Purity Culture as Seen in Cuties Outrage

by Georgia Moore

As online reviews of Maïmouna Doucouré’s Netflix original Cuties are amassing, it is remarkable to witness the irony of critique swelling precisely around the themes the film attempts to bring to light through a critical lens. The majority of those commenting admit to having not even seen the film; rather, they viewed a poorly-executed trailer. A Twitter trend emerged to #CancelNetflix for the objectification of a group of 11-year-old French girls who train for a dance competition that involves “scandalous” hip and butt giration. The hashtag has a dual, coinciding meaning, calling those to join in the social phenomenon of cancel culture, as well as the termination of their Netflix subscriptions.

The small movement is seemingly successful, as “disconnects were running at nearly 8x the daily levels observed in August,” according to Yahoo!Finance. 1 The girls in this film, much like in real life, are scandalized, yes. However, with the exception of a few dicey stylistic choices here and there (up close shots of the children’s butts in sparkly spandex, for example), I don’t believe all this panic is warranted. Instead, I believe it to be extremely misdirected.

One particular comment, in Tweet format, from the U.S. Democratic Representative Tusli Gabbard, set the discussion ablaze: “.@netflix child porn “Cuties” will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade. 1 in 4 victims of trafficking are children. It happened to my friend’s 13 year old daughter. Netflix, you are now complicit. #CancelNetflix.” 2

My point is not to ignore the very real, devastatingly violent way girls and women continue to be brutalized. Violence against women and girls, including sex trafficking, is deeply prevalent across the world. In Massachusetts, “the attorney general alone has prosecuted more than 50 people for trafficking at massage parlors, hotels, and brothels,” according to the Boston Globe. 3 Young people, especially young girls, are reminded of their vulnerability to exploitation and violence through constant indicators of their potential victimhood. Dress codes (the three finger rule for straps), reminders not to walk alone, and billboards with public service announcements confronting Intimate Partner Violence both raise awareness and instill fear.

But I ask, is picking a fight with Netflix the most effective route when tackling this issue? (If we are to demand a platform is shut down for being complicit in the actions Gabbard mentioned in her Tweet, we should probably start with Pornhub, a site notorious for distributing monetized content of actual child abuse and trafficking).

Ultimately, everything about young girls’ bodies seems to be so escalated that there is no actual space to talk about their coming-of-age without the hysteria of oversexualization. How did the message behind Cuties instantly become about pedophiles’ behavior and not about the girls in the film themselves? There isn’t a “socially appropriate” way to talk about the objectification girls face from a very young age, but there needs to be a dialogue for these issues specifically, especially in mass media, where outreach is generous and influential. 

The sexual exploitation of girls is ubiquitous, and even seemingly mundane sites that are marketed to this demographic can be “read” as pornographic, where vlogs of young girls shopping for bras may suffice as explicit or exploitative content to some. An article in the New York Times shed light on pedophilia in the digital age, stating: “predators were using the comment section of YouTube videos with children to guide other pedophiles,” after a video of two 10-year-old girls in bikinis amassed a suspicious amount of views and created a warranted panic about Internet algorithms. 4

Young girls are being sexualized and pornified no matter what they do — if they are in a movie that’s trying to examine their victimization, if they shop for bras, if they wear tank tops to school, if they walk after dark — and in a weird twist, they are also blamed for it. It’s time to talk about how there are no safe venues for girls to experiment with sexuality, and we must address this issue because said practice of providing no safe forum creates further trauma. It should not be “taboo” to analyze girls’ exploitation, but a difficult yet completely necessary conversation. 

We should be uncomfortable watching a movie like Cuties. But we should not dismiss it as child pornography when Doucouré aims to condemn exactly that. Her film conveys very real examples of the ways young girls face exploitation as a way of raising awareness and creating a dialogue about the issue at hand. A response that demands the film’s instant removal from the public eye creates a false consciousness for girls who did experiment and are experimenting with sexuality at a young age, particularly when it comes to clothes and “risqué” media (like popular or “scandalous” dancing trends).

