Isabel Diana

Language – the way we speak and the strength words carry. The idea that actions speak louder than words is a myth in my opinion because speaking is an action so really it is the same. As a member of society we are taught that our words hold value and that they can affect people deeply.I remember learning that in kindergarten. So why is it that as we get older those lines start to blur and we forget that words can hurt if not considered before spoken.

This piece is based on the words that did hurt on the words that do still hurt.

It was written to address the phrases and language society has used to describe or ask me about my identity. I am a Canadian immigrant who identifies as she, was raised in a multi-cultural home and who happens to be adopted.

People are often offended that I do not tell them when we first meet that I am adopted. Apparently I’m supposed to say: Hi my name is Isabel and I’m adopted.

Now I would like to take a second to acknowledge the difference between those two phrases ‘happens to be adopted’ and ‘I amadopted.’ Two different uses of language, neither of them wrong. The only difference is that I happen to identify with one more than the other. Sadly,society does seem to notice that detail, but I do.

The conversation I have attempted to create between the portraits and the paper hanging from the string is about a question that would be seen as disrespectful and rude versus a question that is seen as normal. Why is that though?

I find it hard to educate others in the flaws of the language used to talk about adoption because it is a personal topic that holds many emotions for me. For this piece I chose to let all the rules on what is appropriate and what is not disappear. This work is neither appropriate, or inappropriate, instead it is raw. I stand here unapologetic for calling society out and for the anger that roots my response.

For the base of the work I created a list consisting of both questions and statements. For each t-shirt I chose to place one of the phrases from the initial list. The list is made up by words people have said to me that have stuck with me and have influenced my perception of speaking to people about adoption. I find it interesting to think that out of the context of the conversation, these phrases look harsh, rude and unthinkable. While when speaking to me these words just flow in conversation so naturally. They have an unwelcome home within the conversation of adoption, that in truth hurts.

My hope with this work is that the viewer takes amoment to consider not only the phrase but themselves. In the moment, after seeing the statements on a shirt, I hope the viewer will acknowledge the emotions they hold and carry them like I have. So that when they are presented with the topic of adoption they consider this work before speaking.

I chose to directly address the viewer within my piece, a stylistic choice strongly influenced by Barbara Kruger. Within her work she often uses language that allows the viewer to fully enter the space. By that I mean that her language is often information and colloquial in tone. A style that I felt suited this work because of the societal references. I speak about Kruger not only for language but also the impact her artwork creates. The way the viewer in entranced and seduced by her work without even knowing it is happening. She traps them within the language and visuals of her work.

With those ideas in mind I created the atmosphere of the piece. I wanted to trap the viewer in these statements like I have been my whole life. To continue to pull viewers in I chose to use my own figure to contextualize the t-shirts. One work that suported the idea of contextualizinga t-shirt is the work of Shelley Niro, “The Shirt”. The piece places a female figure in t-shirts that hold statements related to the loss of aboriginal land.The figure is placed on a background of abandoned land and each imagetransitions by having a different shirt each with a different phrase that continue the evolution of the loss of land. This piece helped guide me in finding a way of presenting text but also how to make sure a continuous flow was created throughout the piece.

The decision to space out the questions and phrases,created a loss of information at the beginning that gradually helped the viewer place the story back together. Regarding to portraiture, I chose to go in different from Niro, in the sense of creatinga loss of space through the background. I felt as though the imagery would be stronger if there was less information competing with the text of the t-shirts and the facial expressions. Regarding the face, I chose to place myself in the rawest form: no makeup, no glasses and natural hair. My decision was based on the hope that the viewer would see the direct correlation between the text and my emotions. I did not hide my emotions I wore them on my face. I allowed the viewer to see the non-reaction: a silenced image in facial expression.

From each portrait there is a small piece of paper that in red text holds my response.The language I always want to answer with but feel shame in saying it out loud.I find that when you try to answer someone with the honest truth they find it offensive. This is raw though, these are my emotions and my instant reactions.I did not think in creating them, much like how people do not think when asking them. The language itself imitates the ones written on the t-shirts allowingfor the conversation to continue by the question and answer dynamic.

The dynamic of question and answer is one I tried tocontinue throughout the entirety of the piece. From the portraits to the smalltext boxes, and the overalls and red font t-shirt hanging to imitate my figureonce more.

The clear color palette of red to showcase my ownvoice within the piece contradicting the black and white to represent society’sview point. There is a large amount of strength in the outfit presented throughthe physical clothing. The outfit itself being made up of a t-shirt with the word adopted, the same font as the t-shirts in the photograph with the only difference is the ink, which is red on this t-shirt. I placed the shirt within a pair of overalls that were also used within the portraits, this time being fully attached and creating a trap for the t-shirt. This action is the imitation of the conversation of adoption, myself as the t-shirt being trappedby the words of society with nowhere to escape without one part having to be removed, while still considering that if one part is removed, you are completely exposed. The portraiture is my ability to expose myself. To allow the view to see a side of myself that would be considered rude or thoughtless.

So where does one go from there? Do you allow yourself to stay in a space that makes you feel to be less or uncomfortable or do you address the situation? I believe that these are the questions that I am currently asking myself and trying to contextualize withinmy own experiences. This artwork allowed me to consider the past and addressthe future. 

 How does a modern unapologetic portrait dressed in statements that echo as you look away affect us? The answer is they make us think. They make us consider how the value of language and the emotions that stay after the words are said. I allowed myself to answer the questions in this work because the truth is that no one ever has allowed me to,and I think that’s what hurts the most. For each set of words that I said to I also carry an answer. Maybe not the one you want to hear, but if I am being honest I never wanted to hear your question and that is okay. We are allowed to feel and react harshly, because we are human and I am the same as you. My details may be different but still I am a person. 

I thank the viewer for entering my space and allowing me to enter yours.

2018