Read on Twitter
In 2021 we can address how using the term “raw” to describe any marginalized work is belittling & patronizing.
When reviewing Black & Indigenous art it’s frankly racist and lazy because there is always next to no context given to the definition of ‘raw’.
When reviewing Black & Indigenous art it’s frankly racist and lazy because there is always next to no context given to the definition of ‘raw’.
There are layers here. One meaning is literally not cooked/baked/finished and plays deeply into the Eurocentric Art Institution’s narrative and ideals. What you’re actually saying in this sense is we aren’t there yet in our craft and practice. This is incorrect.
The second meaning is injury: a rubbing raw, a bruised expanse. You are placing our craft into a box of trauma and ignoring how many multitudes could fit into our vulnerability. This feeds into the cyclical nature of trauma porn that those who belong to the White Gaze propagate.
I cringe when I see the would raw, because it’s truly one of the laziest break downs possible. It’s also inadequate in terms. My work tackles the expanse of which my experiences are scattered: some of them processed and some not, but the art is still art and my own.
You’re interacting with work that took so much out of the artist: don’t call it raw, call it tender. It struck a nerve and reverberated inside of you, even rattled you. Don’t use the word raw if it made you uncomfortable, you had to address a truth you weren’t familiar with yet.
Don’t use the word raw.