I knew girls like this. It’s not like they don’t exist. Their stories are just as valid as any other. I certainly took risks like this when I was young, as I was conditioned to! It’s interesting to see so many folks write off experiences like these as pedophilic when so many mass media outlets promote and engage in content that is actually exploitative, unlike Doucouré’s film. (It is also important to note that these same media outlets have no problem depicting young boys’ coming-of-age and sexuality).

Few people seem to support Cuties as an accurate representation of some girls’ realities, but those who do support the film — be it through Twitter, YouTube, or the press — call out the hypocrisy and irony of the hysteria surrounding it. One sex educator, Rukiat, took to her YouTube channel in a video titled: “CUTIES was brilliant. Here’s why,” to explore some of the key themes comprising the criticisms of Doucouré’s film. Rukiat states: “When you enforce purity culture onto young girls and you suppress their sexuality, that curiosity within them is left unnurtured.” 5 Her argument exposes what the Cuties outrage perpetuates. The reaction to Cuties further propagates the sentiment: just when someone starts to talk about girls’ sexuality, they get shut down, instantly written off as “taboo.”

Overall, it seems there are two things happening in opposition: the notion that Cuties as a critique of the sexualization of girls is actually reinforcing the sexualization of girls, and also, that there is no way to have a conversation without being accused of pornifying girls. Whether or not Cuties is a masterpiece or a flunk, Doucouré is sending us a plea to open up the conversation surrounding the plight young girls must endure as they come into their own sexuality while simultaneously being exploited every which way.

Therefore, it is imperative that we view Cuties as a worthy indictment of a very serious issue in our society — an issue that has a chance of dissipating, but only if it is openly talked about first.

ENDNOTES

1 Canal, Alexandra. “Netflix Cancellations Surge ‘Materially’ in the Wake of ‘Cuties’ Controversy, Data Shows.” Yahoo! Finance, Yahoo!, 19 Sept. 2020, finance.yahoo.com/news/netflix-cancellations-surge-following-cuties-controversy-data-hows-114312558.html?guccounter=1.   

2 Gabbard, Tulsi (@TulsiGabbard). “.@netflix child porn "Cuties" will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade. 1 in 4 victims of trafficking are children. It happened to my friend's 13 year old daughter. Netflix, you are now complicit. #CancelNetflix.” 11 Sept. 2020, 9:09PM. Tweet. 

3 Ebbert, Stephanie. “Sex Trafficking Is in Plain Sight in Massachusetts Communities.” BostonGlobe.com, The Boston Globe, 9 Mar. 2019, www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/03/09/mass-authorities-face-steep-hurdles-shutting-down-sex-trafficking/yFW40bBEEN9QtuIHaqTrmM/story.html.

4 Fisher, Max, and Amanda Taub. “On YouTube's Digital Playground, an Open Gate for Pedophiles.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 3 June 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/06/03/world/americas/youtube-pedophiles.html. 

5 RUKIAT. “CUTIES was brilliant. Here’s why.” Youtube. 30 Sept 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAssHJmKNDg.

Label-Less Love

by Faith Bugenhagen

Photography by Surya Sundararajan

There is a countdown clock on the The New York Times building, our generation’s save-the-date for when the climate catastrophe ends the world. Masks cloak our faces, ironic considering our generation’s need for validation based on our appearances. It’s as if the universe is serving us one colossal “fuck-you,” a kiss on the ass before it sends us all into our own versions of hell. 

And yet, we prevail. We prevail by living every day as if none of this is occurring. We block out the bad with the good, maybe to a fault, but that’s up for debate. Is it distraction, or a desire to live radically while everything around us is crumbling towards death? 

We live: by laughing, crying, loving, and hating. We meet for picnics and conferences and dates. We spend time with people despite dire restrictions to keep ourselves socially-distanced and safe. We normalize the new ways of living as if they have always been inherent to us.

It’s special how humans adapt. It’s been a sight to see these past, peculiar months. We’ve stood six feet apart, we’ve been touch-deprived and intimacy-starved. However, we’ve still dated, prioritizing feeling loved or desired in a time when those feelings may create a false sense of security. 

