The sitter from hell

<p>Some people have the patience of saints (or, depending on your point of view, are craven to the point of insanity):<br /> http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/mar/13/i-fell-prey-to-the-seductive-charms-of-marianne-faithfull-by-dennis-morris<br /> (Morris tells how before Faithfull would consent to be photographed at a pre-arranged studio session, he first had to take her to a pub, then to an Italian restaurant where she ordered food like there was no tomorrow and then THREW IT ALL ON THE FLOOR). I have heard many other tales about a variety of sitters - it really does seem that there is no end to the s**t that celebrity photogs have to take from their subjects.</p>

<p>David, are you calling Faithful the sitter, or Morris the sitter... as in baby-sitter? <br>

I would say this was the 'subject' from hell. I know she had fans but I found her to be ridiculous and vulgar, and I'm no saint.</p>

<p>I meant Faithfull as the portrait sitter, although Morris did indeed end up as a kind of baby-sitter. Sadly, being a junkie does not improve character. </p>

<p>Actually, it seems to me like a relatively fun way to go about getting a picture the photographer and subject both seem happy with. What the hell, I say. I would imagine that if one is going into celebrity photography, one should go in with eyes open. One always has the option to walk out of the room, the restaurant, or the job. One always has the option to make a living a different way or to say no to a particular job. This photographer went with the flow and it wound up working. He seems to have taken it in stride, seems to have recognized the opportunity her antics presented, and seems to have recognized something significant about her behavior. He says this:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>She was sussing me out, trying to get us to a place where she knew something electric could happen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>He tells the story fairly non-judgmentally. The comments to this thread are a different story. I love his description at the end which, again, seems to recognize what happened and seems to do so without judgment. They each got what they wanted, which was a lasting photo that has life and something of unique significance.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It felt like two people had met for the first time, had mind-blowing sex and then turned around to look at each other and realised it was all over.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fred, it is indeed true that Morris's "technique" (of allowing his subject to lead him round by the nose) did indeed produce a memorable image. My own attitude to a situation like this would be, if a portrait sitter shows up at my studio loaded and demands to get more loaded before she will be photographed, to take the view that, if I allowed her to go off and embark on a drinking session, the chances of her returning to the studio in a condition to be photographed, or even at all, would be so low that I would make a stand and insist on getting on with the photography, on the basis that if I win I get a picture, and if I lose at least I don't waste my time.<br /> I know from first-hand experience that dealing with contemporary musicians (not Bowie at the time I knew him, but plenty of others) essentially involves trying to guide people towards a certain goal who would normally be considered totally insane. Furthermore, I find the behaviour of people who have discovered just how much they can get away with if they have enough money to be truly repellent. I cheerfully acknowledge that this may well have been a reason why I did NOT become a famous celebrity photographer :-).</p>

<p>David, it's interesting to consider how easy and sometimes ironic it is to put a smiley face at the end of a post that comes across as anything but cheerful. I agree that the many characterizations you've made in just the above two paragraphs (such words as "insane" and "repellent" sum up your feelings adequately) would likely disqualify you from photographing people of whom you think this way, though I'll bet some great photographers made great photos of people they didn't think much of. If there is a "judgmental" icon, it might better be placed at the end of your post. You began this thread by calling Morris a coward (your word "craven"). He would likely think the same of you, though he probably wouldn't even care enough to say it.</p>

<p>Fred, let me offer a few words of explanation. Based on my own (relatively brief) experience in the 60s and conversations with other photographers who have worked with genuine music superstars, I have become aware that, to be accepted by people of this kind, and therefore keep close to the action, it is necessary to be regarded as a welcome, amusing and above all non-judgemental companion. If you do not do this, you will not get a seat in the limo or on the plane, you will not get a corner of a roadie's bedroom to sleep in and you will not get a pass for backstage or the photographers' pit at concerts. In fact, you are likely to find yourself declare persona non grata at a moment's notice and literally thrown out into the darkness.<br>

