A critical slant on the industry... (or, the sort of essay I should probably have been writing when I was at Uni).
Freeboprich: Now also appearing in UBER
freeboprich.uber.com and .COM
freeboprich.com flavours!
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I've been looking at the work of Emily Shur from the recommendation of Chris Weeks
aphotocontributor.typepad.com and have been struck by a thought which compelled me to strike all others about the work from my mind.
The first two sections of her portfolio
www.emilyshur.com are photographs of "Actors" split first into "Men" and then into "Women" (really, I'm not trying to insult anyone's intelligence, please stick with me while I try to get my own head around this).
When I had actually processed the fact that she'd actually done this it concerned me a little; would I, as a male in her position, have done the opposite (be it through an anachronistic sense of courtesy or whatever)? Wouldn't it be more in my liberal and feminist nature to have forgone the seperation completely?
Or was it, as I'm now thinking, done purposefully to provoke a deeper analysis of her work AND her subjects? For the most part I'm not wholly interested and also slightly perturbed by the glamourisation of other men, mainly because I'm a bloke - whereas I'm more comfortable regarding women in a similar aspect as glamour seems to come more naturally to them in my eyes.
Men and women - especially the men - come across in a favourable light when their personalities are portrayed with a comical edge, or when Shur has used her consummate skills of composition or introducing unusual props to throw off our perceptions of her subjects. A good example of this is seeing Greg Kinnear in a pretty straightforward middle-of-the-image full length photo standing on a tennis court with only a pair of rather fetching chequered socks on his feet, or even Aaron Schwartzmann waving from without the doorway, brifcase by his feet, drawing your attention to his shoes' oversized tongues sticking out. (For the record, Alan Arkin's diminutive advice booth is the kind of inspired choice of photo which I would be more than happy to have hanging in a prominent position on my wall. It's both touching and a gorgeous piece of art, it matters not a jot that the whole thing is contrived.)
I'm inclined to believe that Shur is doing it on purpose, as her approach seems to differenciate between a) "sex symbols" and b) "characters" in both sexes. Now I'm probably stating the obvious, or presenting my conclusions too early, but the evidence is clear to see on the site itself.
All in all I'll say my perceptions have been challenged and I really quite enjoyed it. Thank you Emily, I'll continue to have a good look at the rest of your very fine art now (and I'll shut up and just appreciate it).
Rich*****
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::FEATURED DEVIANTS::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
GROUPS
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::