08 PM on 8/23/2007

It's interesting to note that almost all the comments commending the artist for making brave, challenging and relevant artwork are thoughtful and well written, using correct spelling and punctuation.

Whereas, the comments deriding her work are full of grammatical errors, misused capital letters, and spelling mistakes. Moreover, I have yet to read a thoughtful response as to why someone feels that the work is not successful.

As an artist myself, I am aware, as I'm sure that Amber is, that the most useful feedback is often negative. If there are so many people out there that take issue with her work, why have we yet to see anything other than vitriolic insults posted here? Hate to say it, but it makes one question whether patience, education and intelligence might be an issue here.

Flag as inappropriate

commenter at 7:18 PM on 9/3/2007

It seems to me like there are two separate issues going on here: critique of Amber's artwork and critique of Amber's relationship with the doll. To complicate matters, there is the article's description of the art versus what is said in the art itself. I think the source of a lot of disagreements here (besides differing opinions of What Constitutes Art) is when one person is talking about one, and another person is talking about the other.

I can't tell whether Amber's artwork says something useful/meaningful to me or not, since I haven't seen it. Those who actually saw it screened, whether they liked or disliked it, are really the only ones in a position to know. Regardless, I am willing to give Amber the benefit of the doubt in that she is probably genuinely trying to say something-- whether or not the rest of us feel that what she has to say is valuable or something we've heard a million times before.

Some people here say that it raises questions for them-- isn't that, basically, an artist's mission accomplished? Even if *you* don't think they're good questions, obviously they're questions that those people hadn't thought of, so she's enlightened them-- congratulations; her art has accomplished something for them. She doesn't have to move everyone; she just has to make at least someone out there think. No work of art is going to move everybody-- especially one dealing with awareness issues like those of feminism, since everyone is at a different stage of awareness.

From the tone the article is written in, it sounds like Amberdoll is more than just an artistic statement to Amber; that she's also sexually appealing to her: "'I increasingly began thinking about her as my ideal woman and eventual wife,' she says. 'I would lie in bed and rub my hand on the sheets where I knew she’d be lying soon.'" That is a separate issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the art is worthwhile. If that's what you're criticising, then criticise that; don't confuse it, however, with the art. If all Amber wanted was to buy a sex doll or to be in pornos, she could have done that, with probably less hassle. The art isn't necessary for her to enjoy her doll. It's a separate issue. If your critique is "ew, lesbian with fetish for twin doll", then be honest and make that critique instead (and watch all the lesbians with fetishes for twin dolls tell you how prejudiced you are, lol.) But criticising someone because you think they're gross, or narcissistic, or attention-whoring, or some other thing that you dislike about them personally, is different from critiquing their art. Maybe you would think Michaelangelo was an asshole, too, but you probably wouldn't let that affect your opinion of his actual work; the same distancing needs to be applied when critiquing something modern and weird. So please get it sorted out in your head whether you are criticising her art or her personal life, and address one or the other accordingly.

Amberdoll is, as the article pointed out, thinner, and as the pictures pointed out, more smooth-faced than the real Amber. Of course the doll is prettier. Is this because Amber has an airbrushed view of herself, or because that's just how dolls are most easily made? (The company is set up to make sex toys, not to paint realistic pictures.) I don't know; I am so not in a position to judge that, because I don't know her from Adam (Eve?) and I'm not even going to guess what goes on in a stranger's mind. However, I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she's not a narcissistic blind idiot until proven otherwise.

In short, everyone quit making assumptions, and quit confusing Amber's life with her work.

Oh, and Jenny? There shouldn't be a comma after "whereas". ;)

Flag as inappropriate

kingliving at 4:06 AM on 9/8/2007

We're all questions really raised by this project answered in Haunted by CHuck Palahniuk....... seems like quite the rip off.

Flag as inappropriate

so-called "Austin Mayor" at 9:49 PM on 9/25/2007

Won't someone give me thousands of dollars to make art with my poop?

-- SCAM

Flag as inappropriate

ken nava at 10:59 AM on 10/5/2007

I would question the motives of ANY artist who uses sex in art. Sex is an easy way to get attention. It does not mean the artist is not good, just that they need to prove more. Robert Mapplethorpe was brilliant; this women is not.

Flag as inappropriate

av at 11:35 AM on 10/7/2007

silvergalena says: "If a guy did this, you'd probably put him on some kind of sex-offender watch list." Guys do this stuff ALL THE TIME! Do you know how many men buy these dolls with whom they have sex in any way they please. That's absolutely normalized. But if a woman does it, she's suddenly a sex freak? THAT is about the most anti-feminist thing I've ever heard. As is telling women that they have to avoid certain professions in order to be taken seriously. These comments are SO sexist. No one - self righteous "feminist" women included - should be telling women what they can or cannot do for a living. I thought the whole point of feminism is that women can do anything they wish in their lives - unrestricted by gender. Speaking with a shaming tone to other women because you think their exhibitionistic sexuality is wrong is FAR from feminist. It's hiding your own moralistic views behind the term feminism.

Can't women please stop picking on each other and how we represent ourselves as sexual beings and look outward. There are far more atrocities against women going on out there in the world with which we could be concerning ourselves. REAL political issues of abuse and inequality. Lots to think about beyond just sitting around using sophisticated rhetoric to call each other "slut" or "whore." All the people who criticize the artist on the basis that she somehow makes feminism look bad, are just being needlessly catty. Come on women! Unclench your assholes already.

Flag as inappropriate

bubba at 9:57 AM on 10/9/2007

Feminism is so trite. Aren't the 1960s over?