<br />Assuming you manage to maintain your image as everyone's pal, it will not be too long before you are faced with an incident such as this one (I could tell you dozen): a well-known heavy-metal band were partying in a hotel bedroom. One of the female groupies became so intoxicated that she fell down and looked as if she was dead. The reaction to band members was to decide that, in the interests of avoiding incrimination, they should remove the apparently dead body from the room as quickly as possible. They started dragging it towards the hotel balcony with the intention of throwing it over the side. This movement was sufficient to revive the lady in question, who then lived another day.<br>

<br />I would cite this behaviour as a pretty good definition of "repellent". Any normal human being would recognise both the moral and legal duty to intervene and prevent what would effectively have been second-degree murder. Had a music industry photographer been present and done this, it would of course have been the instant end of his/her career. This is why I at one and the same time "cheerfully" recognise that moral vacuousness is more or less essential for a music industry hanger-on and in no way regret my decision to distance myself from this business 40 years ago. YMMV. Call this cowardice if you will - I can't begin to imagine how cowardice comes into anything.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Call this cowardice if you will - I can't begin to imagine how cowardice comes into anything.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're the one who brought up cowardice, so it's your imagination you'd have to search.<br>

<br>

David, clearly, this is now a bait and switch. You started off with a link to one particular story about Marianne Faithful about whom you used the words "insane" and "repellent" and now have moved the goalpost to an unrelated second-degree murder scenario to justify your reaction to the Marianne Faithful story. The sleight of hand does not go unnoticed. In any case, plenty of photographers have survived taking photos of musical celebrities and have managed to stay outside the prison system and that probably speaks to the issue to at least some degree.</p>

<p>Fred, I have to say I'm having severe difficulty in following your logic. I began by citing one incident in which a celebrity photographer was forced to submit to a process of ritual humiliation before being allowed to do his job and followed it up with a description of a second incident of psychotic behaviour by drug addicted performers which similarly required forbearance on the part of all those present (including any photographers) on pain of excommunication. Any talk of "bait and switch" or "sleight of hand" I find utterly mystifying.<br>

I make no secret of the fact that I find junkies' antisocial and self centred behaviour tedious in the extreme – if Morris had responded to Ms Faithfull's behaviour by giving her a good slapping and forcing to clean up her mess herself, he would of course not have got his iconic picture but might well have helped to make her into a better person. You will note in the linked story the number of photographers which had been tried and found wanting (including David Bailey) before the choice fell on Morris. You can bet this was not because of any deficiency in their work but simply because they were unwilling to kiss MF's a**.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>a celebrity photographer was forced to submit to a process of ritual humiliation</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is your characterization but does not square with the linked story. The photographer was not forced to do anything. He is an adult who consented to be part of whatever occurred. At any minute, he was free to choose to extricate himself from the situation. You're desperately trying to make it seem like Ms. Faithful had control over him, and that's simply false. I will say that your choosing the word "excommunication" seems very much in keeping with your sermonizing. The sleight of hand shouldn't be mystifying. You linked to an article about a particular public display and then justified your reaction to it by bringing up an unrelated case of second-degree murder, which had nothing to do with the events about which you were moralizing.</p>

<p>In any case, the good news is she got into rehab in the 80s, for which she thanked her lover at the time, and has had a productive musical and acting career for the better part of her life, reinventing herself several times. We can look back at the indiscretions of youth and one photographer's recollections of a bizarre and uncomfortable photo shoot and sit in judgment but I'm not sure what that teaches us compared to looking at the totality of her life and accomplishments.</p>

<p><em>The photographer was not forced to do anything. [to say that] Ms. Faithful had control over him [is] simply false</em><br>

Fred, you are a fine photographer but this is clearly outside your experience. Allow me to assure you that all celebrities are aware of the value of pictures of themselves and of the measure of control which this gives them over whether photographers earn enough money to eat or not. This manifests itself in various ways - Marlene Dietrich, for example, was friendly and cooperative but insisted that photographers set the lights precisely as she ordered.<br>

