A reporter's view. Topic:Objectification of the male body in photos

[Norma Desmond]

Amazing! I just saw it. About 3 weeks ago. Went immediately to my top ten list. A stunning

film I was moved to tears and can't wait to see it again. Any good photographer would benefit

greatly from seeing it and any thinking, feeling person would as well.

[Norma Desmond]

One thing I will say about the kind of objectification in Calvin Klein ads. At least there's

some honesty to it. I think Beckham would readily admit and be fine with the fact he's

being objectified.

 

What goes on in the nudes category of PN, however, is a different matter. The recent

thread on photographing homeless dealt with photographers' general lack of

consciousness regarding how much exploitation takes place when photographing

homeless folks. When they are presented simply for emotional reaction, along with flowers

and landscapes, with no acknowledgement of their individual humanity, merely as an easy

and cheap symbol of pathos, it is repulsive. Same for many nudes.

 

At least if you're upfront about trying to sell a product with six-pack abs, you're

conscious. But thinking you're making art by putting a nude woman in high heels and

placing a wine glass on the table beside her or throwing a scarf around her neck is

deluding yourself big time.

[GerrySiegel]

Fred, I think honesty is the right word. The following observation is a stretch or digression maybe from my top post but here goes. Many nude works get my attention for about one minute. Below is a study by one of our community photographers, Jim Adams, who goes in for the honesty business. Whether one fancies nude studies or not, it is serious.. That is my impression anyhow. I refer you to this example as at least one PN example.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/6153006

[jtk]

Ichikawa's 2005 commentary on the DVD wasn't necessary, but it adds a layer of understanding. An advantage of DVD over art theatre, though one does lose the trippy crowd.

 

The simplicity of Japanese (and French) cinema technique in the fifties contrasts interestingly with phenomena like Golden Compass and Atonement. Glorious though today's technological wonders are, they're no stronger. We wept here too. The riverside...

 

Fred, as you say, there are lessons in it for photographers, as there are in many films from the era. Another example is Treasure of Sierra Madre, even with the "stinking badges." http://wc03.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:50884

[Norma Desmond]

Gerry--

 

Thanks. I appreciate the link and understand what you're talking about. And I didn't mean to

imply all PN nudes were of a type. Just a lot of them that whiz by in the critique forum.

 

I don't think it's that far a stretch from the original topic. It's about presentations of bodies,

and there's a lot of territory in that universe.

[Norma Desmond]

John--

 

I think Atonement was fatally flawed although nice to look at. Especially because of the

ending, I think it needed to be experienced as a novel. I think it warranted a better

translation to film. The important self-reverential aspect of the story, portrayed

(stunningly, as always) by Redgrave as the mature writer, was ineffective. I felt I needed

to be reading the words of the writer in order for it to work. That tells me that Wright's

conceptualization as

director fell short. There was a way . . .

 

I have much more familiarity with film than with still photography, actually. I have always

been drawn to cinema and I know it's been a big influence and motivator.

[jtk]

It's also not a "far stretch" to consider the stench of war in the context of "objectification of the male body."

 

Kon Ishikawa's film depicted male bodies, so his monk could go beyond that.

 

And war seems a homerotic activity.

[Norma Desmond]

That's what I was getting at by mentioning Achilles and Patroclus in the "metaphor" thread

after your Homer comment.

[Norma Desmond]

I think there is a dark side to homoeroticism and homoerotic imagery, which you get at

with "stench of war" and male bodies.

 

Did you watch any of the HBO series, OZ? Prison and male bodies = sex and violence.

 

The stench of 70s back rooms? A grown-up version of playing with toy soldiers?

 

One reason I was surprised you seemed to think I would place "gay" further outside

mainstream than other minorities is that I've said before in forums that I think much of

"cultural" homosexuality and its dynamics is more about "male" than about "gay."

[jtk]

Interesting. Evidently I missed that.

[kristina_kraft]

Looking objectively at man's figure, I usually become speachless. Because when the body is beautiful, I like to watch and observe without a single word to tell, letting go feelings to overwhelmed me.

 

These ads are wonderful, looking very strong, sincere. The technology of the underwear is just perfect, as their bodies and their individuality.

Their individuality didn't lost despite objectification.

 

Sometimes I like to watch Fashion TV and I noticed two kinds of mannequins. The ones that are thin with the cold expression on the faces, walking like a soldiers. And the other ones that are also tall, but a little grossly, with bigger breasts and with warm facial expression, smiling, presenting the real women and their warm charm. I prefer those kind of fashion presentations.

 

Does anyone ever feel real sexual hunger when looking into perfect body and at the same time beautiful soul and character?

I felt once! It's glorious feeling!

[d_s31]

You can't objectify men. We like it.<p/>At most, looking at Beckham's photo makes me want to go to the gym. And if he's the sexiest man alive, then I'm definitely not gay because he doesn't do a thing for me.

[Norma Desmond]

D S -- It's not whether you're gay or not that counts, it's the need to publicly deny it that

concerns me.

