How did the series “Woman as Meat, or God in a Sausage” come about?
The original impulse was the childhood abuse I went through. The main message I took away from it was this: an adult man perceived me, a little girl, not as a person but as a piece of meat, like a piglet. As if I had no identity at all, and there was only “that thing between the legs” that interested him. That’s where this series came from — it’s about domestic abuse, as they say in English. The overwhelming majority of cases of child abuse come from people close to the child — relatives, friends, family members, people within arm’s reach.
It outraged me, because ever since childhood I felt like a person, and no one bothered to ask me. My mother raised me to value the state of freedom very highly: in that state, you’re supposed to ask — “hello, excuse me, may I sit here, may I do this, may I do that.” But when child abuse happens, no one asks you anything. I felt outrage, indignation — you could call it betrayal, you could call it aggression, but in the end it was simply the desire to protect my own boundaries.
We live, and perhaps still live, in a patriarchal society where a woman is seen as a piglet — forgive me for repeating that word. But that is not how I see myself. I started working with that impulse, and that’s where the telling title comes from: “Woman as Meat,” meaning a piglet, or “God in a Sausage.” The sausage is not what some critics think — it’s not a phallic symbol. The sausage is the woman. “God in a Sausage” means that I am a God-bearing structure, one that thinks, feels, lives, creates. That’s how I see myself: God within me. And that’s why I want a proper conversation with myself.
Is this a feminist statement, or something else?
It all depends on what you call feminism. I say that all people are people. But it turns out that in our patriarchal society, “people” means men, while a woman is a piglet — forgive me for saying that word again. I don’t agree with that.
The modern world, even the invention of the dishwasher, has freed women from domestic slavery — we now see women millionaires, billionaires, heads of major companies. But I also see that this liberation has caused real agony for some men. I currently live in China, and I talk with Chinese women — smart women, professors, business leaders. They tell me that a large percentage of men suffer from depression because women can no longer be mistreated, abused, or appropriated the way they used to be. And this is coming from people in a society where trains run at 300 km/h — meaning this isn’t just my personal observation, it’s happening all over the planet.
So is this a feminist statement? I don’t think so. I think it’s a truthful statement — about what really happened when people were abused. Yes, those people are women. But I believe that God is in the sausage — meaning I am just as much a God as any man, and I too am capable of a proper conversation. The fact that I happen to love something different — some people love beer, some love ice cream — doesn’t mean I’m not a person. I don’t know exactly what you mean by “feminism,” so it’s hard for me to answer definitively. Perhaps I already have.
How did audiences react to this series?
Almost no one remained indifferent. In China, apparently, people love both blood and subjects like this — the first sales from this series happened there. But the reaction with tears came at my exhibitions in Monaco, when mature “kept” women would come — women who had become wealthy through advantageous marriages or by using their position, their female nature, as a path to riches. This isn’t business in its pure form, where gender doesn’t matter — it’s a situation where a woman’s physiology is in demand, and there’s an exchange of time and body for money. People simply wept. I was glad about that, because I believe art exists precisely to stir emotion in people.
Were there any attempts at censorship or bans on showing it?
In Russia, this series never took off at all. I think that’s partly because a prophet has no honor in his own country, and partly because it’s an absolutely truthful story, and people simply don’t want to see it.
How do you respond to those who find it offensive?
Everyone thinks what they think. There are many paths, and they all lead to heaven. So I don’t really respond: like it or not, sleep tight, my beauty. Some people like it, some don’t. I’m a singer of freedom, and I sing about what I’ve experienced and lived through. If that offends someone — well, then go change our society.
Has your understanding of the series changed over time?
Very good question — yes, it has changed. After my third child was born, I simply had no energy left for this series — I had completely exhausted the subject. Everything I had to say, I said through visual images, and everyone reads them in their own way. I worked on this series for about 10–15 years; it was a very long process.
At some point I realized that new themes had appeared, and there are still only 24 hours in a day — you can’t cram everything into them at once. So I simply stepped back: I recorded what I could, and after that, it continues without me.
Why is it important to create provocative art?
I think it really is important. Recently I watched a long video about Marilyn Manson, the American musician — essentially, his whole art is provocative. I don’t always even understand why it’s necessary, but I feel that this stirring-up of something — I’m not exactly sure of what — is needed.
Why is it needed? I don’t know, but I know that it is. It’s like salt and pepper in soup — without them, the soup isn’t very tasty. It’s the same here: provocative art is necessary, though not all art should consist only of it. Besides salt and pepper, a soup has many other ingredients — they’re not the main thing, but they bring out and highlight everything else.
What matters most is that it works. I often see recipes that work, and I don’t always know why. Apparently, someone figured this out before us. I’m one of those people who believe that life was created, not simply the result of natural evolution — there is a creator, and there is the created. And apparently, this design also accounts for the need for provocative art. It works — and really, that’s all you need to know.
How is this series connected to your philosophy of unity?
I simply shed light on an aspect that genuinely exists. If a situation is real, then, in order not to sin against the truth, it needs to be shown. Over the course of my life I’ve seen many psychologists, psychiatrists, and researchers of this phenomenon — of how children experience sexual abuse and how it later affects their lives. It’s a huge branch of psychology and psychotherapy.
I don’t want to deny what exists in our lives. It simply is, and that’s what I’m saying: look, this exists. You can deny it or not deny it, but it’s there. That, apparently, is where my unity lies — I don’t sweep it under the rug; I acknowledge it: yes, this exists. Acknowledging an experience at the price it actually cost you — that’s what it means.
Do you plan to continue this theme?
I finished shooting this series in 2013, and now, thank God, it’s 2025 — meaning I haven’t returned to this topic in 12 years. But it seems it hasn’t lost its relevance. And that only means that the phenomenon described in the series continues to exist — and the information is still just as relevant.