Today is the release day for my vampire/romance/erotica “Love Bites Back” from Freya’s Bower (www.freyasbower.com). Here’s the back cover blurb:
I’m Crystal Payne, yeah I know it’s not an original name, but yeah, it’s better than nothing. What do I do? Well I hunt those things that go bump in the night for profit. Notice I didn’t say fun? So when a vampire comes to visit trying to hire me, I’m a little less than enthusiastic, no matter how handsome and debonair he is. Instead, I take a job for the Snowden family. Their daughter Heather has gone missing in a notorious club frequented (and owned) by vampires… The Uptown Club. It’s a nasty place, and I know Heather’s been missing for three days. That can only mean one thing. She’s no longer human but a bloodsucking menace that needs to be put down. Maybe if I’m lucky I can clean the entire place out. If I’m very, very lucky, that is.
A couple weeks ago when I was telling my friend about my New Year’s resolutions, I was explaining about the one where I’m no longer going to hook up with guys unless I’m in a committed relationship with them. My reason is because what I want is someone who likes me as much as I like them (or as close as you can get because the odds of it being totally equal are very slim…and immeasurable). She said there is this book called Choke by Chuck Palahniuk about a guy who has an addiction, and in the book the main character says how he needs someone who has a mutual addiction to him. When she said that, I was like, “Yes! That’s exactly it!” I had to read this book.
I always wanted to read a book by Palahniuk, and she was always talking about them, so she loaned me her copy of Choke. From the start I really loved Palahniuk’s style of writing. I mentioned to another friend that it is quite clear that he has a gift for making the reader read his book the way he wants it to be read…if that makes any sense. “Yes,” she assured me, “it makes sense.”
There is also no doubt that he is creative. The story had a lot of different ingredients to it, and the way they are put together is very digestible, and that’s actually really funny if you’ve read the book. (Read the book, and you’ll understand the funny.) The main character, Victor Mancini, is a sex addict who goes to sex addiction workshops just to hook up with other sex addicts. He works at a colonial park, but his real source of income is from those who have saved his life on the many occasions he goes to restaurants to choke and be saved. The money is a necessity to pay for his mother’s hospital fees. That is like a very small piece of the story. All of the characters are interesting and fully fleshed out, even the ones Victor has only brief encounters with.
The full quote that my friend was talking about was:
What I need is to be indispensable to somebody. Who I need is somebody that will eat up all my free time, my ego, my attention. Somebody addicted to me. A mutual addiction.
When I read that, I was disappointed because I don’t feel that way at all. I only agree with the mutual addiction part. As for the rest of it…no…I run away from shit like that. If I wanted someone to need me like that, I’d still be with my ex-boyfriend. Personally, I like my freedom and respect those who do, too. I want someone I can respect and trust. I don’t want a fucking leech. Parasite. No.
Despite the disappointment of the quote, the reason I read the book in the first place, I’m glad I read it. It was an interesting look into the male psyche. Even though Victor Mancini isn’t necessarily your typical male, some of it is clearly true of males in general. Like how men have to think about nonsexual things while having sex or else they shoot their load too quickly. Although I already knew this from when I asked my friend what was wrong one time while we were having sex, and he told me he was trying to focus on other things because he was about to come. He breathed in deep, looked away, his eyes lit up, “Hey, coffee maker.”
I think you’re really hot. I don’t know why, but there is something about you that makes me want to immediately rip your clothes off.
Now, this is not a good idea. As you may remember, I just broke up with someone. And we were together for a long time. So I don’t think I’m ready for anything right now, not even just hooking up. I think to sleep with someone now would make me all vulnerable and crazy. Plus you know all my friends, and I’m not into the incestuous circle of friends who all sleep together shit. I mean, I need to keep my friends and my rebounding separate, to avoid the awkwardness.
But seriously, if you had touched my back one more time I think your clothes would have been off before we got to the subway. And when you picked me up while we were hugging, I was imagining a completely different event going on, and by the way, it was really really good.
Ever walk around London’s East End and catch sight of a nude woman in a gas mask on a yellow-painted wall? If so, you’ve discovered the artistic ingenuity of Keith Hopewell, aka Part2ism.
Since the 80s when he created his first piece of street art, his style has evolved to reflect a changing state-of-mind and the current political/economic environment. His work is a bit rebellious, a bit controversial, a bit erotic, sensuous, pornographic at times, and always thought-provoking. Experimenting with beauty in death and the ugly faces of life – like war, consumerism and religious fanaticism - Part2ism has intrigued London and other cities with floral skulls, nudes hand-painted with photo precision and unique military typography. He’s stretched the boundaries of street art to show his work in gallery exhibitions and his art was featured on the front cover of the London Street Art Anthology a few months ago. When he’s not busy being a revolutionary artist, Part2ism has also been producing rap/hip-hop music for the past decade or two.
For this week’s London Art Spot, he talked to us about his famous Tamara series, his influences and why he chose the name Part2ism.
LLO: You’ve been noted as a pioneer in photorealist graffiti. How long have you been a graffiti artist and where did you create your first “photorealist” piece?
P2: I used to write and spray MOD-related logos like the The Who and The Jam everywhere in the 80s when I was 11 or 12-years-old. When I saw what was happening on the New York subway, I really had to get involved and never questioned why. The mid-80s, for me, was an exciting time, but a bit of a fun thing. I was young like most writers in the UK at that time and was influenced by the US heros. But, before the 80s were over, I became more obsessed with developing my own corner in the culture. I experimented with a lot more avant-garde concepts. The photorealism developed slowly over 1989-1990. Before then, it was about portraits that were not painted as articulately.
