Emma Kollmar - Sally Mann

I think Sally Mann was in the right when she took nude photos of her children. It is argued that these pictures are pornographic, but Mann was just documenting her children’s lives. In the summer they lived on a secluded farm where no one else could be found for five miles. This is where Mann did most of her photographing of her children. The children spent their days swimming in the lake so there was no reason for them to wear clothes. Mann was just taking pictures of her children as they were having fun and living their lives. These were not meant to be pornographic pictures. Children enjoying their summer without clothes on should not be turned into something sexual. There is nothing sexual about children, so photos of them naked shouldn’t be a

problem (npr).

Another issue some have with Mann’s Immediate Family photos is that she was exploiting her children by displaying these photos and letting the public view them. But, the children were fine with the pictures. Mann had her children’s consent when showing these pictures. She always made sure they were ok with it. The children didn’t mind nude photos of themselves being on display because that is their natural state. There is nothing sexual about these pictures. At galleries, the Mann children were unphased by people viewing photographs of them. Jessie happily answered curious people’s questions, while Emmett casually boasted about his expensive shoes (nytimes).

Mann explained what was really going on in some of her most controversial photos. In the photo “Virginia at Three” where her daughter Virginia is naked leaning against a bed with one hand on her hip and another on her nipple while her sister, Jessie, lays under the covers, was just a moment where Jessie was sick in bed and Virginia wanted to rub it in her face that she was healthy and powerful. It was just Virginia being a normal, pesky, little sister, not something sexual. Another one of her photos, “Rodney Plogger at 6:01” was controversial because a man who appears to not have pants on has his hands wrapped around Virginia’s bare stomach where she is standing between his legs. Mann took this picture because of the juxtaposition of their hands. The man, Rodney, had very large hands and Virginia’s were extremely small. Mann wanted to capture how Virginia was completely unphased by this. She still felt powerful (npr).

These are not sexual images and should not be seen as pornagraphic. Children’s bodies should not be seen as something sexual. This was not the intention of Mann when she made these photographs. Once her children hit puberty she didn’t photograph them nude anymore. She was not in the wrong when photographing her children nude. She was merely making images of her children playing and enjoying their summer by the lake (sdpb).

Works Cited

"The Disturbing Photography of Sally Mann." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia, 19 Jan. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/magazine/the-disturbing-photography-of-sally-mann.html.

"Making Art Out Of Bodies: Sally Mann Reflects On Life And Photography." NPR.org, 12 May 2015, www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=405937803?storyId=405937803.

"Making Art Out Of Bodies: Sally Mann Reflects On Life And Photography." SDPB Radio | Learn. Dream. Grow, 12 May 2015, listen.sdpb.org/post/making-art-out-bodies-sally-mann-reflects-life-and-photography.