Flag as inappropriate

Steve Dahl at 1:45 AM on 10/18/2007

I still love this story, but I just hate myself for thinking of Howard Stern at the same time.

Flag as inappropriate

dice at 5:13 PM on 10/22/2007

"asking for it clothes"? i liked her until i read this line. that's just fucking insulting.

Flag as inappropriate

shygirl2 at 8:27 PM on 10/22/2007

dear dice, this has already been addresed. see above:shy girl at 11:51 PM on 8/11/2007I read her comment about the " 'asking for it' outfits" as sarcastic. I thought that her point in saying so was that in mainstream films women are depicted as inviting sexual violence by wearing certain styles, while at the same time these clothes are readily available and promoted as day wear in malls across America.Perhaps it was meant as a comment about how normative both images portraying sexual violence and sexualized clothing are? (I will admit that by the tone of the article, this point come across clumsily)

Flag as inappropriate

no at 12:44 PM on 10/23/2007

this 'art' is W E A K .

Flag as inappropriate

cory at 10:17 PM on 11/6/2007

i am a artist from iowa and have thought about going to iowa state like amber, but maybe now i won't... it is sad that she wasted so much time and money on a art degree when she oviously doesn't even have any true art talent, all she is doing is shock value... it works, but it's not real art because you don't express anything about yourself or your feelings, you only do what you think will baffle or anger people, a 5 year old can do that in a temper tantrum

Flag as inappropriate

cory at 10:23 PM on 11/6/2007

and to the people who praise this as art... saying it is new and amber is pushing new boundries... no she isn't... look up your art history folks, it's dadaism if its anything to be called art, and the dada movement wasn't art.. get it, if not look it up. for my option this isn't art, this isn't even creative it is just another way for someone who was never told they suck at art to destroy the vision of modern art in the eyes of your average joe. I think she should see a shrink.. and this is coming from an artist who paints skeletons and paintings crazy people have told me they relate too, hey amber maybe you should buy one of my paintings!

Flag as inappropriate

Miss at 9:21 PM on 12/10/2007

I wish I had thought of this first so I could have a good excuse to fuck a RealDoll.

Flag as inappropriate

totalsuper at 6:15 PM on 12/11/2007

CasperGhostboy: fancy meeting you here. :-) Personally, I think the relationship you show with Daphne is far healthier than what Amber has done. I think people sense the sensationalism in her displays and find it pretentious. We've both seen this issue before: marrying the doll. I think the people who pointed out how it smacks of a publicity stunt have it nailed.

Flag as inappropriate

Melissa at 2:46 AM on 12/24/2007

I think she's off her rocker. It isn't new, it isn't inventive, it's been done. It's not artistic in the least. She has a lot of patterns of a serial killer. At least she's taking her personal and sexual frustrations out on a doll. It's all like some supid [anti]reality show that people think is theatrically artistic but is a load of sh*t. I'm an artist and like most of the other artists on here, I feel personally offended by what people can call art these days and this totally tips the scale. Amber needs to be in therapy for her apparent lack of normal social skills and probably abusive men in her childhood.

Flag as inappropriate

KHolliday at 9:52 PM on 2/4/2008

All art is a mirror, and our responses to that art give clues to our own issues. To "Melissa", you state that Amber "has a lot of patterns of a serial killer" - what do you mean by that? Do you know for a fact that the artist in question; wet her bed until puberty, killed and mutillated animals as a child, was severely tortured/abused as a child, etc? Is it perhaps you (and the other extreme responders) who have sexual and/or abuse issues and you simply can't handle confronting them in Amber's art? Otherwise, why the strident attitude? Why take what any artist does so personally?

Flag as inappropriate

Ras Thavas at 7:17 PM on 2/28/2008

This moves us into the future. Increasingly sophisticated fembots will enable us to live our profoundest wishes...

"How is it that suddenly feminism became a pursuit of ever-increasing skankiness and sexualized behavior"

Because feminists are skanks, every one.

Flag as inappropriate

The Castle Anthrax at 1:13 PM on 2/29/2008

Uh. I don't get it.

Flag as inappropriate

elle at 12:05 PM on 3/7/2008

she is so gay and boring.

Flag as inappropriate

Bunny at 1:37 PM on 4/15/2008

I love people and their bizarreness. Excellent.

Flag as inappropriate

Liz at 1:30 AM on 4/20/2008

I really just don't understand how this goes along with ideas of feminism. Sure, rape and violation... simple idea that are tied to feminism. But having a sex doll made to your image and not only toting it around but treating it as a real person is just something I can't grasp. Especially having a physical, sexually violent relationship with it. It's like dehumanizing your own self, and while that packs quite a punch, just what kind of psychological issues are lying under the surface of all of this?

I really just don't see how it can be looked at as such a wonderful feminist statement when really there's a lot more to it than reclaiming or making new statements about the female experience. Call me silly, but I believe this has something more to it that's a bit too dark and disgusting to even think about further.

How someone could justify giving a grant to this silly project is beyond me. Then again, I'm not one for absurdism.

Flag as inappropriate

SOMETHING AWFUL DOT COM at 7:36 AM on 4/22/2008

I fuck dolls too, so go fuck yourselves. I am a male who has ordered a male doll with a giant cock so I can stick it in my base all day. And I'm STILL better than all of you WoW players.

Add a comment

Required, but will never be displayed

This math problem is an anti-spam measure

(please read our policy)



From the Reader blogs

Chicagoland Whet Moser: Celebrate Studs Terkel's birthday on WFMT.
Friday at 2:57 pm