[jtk]

Near-nekked-Putin & Bush & Scooter Libby:

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/arts/articulate/200610/s1770554.htm

 

...and of course:

 

http://mcgonnigle.wordpress.com/2007/08/23/putin-shaves-his-chest/

[Norma Desmond]

Let's not forget the humble beginnings:

<p><p>

<a href="http://nw08.american.edu/~rstreit/reynoldspage.htm">COSMO</a>

[GerrySiegel]

I was recalling that centerfold in Playgirl too, Fred. I had a lot of admiration for Burt in his light roles. And more serious in Man Who Loved Cat Dancing. Got a little spotted when he went through a messy divorce,really messy and public. He was well cast in Boogie Nights I thought. A daring film on the commercial side of sex in cinema I thought.

[GerrySiegel]

I just recalled a coincidence I didn't notice. Mark Wahlberg for some beefcake ads for uderwear and Mark Wahlberg as the super sized Dirk Diggler,,,small world.

[Allen Herbert]

Hi Fred,

 

On the matter of labels, they are hard (impossible?) to avoid when talking about cultural phenomenon..Fred.

 

After some consideration, Fred, I have come to the conclusion that we are talking about different segments of the circle. I think you are referring to labels as names to identify; I'm referring to them as labels with connotations. A fine line, perhaps, but it exists.

 

On a more general note I think labels can be very misleading as they are creating an image in your mind of that individual. For instance if we say someone is a "Christian Person" thoughts and images immediately spring to mind which may not be necessarily true. We might say someone is a "Socialist Person" again we are categorising that person into a mental filing cabinet...Hitler was a socialist for instance, and a Christian. The concern is that different people have different thoughts on what that label means and implies.

 

Perhaps it would be a more understanding world if folks took their labels off and just dropped them in the sea;)

[GerrySiegel]

Allen, as long there is some common agreement about the label, it's handy reference,rather than a slanted and unfair stereotype. Example: If a news story calls a man a "hunk" that is something I believe we can get in our heads. I think you will have to agree that we are stuck with labels for a reason and not all bad,

 

DS, I know your reference to going to the gym was a bit of a leg pull. I go the gym and don't see that kind of muscle tone and muscles. On the other hand, Arnold Schwarzenegger managed to pull it off and it got him far. But giving the devil his due, it takes about 3 hours of sweat and pain to get those pectorals. Not for me. Stallone also tells of the work to pull it off.

 

Fred,recalling just now the film " American Beauty" which gets into the intrigues and fallout associated with objectification of the body beautiful.

[jtk]

Let me ask the same question from another angle...

 

Isn't there such a thing as a "beautiful body," whether male or female?

 

For photographers, and for the population at large, how is a "beautiful body" different from a "beautiful plant" or a "beautiful insect"?

 

Does "beauty" stop being a valid concept when it comes up against politics (as with men and women we wouldn't call "beautiful")?

 

If we don't love a plant (yellow algae in water) or insect (mosquito), does that deny it beauty?

[Norma Desmond]

John--

 

I agree with you. We don't have to love something for it to be beautiful. But I think a good phototgrapher/artist can portray beauty without an attending objectification.

 

I would maintain that one of the reasons so many images comprised of flowers or sunsets or homeless people are so bad is because they are shot more as objects than as beautiful. Capturing beauty may not require love (except in Plato's sense of Love), but it requires giving something of yourself. Objectifying does not.

[jtk]

I'm wondering if beauty is inherently more virtuous than objectification...

[Norma Desmond]

Offhand, I prefer not to consider big terms like "beauty" or "objectify" to be <i>inherently</i> anything.

<p><p>

So much is dependent on our relationship to and use of these concepts. For instance, there should be a way that a good photographer, writer, artist can, with consciousness, elevate objectification to a virtue. If, by attending to it, by confronting it head on, by being honest about it, something objectified is presented as such and the viewer/audience then recognizes something significant about what it is to be objectified, there would be virtue in that.

<p><p>

That's what I meant somewhere else when I suggested that photography/art has the power to raise up the mundane and the profane. But it takes self-consciousness.

[kristina_kraft]

It's true that you don't have to love, or even, you can't love because of its beauty. Human can only love human, and having different attitudes to other species, showing love in a different way. Human can admire and respect some beautiful animal, and some beautiful landscape. But when it comes to homeless, one has to give something from itself. Being more evolved and to try hard to capture the last glimpse of their conch.

 

How to elevate objectification to a virtue, if the object/subject doesn't have it inside? Than you have to invent and create that virtue. To inhale the soul in it. If you are more than an artist, having some "state of the art" technology, than you might succeed.

Like in that Armani's ads in which photographer elevated their objectification to a virtue.

 

I like elevate myself, photographing. And seeing myself truly. Practicing a self-awareness, feeling alive. I admit, I need better equipment.

[jtk]

Part of what a Zen practitioner does is objectification. Contemplating a diamond, the practitioner objectifies it, realizes that it absolutely is only that rock on that mat in this room on this day in this light. That allows clear awareness of the paradox: the diamond is absolutely a rock, not an illusion, but it is simultaneously and absolutely only an illusion...just like everything else. Yang, yin.

 

One does not "have" to do anything. If one chooses to do something, such as helping the homeless, one is engaging in "right action." If one "must" do something, the personal morality or righteousness evaporates.. even if the action has the desired outcome.

 

How does this apply to photography? Don't quite know...except that just as "enlightenment favors the prepared mind," a photographer can't accomplish much if he lacks the tools and skills and isn't in the right place at the right time to be favored by...whatever...