“False sense of security,” a pessimistic phrase some would argue, but isn’t that what these emotional and/or sexual connections are? These relationships are tiny bits and pieces of hope that put us back together, reminding us that the world we live in is still inhabitable, that our lives can continue in spite of what the news feeds us. What reminds us, though, distracts us, and that’s where the negativity ensues. 

Our stomachs are bottomless pits and our brains ache as we read articles telling us that we’re only living to die. Lapses in judgements and misunderstandings cloud our brains when they bear witness to an entire population of people who love each other. So we create a “consumable love” through manifestations of these fragmented situations that aren’t quite relationships, but rather “situation-ships.” 

Situation-ships: the in-between of casually dating or being friends versus actually being together in a relationship. Girlfriends, boyfriends, significant others: this is what we are now trying to avoid. We’ve constructed the idea that materializing commitment and embracing a relationship will become the largest inhibitor to our existences. 

We lie in beds in spaces that aren’t our own, without any right to do so. We spend hours of time, each and every day, with each other, without actually ever being anything to each other. Is it because we have experienced such colossal disaster in every aspect of our lives that we are now actually birthing it?

I’m not arguing that being both intimate and unattached to someone doesn’t work. In a perfect world, it could. But we don’t live in a utopia. We are not a happy, healthy population of individuals living today. We survive but we don’t thrive.  How could we possibly tackle being cool, distant, and unfeeling?

That is what our world wants us to be. Unempathetic. It is a dog-eat-dog experience that comes at our expense. To be unemotional means to be adaptable in this world. 

In reality, we are creating our own escape routes through microdoses of love and intimacy; we have rewritten what it is to experience these things. There is no inherent issue with this “in-between” we facilitate. However, we must remember that we are human... not devoid of emotion, or a desire to be truly and radically loved. 

Create and construct your own situation-ship to how you see fit, because we are all trying to keep our heads above water, swimming through the days. But wanting to communicate, to have more, to be selfish for a moment and desire greater fulfillment, will return us to regularity. It will remind us of our humanity.

Shelley Duvall: The Woman Every Working Artist Should Thank

by Matt McKinzie

---

Many people who know me know that I am a huge Shelley Duvall fan. Often times they furrow their brow in bewilderment when I gush about the actress. You mean the woman from The Shining who just cries all of the time? Yes, that woman. The woman from The Shining who cries all of the time, and who was perhaps one of the greatest actors of 1970s American cinema--and of cinema at large.

When people think of the “greats,” some names immediately come to mind: Brando, Hepburn, Streep, Davis, De Niro. And the list goes on. Rarely is the name “Shelley Duvall” uttered on that list. That’s because Shelley Duvall was, and is, exactly what the greats weren’t--and in spectacular and equal measure. She slipped in and out of polar opposite roles without having to change a single thing about her physical appearance. One moment she is the meek and unassuming daughter of a gas station attendant in Thieves Like Us, and the next minute she is a fast-talking New York journalist upstaging Woody Allen (ugh) in Annie Hall. On Monday, she is Millie Lammoreaux, the glamorous, delusional, and slowly-disillusioned rehab nurse in 3 Women, but by Friday she is the hysterical and markedly unglamorous wife of Jack Nicholson in The Shining. By Saturday, she is quite literally a cartoon character--transforming, before our eyes, into Popeye’s Olive Oyl, playing cheerful bride to none other than Robin Williams.

illustration by Elinor Bonifant

She achieves all of this--prolificity, tremendous versatility--practically without batting an eye. Sure, there were a few costume changes here and there (who can forget that iconic yellow dress from 3 Women? With the yellow wallpaper to match?). But the one thing that never--ever--changed was her face. In an industry overflowing with prosthetics and practical effects--enough to make Christian Bale quite literally become Dick Cheney--Shelley Duvall never abandoned a makeup-free, utterly natural state. This considered, it is also important to recognize that she did not fit into the movie star mold. She was never considered a “glamour girl” in the traditional sense. Her large eyes, superfluous smile, towering presence, and syrupy Southern drawl rarely matched the look and persona of her contemporaries. She scarcely fit a certain “type”--never playing the ingenue, the love interest, the “femme fatale.” But these qualities made her one-of-a-kind, and filled each performance she delivered with a charming and completely captivating sense of singularity. No one could be Shelley Duvall but Shelley Duvall. And no one other than Shelley Duvall could give a Shelley Duvall performance; a performance style where, much like Bale becoming Cheney, she became each distinct character she assumed, but never abandoned a sense of vulnerability, a tactile earthiness, and a complete naturalism that allowed her to stay utterly true to herself in a business built on a love affair with facades. Simply put, there was nothing standing between her and the camera. Everything about her was and is so...immediate.

