Much has been written and even more images taken of Paris Hilton. Nearly all are, to the great pleasure of the male of the species, devoted to what she achieves in undress and ’fashion’ than in any other form of human activity.
While we understand that exhibitionism is a natural activity of a sexually alert human, and that the male strongly encourages this trend in the female, it becomes difficult to isolate libido when attempting to appreciate art. The question remains, is Paris Hilton Art?
In Energitismo, we seek the combination of technology and art. Of course, many would propose that Paris Hilton is a work of art, but how can we judge this without personal intervention?
It is said that art sets its own price and cannot be measured like a commodity. On the other side of the coin, art is in the eye of the beholder. In the first instance, given that the appearance fee for Paris Hilton is reputed to be $300,000 per event, there is no argument about her price not matching that of a commodity. In the second instance, the eye of the beholder may be confused by sexual predilection or input from other senses or even, in the case of some ladies, bias. So we need a more objective tool for assessment.
If Paris Hilton is a work of art, to which category does she belong? Surely not Contemporary as this style decries natural beauty – and there is no doubt that Paris Hilton fulfils the requirement for beauty – uniform lines and matching assets, whether one views the eyes, breasts or buttocks.
No doubt that she is not Cubist or even Impressionist, yet. Paris Hilton, for some, may appear Classical, but she fails the test of an opulent figure. To the same degree, despite her height, she is not Mannerist as, unless my eyes fail me (and I have not had the opportunity to evaluate this category with other senses), she currently fails the test of corporal comfort so evident in Mannerist females.
None of the Asian art forms suffice to assess Paris Hilton, though traditional Indian sexual representation in sculpture and paintings may make her a little jealous.
We have though, one category that Paris Hilton may fit, and that is expressionism. No doubt she is exposed in strong and joyful colours, her expression is overt, she does not allow intellectuality to confuse the impression on the eyes, and, to the touch, she has appeared to date to meet all criteria. So, from the perspective of art, she meets the Energitismo criteria.
In this review, we will not attempt to understand the role of technology in the 4D corporal identity that is Paris Hilton or to establish a definitive commercial value. Nevertheless, we can consider the concept of Living Art, an art form that changes with time, an art form that requires regular maintenance to satisfy the ultimate client, and an art form that may even require the work of art to be re-assessed as to its category as years go by.
One task then is to forecast the value of this work of art for future potential collectors. For this, I can only offer the strains of an old song:
“Well, the last time I saw Paris,
Paris was soft and grey,
And every time I see Paris
I always see Paris that way”
It could be a fine impressionist finale both for a ‘work of art’ that stimulates the erotic copyist, and for the longevity of the value of Paris Hilton.