LLO: Your style has changed quite a bit over the years. P2: Ha ha, true. I’m a human being and I suppose it’s not much different from eating different meals. You get an intuition and follow it because it feels right. Your art should represent your true self and it doesn’t feel right to me if you ain’t moving forward with your work. People have called me the “Renaissance Man” which is great for the ego, but bad for future productions if you take it too seriously. I believe keeping your work relevent and challenging conventional ideas stops the mind from going soft.
LLO: Have you seen a change in the way people have perceived your work over the years?
P2: No, I still have to work twice as hard as most people. It’s great for my work but very tiring (laughs).
LLO: Why did you choose the name Part2ism? What does it mean?
P2: It’s just a play on the name Part 2 which was my writing name. I hate being categorised, so adding -ism makes Part 2 a practice. I kinda operate more in the middle ground between graffiti, street art and contemporary art from a bit of an outsider position and am not really accepted by any of them. There was always the label “alternative art” which categorised street work in New York in the 60s, 70s and 80s, but that just reminds me of the music industry; when they don’t know how to box a particular sound, they just label it “alternative” or left-field. They really suggest that what you do doesn’t fit, which can’t really benefit the artist. I’m just an artist period! I utilize a bit of everything and add it to my hybrid. categories are really for the media and not us. Keeps people’s minds neat, tidy and rigid if things are more formulaic.
LLO: How does living in London influence your creativity?
P2: Most cities outside London don’t have such an abundance of pubic space to work on, so London is unique in this way. A lot of the time I get out of London when I’m looking for inspiration. I get my ideas a lot clearer in the country and when they come, I know exactly where in London to execute the idea. I’ve always spent a lot of hours walking around London no matter how far apart places are; this is how you learn what’s what in the capital.
LLO: Do you prefer exhibiting in galleries or on the street?
P2: I don’t discriminate; art is applicable everywhere on any medium.
LLO: Your series Tamara got a lot of attention. Can you tell us a bit about these pieces, who Tamara is and what they mean?
P2: Those paintings are loosely based around the idea of consumerism consuming itself. Tamara [Seabrook] was my girlfriend at the time. We both thought works exploring the body, erotics and death were missing in the modern spray cannist scenes, so we got to work. Tamara worked a lot with erotics and photography and I was exploring these realms too, so we brought it all together.
LLO: Which piece of work are you most proud of and why?
P2: Oh gosh; this changes all the time. Maybe the Floral Skull right now, because it’s started me working in a totally new way. It’s the foundation for all the new work I’ve got coming out later this year.
LLO: Which other London-based artists do you admire?
P2: I’m digging R.O.A. at the moment. He’s not from London, but he’s definitely brought something different to the melting pot…
LLO: Where can see your work now?
P2: My next show is in New York, but Londoners keep your eyes out on the streets shortly!
Thanks Part2ism!
Catch Part2ism on Facebook: www.facebook.com/keith.hopewell
Sometimes, living is a celluloid loop,
a three minute picture show shown
on the back of your eyeballs. The
textures of the scenes burned into
the memory. The same cruel lips,
caresses, stinging words, slamming
doors. Then the epilogue filled with
joy, smiles, Elysian fields, gentle
breezes, new age music. The projectionist
is a sleep, snoring slack mouthed,
cradling an empty bottle of scotch.
The movie goer doesn’t care, they
are there waiting for life’s
sad repetition to start over.
We paid good money for the show
didn’t we?
The ladies love to see Robert Pattinson getting steamy with Kristen Stewart in the “Twilight” films, and now he’s set for an on-screen hookup with Uma Thurman.
According to a report, the “New Moon” stud has signed on for the lead in “Bel Ami,” playing an ambitious young journalist named Georges Duroy.
And in the process of sleeping his way to the top, Pattinson’s character ends up in the sack with Thurman’s character Madeleine.
Robert recently admitted that he’s a bit apprehensive with anything outside his mainstay vampire role. “You get offered stuff that you would never dream of getting offered before, but that’s also scary. You don’t have to audition for anything. But I don’t want to do a movie just so it gets made. You have to question yourself a lot more. Before Twilight, I did any movie that I got offered, and you’d try and make the best of it afterward. But now, you’re expected to come into the movie and provide not only economic viability, but also a performance as well.”
Go to www.mrlocario.com for sex, dating and relationship advice
Her Highness Anonymous asked: What about foreplay before marriage? How far is too far etc.? Answer: Too far is when a woman loses a man she hopes to keep. So, let’s examine foreplay in terms that tend to keep rather than chase off a man.
Foreplay delayed beats afterplay remorse.
Men see romance as necessary step to foreplay. Her first challenge is to distinguish romantic words that are acceptable from foreplay words, ideas, and conversations that should be unacceptable. If she can’t draw the line, confusion will haunt her attempts to govern her life while in foreplay mode.
By separating the romantic from foreplay, she decides what her standards are and lives up to them. We’re all more admirable, when we live up to something bigger and more worthwhile than ourselves. Chasteness qualifies in the male mind, but she has to convince herself first.
A man sees that she’s able to resist his greatest efforts, passions, promises, and commitment pledges. Consequently, he respects her fortitude in protecting what men imagine as her greatest asset. (He thinks: ‘She must be refusing other men too’. The more stringent her standards the more convincing they appear, and the more she stands out among other women.)
A lack of foreplay anchors a man alongside a woman with notions of romance in his head. The longer she defers any foreplay, the more romantically inclined he becomes with her. (Unless he’s only after sex and dropping her confirms that.)
Persistent sexual pressures in modern society confuse men about female values about sex. Women can end it by drawing this line to forestall foreplay: ‘Talk about sex and the public is okay, if relevant to what’s of interest to us at a particular time; IOW it’s awkward if we don’t. Talk about me and sex in any shade or color is never okay.’