It is these qualities that often finds Duvall at the mercy of some extreme vitriol. Her unwillingness to fit into a specific mold or industry norm bewilders those who place weight on such silliness. Furthermore, Stephen King blames his hatred for The Shining on Duvall’s performance, noting, “she’s basically just there to scream and be stupid.” Here, King is failing to realize three things: the strength, willpower, and ultimate sensitivity it takes a person to go to such extreme emotional lengths; the fact that Duvall was put through absolute hell on set by director Stanley Kubrick; and the fact that--amid all of this--she quite literally saves the film. Our ability to identify with Duvall’s poignant, palpable expression of terror turns what could have otherwise become a camp comedy (considering the often cartoonish nature of Nicholson’s performance) into what is now considered one of the greatest horror films ever made.

So who is Shelley Duvall? Yes, she is the screaming wife of Jack Nicholson in The Shining. But because of that, she is also a supreme torch-carrier for the role and importance of women in the horror genre. Beyond this, she is easily one of the most talented and underappreciated actors of the American New Wave--and American cinema in general. And ultimately, she is an artist who (as trite as it sounds) never abandoned her authentic self, in the face of forces that asked her to abandon (and too often attacked her for not abandoning) everything that made Shelley Duvall...well...Shelley Duvall.

In that way, let her be an inspiration to us all.

Deteriorating is a Becoming Event

Photos by Yuhan Cheng

Words by Carly McGoldrick

The last few weeks have felt particularly heavy. There’s a certain bleakness, now, as the city turns colder and old snow accumulates along the sidewalks. Puddles are getting cloudier, and I haven’t been able to go outside for more than ten minutes without freezing. Time is moving more slowly. I wish the sun didn’t set so early in the day.

I’ve been spending a lot of time swaying in the darkness of my room, blinds closed, half-comatose. I clutch my arms so tightly to my torso to contend with the cold, and also to avoid letting any important pieces of myself fall out.

There’s a nervousness and a fear, for whatever reason, that as the seasons change, and the snow freezes, and then melts and then falls again, that some piece of my identity is getting lost along the way.

It’s sort of indescribable, the feeling of deterioration. If nature is collapsing in on itself, why can’t I?

I exist in many forms.

It’s taken me awhile to believe that.

For years, I’ve suppressed my multitudes as a means of becoming

more digestible by other people.

It’s frightening to come to the realization

That I had been shaping myself so exhaustively

To satisfy the likes of others,

Rather than developing my own identity.

To instead become a shell of expectations, rather than a whole person.

I‘ve always liked to see myself reflected in my environment.

Now, instead of changing myself,

I change the things I see.

I go on walks.

I admire the water as it freezes and thaws,

Allowing its smooth form to run alongside its more jagged one,

Not fearful of the way in which its two versions are different.

Like that water,

I coexist with myself.

I am not fully one thing, but rather, I am many,

And I am transforming constantly.

I remember speaking to my mother on the phone in the airport terminal a month or two ago, before my flight home to Ohio. I had tears streaming down my face. At that time in my life, even the temporary change of a location, like the one from Massachusetts to Ohio, was disorienting. I didn’t want to go. I’m currently learning to adapt to that kind of infinitesimal change.

It was raining that day, and I remember how the raindrops framed the grime on the terminal windows, illuminating the planes and the runways and the workers and the luggage, all battling the storm outside. It’s funny how something so normal and so harmless, like water, can be such a nuisance.

