Portrait of Rudy G, your thoughts...

[brucecahn]

Emily: You are a better person than I am. But cynicism and thorough scrutiny of public officials in powerful positions is absolutely essential in order to maintain even a semblence of a democracy. When I see or hear of RG it disgusts me. He tried to be a dictator. Make him president and you will look back with fondness to the Bush years.

[john falkenstine]

The current crop of presidential candidates reminds me of the drive-up menu at McDonald's. This one is better off retiring.

[iliafarniev]

just something the common people can like for a moment, less irritating than the rest, a nostalgic hope or something... a basic imagery of political theater, ewerything is well and under control.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Emily,

I know a lot of New Yorkers, rich, middle class, poor, white, oriental, black, hispanic, poor, conservative, liberal, Republican and democrat. I've never heard any ofthem have a good word to say about Guiliani as a mayor. As a prosecuter yes, as a mayor, no.

 

Yes he was a great instant symbol immediately after September 11, 2001 --it was his finest moment but at that point he was a lame duck. And now he's exploiting his image as the hero of that hour to make a run for president.

 

Take a hard look at the people he has surrounded himself with. If you are a Republican there are several better choices.

[jtk]

Bruce, I don't think Emily is a better person than you.

 

She asked us to look at her portfolio. I did. She would like us to believe she is what she photographs.

 

I don't think the Rudy image in question is hurtful to him or cynical in any way. I think the people who don't like it have not read the article it illustrates.

 

That photo reflects a man living with fear of death from prostate cancer ("living with cancer"), a fundamentally dishonest man who, like Clinton and Gingrich, betrayed wives, a man who lusts for a national office. Today he tried to convince us that Petraeus was believable, attacking Clinton for saying the obvious. The photographer was too kind.

[morgan lee]

I would call it a very successful image. It's meant to be stern, it's meant to be frightening. The point (from Rudy G's perspective and intent)is not that the face in the photo is glaring at the viewer to scare you, it's glaring at all that stands between you and safety from terrorists, your pursuit of the American dream, etc. The details of age sharply depicted on his face are meant to illustrate hard-won experience. Your meant to be standing behind it, not looking into it. It's like a dragon's head on the prow of a viking ship or the lion standard on a medieval shield. The idea is, if you elect this man, he is fighting for you and he knows how to do it. BTW, I'm a tree-hugging first amendment-loving Democrat. I'm not speaking to personal beliefs, only the success of the intent of this photograph. It is captioned, "The Crusader" after all and the image is perfect.

[beeman458]

Maybe if the shot was accompanied by another portrait, I wouldn't think that the shot, considering the paper it's attached to, wasn't a political hit portrait.

 

One has to consider politics when considering a shot of this nature because context demands that one do that in order to stay intellectually honest and genuine.

 

Here's a countering shot from Rudy's political web site. Note the difference; negative vs positive tone.

 

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/

[edgreene]

Ah, our "Accidental Hero" former Mayor.

 

I often wonder what would any other Mayor have done in his place? Me being NYC born and reared, the shot shows the man I remember in all his venal "glory".

[tholte]

Great portrait, makes him look tough and in command! Don't know if I could take four years of his new wife though, she seems a little nutty.

[charles_stobbs3]

The chopped off hairline (or nonhairline) changes his appearance. My wife glanced at it and said "who's that?".

[sobeystudio]

Rudy may not be the best candidate for pres, but anyone is better than Bush- the man can't

even speak. God he's stupid. At least Giuliani has some sort of charisma. I'm not gonna vote

for him, but damn Bush has screwed America. I don't think you could get a photo of Bush

that looks this solid, or would want to. I can't get images of simians out of my head, and

they're smarter than Bush.

[35mmdelux]

i think the NY Times foto is terrible. Here is my humble rendition.<div></div>

[GerrySiegel]

I was just thinking of the moment when Rudy declared (paraphrase) "Whatever the death toll,it will be more than we can bear." This was a cri de coeur that resonated at the time and place. Giving the devil his due.

[._._z]

New Yorkers remember and know the real Giuliani, which is why he never was a top Presidential candidate in the State, even amongst Republicans.

 

 

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0732,barrett,77463,6.html

[jtk]

Paul A, the photograph was tight on his face, it was B&W large format, and as a photograph it is beautiful. That it didn't transform him into a bland pink guy is a concern only to people see him that way.

 

It wasn't "intended" specifically to illustrate his hand, necktie, shirt, and Fox logo as yours distinctly was (perhaps not wishing to emphasize his Cheney-lip by zooming closer).

 

I don't think the photographer "intended" to do anything other than what he does.

 

Read the article the photograph was intended to illustrates: it treats him with more carefully detailed respect than any of the other candidates NYT has profiled IMO.

 

We see a classic technique, almost identical to that pioneered decades earlier by Avedon to photograph various heros and monsters, all in the same fashion and for the same purpose.

[petemillis]

Until I read the above I didn't know anything about Rudy G. I know a lot more about Ali G! Anyway, after finding the portrait of Rudy G that everyone is talking about (I didn't even realise it was the one in the article titled "The Crusader"!) I have had a look and a think.

 

Without prior knowledge of the bloke himself, all the portrait seems to show is some hunched up miserable old duffer who the grandchildren dread being dragged along to visit by their parents (who also probably dread going to visit him!). I see some old git who would bellow at his wife if dinner isn't on the table when he expects it. I see someone who walks slowly around with his head shaking and muttering to himself - swearing under his breath at every little thing that he finds the least bit irritating. He looks like one of those miderable old sods that would come out and moan at me for parking within 100 feet of their house. And I'd just tell him to sod off and get a life!

 

Now you guys who have prior knowledge of this old duffer can read something else into the image - so you can see a deceiver, or someone worn down by the aftermath of 9/11, or someone who screws over workers, or someone who stamps out crime or whatever. What you see in the image itself is prejudiced by what you already know of the man. For people who know nothing about him, then their ideas will be prejudiced by people they have come across in the past who have a similar expression and appearance. The portrait itself shows nothing more than the appearance of the man at that one moment. The viewer's interpretation of his character will depend entirely on what prior knowledge they have of him (none in my case) and how his expression and appearance reflects accumulated knowledge from previous acquaintances.

 

 

Whether the image itself is successful or not depends on what it is intended to portray. John Kelly said "I don't think the Rudy image in question is hurtful to him or cynical in any way. I think the people who don't like it have not read the article it illustrates." I'm wondering whether any reportage image like this should be expected to work without the viewer having prior knowledge of the character or at least reading the accompanying text.

[GerrySiegel]

Martin Sobey comment led me to the photo image book "Sharp." It is a huge,really hefty table book that has a lot of Parry's work, including Bill Clinton, Ed Koch,many rock stars and public figures. It is fascinating to say the least and worth the $7.95 plus shipping from Hamilton Books in CT.

 

Very different type of portraiture. Will be too clinical approach for those used to the retouched flattering shot. These Parry black and whites have a lot of "power," for want of a better word.