[Leica] photography, gender roles, power structures, my daughter, and the beauty standard

[kididdoc at cox.net (Steve Barbour)]

On Nov 4, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote:

> In light of recent events -- I feel compelled to speak out.

thanks Kyle...


so topical, thoughtful, extremely brilliant, and true....


but geeze Kyle...


I can't imagine what recent events you might be referring to...


Steve



> Photography has been a huge, possibly the largest, part of the  
> definition of the American beauty standard almost since its  
> creation. The Goudy ladies turned from pencil sketches to  
> photographs as rapidly as the technology allowed. And the first stop  
> that a young woman makes on her way to representing that American  
> beauty standard is with a portfolio. Which means she visits a  
> photographer, usually on the photographer's dime if she has any  
> chance, or on her own if she doesn't. Of the millions of women in  
> this country we might think of as "beautiful" -- only the smallest  
> handful will ever actually be models (I really recommend Jurgen  
> Teller's sad and beautiful photo book "go sees" in which he  
> documents all the women who show up at his studio door for a year,  
> hoping to be models). This leaves a trail of extremely attractive  
> young women, desperate to BE what they see on magazine pages every  
> day. As photographers we are lucky -- a little talent, dedication,  
> and a lot of practice and most any photographer, no matter how over  
> weight, out of shape, etc. can produce fashion images that grace  
> magazine pages, billboards, and newspapers. You can study your way  
> to being a skilled photographer, but you can't study your way to  
> being beautiful. Here are careers made and hearts broken.
>
> Somewhere beneath that over-layer of fashion and beauty photography  
> there exists a sub strata that disturbs me to my core -- a species  
> of photographer known in the industry as GWAC's (Guys With A Camera)  
> -- they have a camera, they have two strobes, a pair of umbrellas,  
> and a white seamless and they've made a personal hobby out of  
> preying on the aspirations and hopes of young women who desperately  
> _want_. On the one hand, you can view this as harmless hobbyism --  
> women who want to be models, men who want to be photographers,  
> existing in a symbiotic relationship producing photographs -- and  
> that actually often happens -- the Internet is filled with talented  
> part-time models and skilled part-time photographers who produce  
> mutually benefitial product every day and fuel sites like  
> modelmayhem.com -- indeed, this is where the alt.fashion industry  
> arose. But at the same time, there are photographers who use the  
> modicum of skill they have to lure women into situations that are  
> _not_ mutually beneficial, they produce hard drives filled with  
> bikini photos, and topless shots of women in fedoras caressing  
> Mamiya 645's, that will never see, nor were they ever meant to, see  
> the light of publication -- they're "personal use" photos whose sole  
> function is to get the photographer in a room with naked women. In  
> my mind it's the most obscene kind of voyurism, based on lies, in  
> which one party is coaxed into actively participating  in a role  
> she's been mislead into thinking is in her benefit. It's like a dude  
> ranch for women, made out of film and dreams. "Come to this shoot,  
> get undressed, show your friends your photos -- they'll be jealous  
> you're a bikini model and they're not." But nobody's warned them to  
> beware of a "fashion" photographer who wants you to bring your own  
> wardrobe. As I've been telling models for years -- once you're naked  
> on the Internet, you're naked on the Internet _forever_. It's a  
> decision worthy of a lot more contemplation than "Ooh! I get a CD of  
> all the shots?!"
>
> We see advertised now across the country fantasy "retreats" for  
> photographers where models and lighting are provided and groups of  
> the newly cameraed cluster around one another, jockying for  
> position, snapping away at a topless vixen. Then they retire to the  
> bar to discuss lens caps or set up "private" sessions with the  
> models. This is no more "photography" than shooting an Ibus tethered  
> to a stake is "hunting". It does not serve the greater cause of  
> photography but instead emboldens an evil side that is unmotivated  
> by talent, skill, and creativity and thrives on the emotional  
> plunder of some by others, placing men in falsified positions of  
> power.
>
> I don't know what the solution is -- you can't teach good taste in a  
> weekend Nikon workshop, but perhaps calling this particular monster  
> genre out of the closet and pointing a finger at it is a start.
>
>
> Hopefully my daughter (if i had one) would have posessed a critical  
> eye for portfolio review and never gotten involved, but there are  
> millions of daughters who don't posess that, who've never been  
> exposed to photography on a critical level and can't make those  
> judgements. Support arts education in your schools and communities.
>
> kc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information