When I got to Ohio that evening, it was snowing. I missed the rain in Massachusetts, but I would imagine I was glad to be see that Midwestern snow I had known and loved my whole life.

I’ve learned, or am currently learning, that there’s much to be learned from water, in all its forms. There’s power in deteriorating, in the ability to break oneself down, to then build oneself back up in another form. Like rain in one place, turning cold in another, I seek to become more comfortable with change. There lies much power in fluidity, and I’m learning to embrace that.

The Rise of Stick and Poke Tattooing

By Erin Christie and Mica Kendall

Personal anecdotes provided by Erin Christie

---

The stylistic trend of “Do it Yourself” art has extended its notoriety within millennial culture from not only basement DIY music to DIY pinterest craft making. In the same vein as DIY, the art of tattooing isn’t nearly a new concept, let alone one that’ll be stopping anytime soon. One thing that might be evolving, though, is the mass production of the practice, the “DIY-ness” of it, and how accessible it is for just about anyone with the means to sterilize a needle and a pot of ink to accomplish their own makeshift career. This subset of DIY, referred to as “stick and pokes tattooing” due to the nature in which they are crafted-- with a needle being used to repeatedly poke ink into the skin-- is, as Vogue describes, “the new septum piercings,” with stick and poke tattoos becoming increasingly preferred over the traditional tattoo gun in tattoo parlors.

When I first started getting tattoos, myself, I was extremely intimidated by the prospect of going into a tattoo parlor, and  the prices that were oftentimes attached to the service. Of course, you’re paying an artist to do their job, and that requires some sort of payout in exchange, but for a college student, the idea of wanting art on your body and being able to afford it is a whole different story. Despite this, I was determined to save up with the sole intention of ink.

When I got my second tattoo, I did so on an absolute whim of spontaneity. Hidden in a small alcove attached to a Brooklyn shop that sold anything from drug paraphernalia to sex toys laid “Fantasy Party Tattoo,” also known as two professional artists sitting at a countertop, tattoo guns in hand. Sat atop a teeny stool, I watched the tattoo artist (whose name I can’t even remember) drag the single needle-clad gun across my inner forearm and winced at the sting. The process, in entirety, was quick, easy, and unapologetic—simply an exchange of payment for a lifelong piece of artwork.

At least in my personal experience, getting stick and poke tattoos has been a practice that has a completely different energy.  

In a GQ article entitled “The Stylish Rise of Stick and Poke Tattoos,” writer Liza Corsillo says, “What were once known as ‘jail tattoos’ have become exceedingly popular among young creative types with a different view of tattooing.” Stick and poke has a strong emphasis on the intimacy behind the craft: as opposed to a tattoo gun, hand-poking is done by just that: by hand, with each “poke” of ink into the skin packed with meaning.  

From an artist and client perspective, it is important to note the financial benefits of stick and poking: not only are the materials much cheaper and accessible, but the work itself typically is, too. Not only are stick and pokes a cheaper alternative to the common $100 minimum at tattoo parlors, but the appeal in stick and pokes are centered around the intimate and more personalized experience between one and the stick and poke artist. Stick and poke tattoos are traditionally given in the artist’s own personal space, like their apartments or art studios. Thus, not only are you obtaining a personalized experience and getting a one of a kind, hand-drawn stick and poke design, but your experience is also much more laid back and personal considering the atmosphere (as opposed to the hectic, customer-ridden experience that comes with going to a tattoo parlor).

When I met Joo (jpcff on Instagram), I immediately felt an aura of warmth, despite how freezing it had been outside at the time. It was November, and I was visiting Joo with the intention of getting my first ever stick and poke, my third tattoo in total.  

Joo’s Somerville space was decorated with an assortment of flash sheets that I had seen on their Instagram, as well as other various sketches and tattoo designs. Apart from a traditional studio space, I felt at ease in Joo’s small bedroom-turned-tattoo parlor. During the session, we talked about everything from their plans to eventually branch out and start their own studio in New York City to the trials that I experience at my job at Urban Outfitters, all whilst Ariana Grande’s then newest, “Thank U, Next” played softly in the background.

