Positions and practice / Topic 3: Reading photographs
“If it doesn’t have ambiguity, don’t bother to take it. I love that, that aspect of photography—the mendacity of photography—it’s got to have some kind of peculiarity in it or it’s not interesting to me.”
We are bombarded with imagery in everyday life, so much so that we no longer notice the visual stimuli we are consuming, be it consciously or subconsciously. In some cases we have become desensitised and cynical about hard hitting matters as it has been overused in some cases, exploited in others.
I deliberately selected the image above due to its ambiguous narrative. Unless I give the photograph a title, then many assumptions can be made about it. Most likely based on the individual’s subjective perspective.
Sally Mann, Candy Cigarette (1989)
“I like to make people a little uncomfortable. It encourages them to examine who they are and why they think the way they do.”
Sally Man received a lot of criticism and accusations of exploitation for how her children are depicted in her book ‘Immediate family’. Her approach to her subject is raw, unadulterated and thought provoking. She has the ability to capture her children’s essence and shows them as liminal beings. A notion that some may find disquieting, as children are traditionally seen as angelic and in an enteral state of innocence… until they’re no longer children. However, it’s this evolution throughout childhood, and exploration of maturity that is a constant. Perhaps it is the mother’s gaze that viewers feel uncomfortable with. The notion that raising children should remain behind closed doors. Similar to the way society frowns on breast feeding in public or the idea of childbirth being too vulgar to look at. In actual fact it’s not the act that should be judged, but rather the viewers perceptions and why they think that way.
Fashion provides a good example of provocative messaging within photography. In May 2020, Fred Perry launched a campaign which only featured models of colour. It was a reaction to the hijacking of the brand by a US far-right group called the Proud boys. The visual message is stark and serious in tone. The focus is squarely on the diversity of the models, shown by cropping in tight to their faces and it also shows them wearing the black and gold polo shirts which is now banned for sale in North America. Its a full on conscious rejection of the racist subculture that has adopted the brand as part of its uniform, as well as a stark reminder that the name Fred Perry is proud of it’s roots stemming from a multicultural 60s working class Britain and it’s rich musical heritage. I think the message is slick. It's still very much a fashion image without you necessarily being aware of the underlying intentions, and it appeals to the youth subcultures it represents today.