so avoiding my revision i came across an angry mob of bloggers who were talking about Terry Richardson and his sexual photos, now i have never really looked into it much, so i took a closer look - if i'm honest its just porn meets a fashion accessory to avert the eyes. So i had a bit of a debate with myself - in what ways could this be considered art and acceptable to little children searching the internet and looking at this for 'art'? The fact is to me he just looks like a dirty old man you find on edgeware road ready to pounce on the young ambitious women who want to kick start their modelling career- i think the fact that on the 'model for me' tab there's a picture of a door with the number 69 on it says it all - I don't know about you, but he needs to tone down his foreplay act as just because he's a high up photographer making it acceptable to the fashion industry does not make it acceptable to those who find this vulgar to an extent that its like porn - who agrees with me? (and please be nice it's my first blog!)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i agree!
ReplyDeleteSex is a main factor in human existence, and a focus point of human interest. Do you seriously expect to go through art, music or literature and not find eroticism, it's a key factor of our existence. And Richardson has picked up on something his photos are rough and without being pornographic or showing any real nudity they manage to captivate a natural human sexuality with a rye twist. I think your view of it is childish and shows you can't come to terms with sexuality or the revelence of it.
ReplyDeletelook, if u want to go into fashion, u need to get used to it. sex is part of fashion, because fashion is often about celebrating the human body, much like how mcqueen does, if u really feel so passionately about his work. and if u cant deal with that, the fashion world is NOT for you.
ReplyDeleteI agree with celebrating the body and embracing the beautiful side of sexuality but I think there are ways of doing this. Whilst it can be very elegant like works of artists such as Bill Brandt, making the body appear in a crude context reduces the beauty of the images and transforms them into rudimentary objectifications of the body. The seedy allegations surrounding the photographer just contribute to this demeaning photography.
ReplyDeleteI can see your POV in terms of the allegations that he harassed models but from the photos in his portfolio and those that he makes public there is crisp rye feeling to his photos, which is conveyed through eroticism. And i think that sexuality and art have never been mutually exclusive, look at most great art, dating back to the ancient greeks there is a shrewd sexuality that Richardson embraces.
ReplyDeleteyou seem to be trying to be something you are not throughout this whole blog. You are talking as if you are a fashion student, when it says you are actually forteen. You have no idea what fashion is really about and I find your veiws pretentious and boreish. It is a real shame that you think you know 'the industry' - as you give ourself no room to heighten your knowledge without basing it on facts you have learnt off the internet or by pouring over 'vogue' for hours. I am ashamed that you fail to see the flaws in this outlandish and (again) pretentious blog.
ReplyDeleteTo all the sad pathetic people dissing this blog, get a life! Why not allow a 14 year old her chance at expressing her thoughts on fashion? Who are YOU to put her down, hiding behind your anonymity? I work in the industry at a very high level and happen to know this young lady, and very much enjoy hearing and reading what she has to say. She is a talent in the making, and you can't even spell properly!
ReplyDeleteI will be monitoring this situation.
Melanie Rickey
www.fashioneditoratlarge.blogspot.com