As opposed to my personal past experiences, which felt much more business-like and formal, this was an entirely different experience, one that felt more like a meeting of two friends, each connected by art and the practice of inking homemade tattoos.

Aside from professional stick and poke artists, the art of stick and poke is very much a college milestone, in a way, especially within the Boston scene. Avery Kelly (@friendsround), a Northeastern Sophomore from Portland, Oregon recalls her stick and poke beginnings fondly, but not without cringing at her past self:

“So, I started because I was fifteen and wanted a tattoo for the 1975 (lol), but after realizing how accessible and expressive it is, started actually getting into it,” she said.  “I really love the community that comes with it; it’s probably why I started expanding my pokes to people other than my friends and started asking for payment.”

As she noted, a friend, Dylan (@violentwire), became a kind of mentor in terms of hand-poking when they met this past summer. They traded tattoos and he taught her a lot about technique and the community as a whole. “I love being able to trade art with people and decorate others as well as myself, and I see it as a sort of permanent jewelry,” Kelly said.

Throughout her time with the craft, she recalls her most memorable tattoo appointments:

“As for people I’ve poked, the most memorable is definitely Hinds!! The girls were on tour in the US, and their photographer posted on their story that they were looking for tour tats. I reached out, and we met up at the venue before the show and I gave Carlotta, Amber, their photog Neelam, and Emmett from Goodbye Honolulu lil tour mementos. They were super inviting and open and made me feel like my art was a valid form of tattooing!”

Though, the stick and poke tattoo process is more tedious and time consuming compared to the “one and done” technique of using a tattoo gun, the results are more individualized and meaningful. In essence, if you intend to support independent artists, stick and poke tattoos are a great alternative in terms of your ink needs, especially if you want to help artists get their start in the tattooing industry. What many people don’t realize is just how communal the art of stick and poking is: it’s not isolated to a specific area of the world, nor is it exclusive in any way, shape or form: it’s available to anyone who’s interested, and is loved by all who either poke themselves (like Avery and Joo) or enjoy receiving them (like myself).

A note for aspiring stick and poke artists: If you are an artist yourself, many companies offer stick and poke starter kits which are available to order online (i.e. at www.stick@poketattookit.com). Prices range from $44 to $68 a kit, but the kit comes with everything essential to conducting your own stick and poke tattoo.

The Men That Lead

by Nada Alturki

illustration by Pixie Kolesa

The wind blew in
And the Mercedes-Benz dragged in creatures of conspicuous self-worth
Who reek of high-end cologne
Ringing laughter
Traced with beer
and the comfort of unlimited credit cards And daddy’s paychecks
Masked in pink slapped skin they call a tan Their eyes see in a one-dimensional thrill Because their surroundings have been Molded to adjust just that
They walk around
With feet that stomp
Limbs that grope
Eyes that choke
And dicks that throb
For anything that looks
Exotic
Or not
It really doesn’t matter
As long as they fit into a size 6
And these are the same men
That teach our kids
And entertain our screens
And rule our countries

Illustration by Pixie Kolesa

Proximity

by Maya Pontone

Illustration by Coco Luan

The first thing I noticed was his height.

Before I had left for school in August, I was used to resting my chin on top of my brother’s head whenever he gave me a hug. But when Carter greeted me at the front door with that awkward side-hug so many 13 year-olds give, I was startled when the scruff of his dirty blonde hair brushed up against my cheek and ears. It had only been three months since I’d last seen him, but in that short time frame, I had clearly missed a lot. Now he was nearly as tall as me.

I can distinctly remember, in the weeks leading up to my first year of school, dreading the changes in my relationship with my family. I knew that while leaving home would give me the freedom to be my own person, it also meant separation from the people I saw every day from my first days of preschool to my last days of high school. As the oldest of three younger siblings, I wasn’t fully aware of the impact their daily presence had on my growth until I realized what my absence during some of the most formative years of their lives meant.

