This review was initially published as part of a now abandoned journal project under the title -cene.
…
“Don’t allow this broken culture to send you a message that you’re a bad person because you’re a man, because you like to tell a joke, because you like to have a beer with your friends, or because you’re competitive.“
-JD Vance, VPOTUS (and alleged weirdo)
Summer is often a slow time in the Art world, as in much of a society built around summer vacation from school. Satellite Space on Poole Road, run, in its current iteration, by local artist and co-founder Marriot Sheldon, decided to keep the temperature high, with CJ Martin’s Phony Tough, on view until July 26. Martin’s first solo show since he arrived in the area a few years ago, the work is a departure from the non-figurative painting that we’ve seen from him to date.
Regular readers know I’m a regular reader of Ravi Gupta. He recently hosted an interview with Heidi Blake on his pod “Lost Debate” about her extensively researched piece in the New Yorker on Andrew Tate, easily one of the most noxious and toxic icons of the Manosphere. I bring this up as we begin because Tate’s lifestyle is performative in the extreme. I must confess I only listened to the pod because of the timing of its release with this review, so I am quite new to the sordid details of Tate’s life and ongoing performance, and certainly no expert on the Manosphere (I have intentionally avoided the Netflix documentary of the same name, by Louis Theroux). I consumed enough material on this garbage though to see that many of the excesses of “western chauvinists” which are claimed as “theater” to make a point- to an audience of distressingly young and un-worldly young men- are not unique just to Tate. BTW, if you think this filth is impacting someone you love, try this explainer.
In Martin’s words from the show statement, though, “the more intense the performance, the greater the danger of it betraying itself.” Phony (or phoney) is an adjective and noun used to describe someone who falsely pretends to be something they are not. The first thing a viewer is likely to note though is that, nothing in the show is pretending to be tough, or aping “toughness,” at all. And the work is fairly specific in where it sets its sights- there aren’t any dudes in blue jeans riding horses or building things or fixing their trucks, or even getting in cage fights. Phony Tough sets the stage right from the jump- instead of “macho” imagery or objects, we get goofy, smirking devils, 7th grade Art class skull-and-crossbones, tufting, and in the middle of it all, floppy phalluses that resolve into swords upon closer inspection.
While the material choices vary and take off in a few directions, the thing they all have in common is that they are showing us how readily we all accept the cultural understanding of how to communicate masculinity, because, well, that’s clearly *not* it.
The critique of performative toughness is not directed at all outward expressions of maleness (ergo no race car drivers, etc). As I said to start, there is a *very* real cultural context to the hypothesis of Phony Tough- a pervasive, bizarre infatuation with projecting affiliation with a set of ideas conflated with “authentic” manliness, such as exhibited by our current VP. Also, and, the intrepid viewer who digs a little will find a searing intensity in the references- the second image below is provided to illustrate the source material (The Totenkopf, or Death’s Head, of the Nazi SS) of the work on the left. So, given the clear desire among denizens of the Manosphere for authoritarianism, Martin elects to call a spade a spade.
I reached out to Martin to ask him a few questions about the exhibit- below are edited for length and clarity.
Sterling
Are the materials the opposite of “manly” choices?
CJ Martin
The materials are soft. I think it’s as simple as the fact that men are told to be hard and never soft.
SB
The symbology is dark. Is there any sort of conflation in the choice of icons?
CM
It definitely has a lot of gravity. It might be symbolism or imagery of violent authoritarians of the last century, but this artwork should be a finger pointing directly at the capacity of the same impulses around us today. I hope ideas such as “the banality of evil” aren’t far behind.
SB
The work is sort of funny too though, because it’s talking shit, and being able to talk shit is a such a bro thing. Thoughts?
CJM
It’s definitely funny, but it’s not a joke. A really important word I think of with this work is “precarious” and talking shit can be pretty precarious. It reminds me of a sharp witted friend in high school who knew how to turn the tables on some dimwitted bullies when he directed that wit their way.
SB
Along the lines of above- is the problem that racist pig misogynists don’t feel shame or just not the right kind?
CM
I think the racism, the misogyny, the boorishness come from a place of deep shame and the fear of that shame being exposed. It’s also important to consider that rule by fear is under direct threat from being mocked. It’s why Trump has gone after late night, and it’s why they absolutely hated being called weird during the campaign. It’s important for us to keep our humor, and that’s why it factors in the show. If there were a machine that kills fascists, I believe humor might be the gas it runs on.
SB
Is the work an indictment of the need for tribe identity? Masculinity isn’t virtue signaling in the way the left or right defines it, but it is “pack”signaling
CM
The need to belong is deeply human, and I wouldn’t want to indict that kind of impulse. When a performance relies on pushing someone else out to preserve one’s own place in the pack, that comes from a place of fear. I think we should endorse the kind of masculinity that uses strength to make room in the pack and to create belonging.
SB
Why did you avoid the modifier “toxic”?
CM
I think at one point toxic masculinity felt like a really useful phrase, but it feels so filtered through pop-psychology that it’s lost some of its utility. I’d like to avoid the work being too didactic. If the type of person I disagree with most strongly was to see this work, they’d be the person I would want more than any to suspend their certainty and come along. While the work is absolutely an indictment of certain “toxic” impulses, I hope it also open cracks to see the humanity and fragility being human entails beneath the posturing of masculinity.
I believe staying soft requires a great deal of strength, and nothing else banishes the darkness of hate like the light of empathy.
Leave a Reply