Many practitioners in other artistic media make a point of displaying their contempt for photography - one such example, told to me by the Brit photographer Nicholas Sinclair, was the artist Eduardo Paolozzi, who insisted that NS take a picture and leave his studio in no more than 3 minutes, all the while grousing about what a pain in the a** being photographed was.<br>

There are some (more intelligent) celebrities who understand that helping photographers to make them look good is a win/win situation, there are also many stupid ones who think that the sign of a superstar is barging through groups of photographers shouting "No pictures!" or else do nothing but stick two fingers up at the lens. It more or less comes as standard that a photographer turning up to an appointment on time will be made to wait out of sheer spite and then given the "Can't you hurry up? I'm very busy!" routine.</p>

<p>David, it's clear that you think of yourself as an expert on the subject of photographing celebrities, a career path you chose not to pursue. Despite the high esteem in which you hold your own opinions on this, others are allowed their opinions, even if they're not as close to the in-crowd as you perceive yourself to be. The article starts out by saying, and you yourself have even noted, that a good many photographers had already refused to do the shoot. So obviously, she didn't exercise the kind of control you're falsely alleging. I'm sure you know better than me, so let me know if any of those photographers who refused to do this album cover went hungry because of their choice.</p>

<p>For me, the point is not to judge Ms. Faithfull on this one incident but rather to appreciate the totality of her life and career. Addiction is a devastating illness and, though it's unlikely, a photographer encountering Ms. Faithfull in the throes of addictive behavior might have been able to have a positive effect on her through his own actions. But sitting here judging her behavior from 4 decades ago is not going to be terribly productive other than to come across as holier-than-thou.</p>

<p>Fred, we have had many interesting exchanges in the past, which makes it all the more difficult for me to understand your apparently sudden note of hostility. However, I’m afraid I cannot let the allegation of being swollen headed and deluded go unchallenged. I have never bothered to consider whether I am an “expert” in photographing celebrities, I have photographed a fair number of them myself during my youth, more to the point I have learned a very great deal about this subject by simply talking to other practitioners who do it full-time, watching and reading interviews on TV and in the press, and attending workshops led by professionals in various fields. If you happen to know any celebrity photographers personally, I would suggest you ask them whether they agree with me or not.<br>

Of course I respect others' opinions, as I hope would be obvious from my several thousand postings on PN. Do I think I am part of an “in crowd”? I couldn’t be further from this if I tried – I work at home in a very small provincial town and, particularly since the credit crunch of 2008, have had to abandon all the side projects in which I used to indulge (cooperative ventures with other artists).<br>

<em>... let me know if any of those photographers who refused to do this album cover went hungry because of their choice.</em><br>

To be brutally frank, it is statements like this that make me wonder just how much you do know about how the business works. Let’s just clarify a couple of things. Firstly, as far as I’m aware, no photographers refused to photograph Marianne Faithfull. She was in fact photographed by a number of other people, established photographers such as David Bailey, who naturally refused to be manipulated by her. In a quid pro quo, she pronounced their work to be garbage. It is the young hopeful photographers, new entrants to the profession, who get kicked around most in the way that I have described. Eventually, these people will either give up in disgust or learn the lesson in the studio that many of us learned in the schoolyard, namely that standing up to bullies is the only way to deal with them. If Morris, right from the get go, had responded to Faithfull’s initial question of “Do you know who I am?” with “You look like a washed up drunk, but I might be able to do something with you”, he would have saved himself a lot of grief. It should be noted that, in this situation, Morris was in the unusual position of being a salaried art director working for a record company. Any other independent photographer could not possibly have dealt with the situation in the way that he did – paying for all the food in the Italian restaurant would have cost 3 to 4 times as much as any fee on offer.</p>

<p>I do have more personal experience with addiction and that's one thing that's been driving my reaction. The other is that I read Morris's own reaction and noticed how different it is from yours . . . and he was there and you were not. </p>

<p>Thanks for your response, Fred. If I need to, I would like to emphasise that I have every sympathy for people suffering from addiction problems. At the same time, I do reserve the right to back away from people manifesting what I consider to be intolerable behaviour! As you remark, other people choose to react in other ways - I respect this!</p>