It suddenly hit me that I wouldn’t be there to offer guidance during their awkward middle school years, or to comfort them during the frustrating chaos of high school. Family group chats and phone calls could never replace sitting next to them at the kitchen counter while they struggled with Algebra homework, or listening to them from the front seat of the car while complained about some text a stupid boy sent them, or teasing them in the bathroom when they drunkenly brushed their teeth after their first party. Visits home over breaks wouldn’t just be vacations, but desperate attempts to play catch-up on all that I had missed in my siblings’ lives in the months I had been gone.

I never understood the true extent of everyone’s temporary presence in each of our lives until I realized those closest to me were no longer with me. I always considered my family to be permanent. But in reality, no one is meant to last forever. Regardless of how intertwined our lives may be with others, we are all leading separate lives; this truth can be hard to remember sometimes when we become unconsciously reliant on others’ unwavering presence.

Illustration by Coco Luan

Growing up, there were times when I felt overwhelmed by my family’s close proximity. It did not matter if I fled upstairs to my bedroom or snuck downstairs into the basement—there was no corner of the house where I could escape the noise of my family’s incessant yelling, laughing, crying, bickering, whining, and barking. I didn’t know then how much I would eventually yearn for this chaos when faced with the loneliness of individual silence

Stories and DMs

A Reconsideration

by Matthew Thomas

I experienced a sort of phenomenon the other week, when, lying in bed on a quiet Tuesday night, I numbly tapped away at my phone screen. It was around 11pm, and I had been off the grid for a few hours by that point, so I felt it appropriate to check in on those I knew—and those I really didn’t know at all—the one way I could: Instagram.

We have to consider what Instagram really is: a platform. It is not an extension of reality. Sure, it is a place where we document our lives in photographs. But nowadays you’d more easily find users of the app paranoid about “the grid” (how their photos look and flow together on their feed) than posting authentic, day-to-day material. We manicure our feeds, we don’t bare our souls on them. The only place on the app you might find any sort of soul-baring is on someone’s “finsta,” in which they can be truly unfiltered, only to a safe, select group who after years of each other’s company are not quick to pass judgement. But if our “finstas”—or what I like to think of as digital diaries enmeshed with shitposting—are only available to a limited and private audience, what new connections are we genuinely forming? With this in mind, I always perceived Instagram as a platform for performance, and therefore the last place for real human connection. It was all artifice, ulterior motives feigning authenticity, an artwork where the artist was involving less and less of their true self in the art.

But that night, my mind and heart were changed when I stumbled upon the story of a person who I really did not know at all. We had only met one night the previous semester in which we shared a juul beneath hazy neon lights, and exchanged social media information before parting ways. In this one story, the person chose to be refreshingly candid: there was no performance here, rather an untouched selfie against her bedroom wall, from which a Velvet Underground poster hung. The same Velvet Underground poster that hung above my own bed.

Art by Pixie Kolesa

My fingers flew to the message box: OMG I HAVE THE EXACT SAME VELVET UNDERGROUND POSTER IN MY DORM. Then, I stopped. Who am I to “slide into the DMs” of this person, who I barely know, about something so trivial as a poster? This could end disastrously. That was when I realized, this poster would never appear in a “manicured feed.” It would never be something fresh or aesthetically-pleasing enough to coincide with today’s modernity, or even our obsession with “vintage media.” I was presented with a tiny, telling thread of information about this person, and that thread would be gone in 24 hours. Only this message box—this place for “DM sliding”—connected us, and it connected us via something real.

I approached my friend Sam to discuss this very trivial yet somehow dire situation. “Should I DM this person? Is it weird? Will they take it the wrong way?” And then he said something brilliant. “Social media, in so many ways that we don’t even really recognize, provides us with nuances—even mundane ones—about each other. It’s not the overt expression, but the little unique qualities about our shared habits [like a poster in the background of a photo] that can really connect people in ways that wouldn’t happen elsewhere.” In short, the story and DM feature of Instagram was (and is) taking a platform so expansive, so manufactured, so (in many ways) impersonal, and re-personalizing it. I finally saw it as media that was authentically social.

I hit SEND and held my breath. Suddenly: a DM notification. A week later, as I traipsed through the dining hall, a voice called out: “Hey Matt! It’s me, Julie.”

We haven’t stopped chatting since.