Many people will argue that Sally Mann had the right to capture and display the nude photographs of her children purely because they were her children, and she is in charge of them under the law. Now we live in a world where morals are constantly questioned, "what about the kids?" and questions like that keep coming up. In my mind it's more of, a; do the children mind having their pictures taken? b; Do they understand the photograph and how some people may implicate it? As long as a child understands a little bit of how people may be seeing the photographs its okay. While in some of them they definitely are not old enough to make an informed decision that would go to the parent. And in this case, Mann feels that this is an okay form of art and includes her children. I also do see it as art, she is expressing herself in a way by showing her children. It's like how sometimes when people have children their entire life becomes about them (as it should), she is documenting that in her work. She is an excellent example of how children can change people. Furthermore, when the children were old enough to make more informed decisions on the nature of their mother's photography, they asked her to stop and she did. That chapter of her life is over and it shows in her work as she went on to a more morbid level of photography. I could speculate the psychological part of that as well for hours (like how it could symbolize her children getting older and how soon they will be leaving her / have left her and a sorta empty nest idea). But that is just how she shows her art and how she feels in the world changing and such. It is extremely interesting in my opinion. How she shows her world through her children.
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/27/magazine/the-disturbing-photography-of-sally-mann.html
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-sally-mann-s-photographs-children-viewers-uncomfortable
No comments:
Post a Comment