*I want to start out by stating I really enjoy Sally Mann’s work. I had the pleasure to do a Library Research Project on her in the beginning of the semester, and as I dove into her collection of “Immediate Family” and researched more about her inspirations, I realized the pure beauty and realness of her photographs.
Sally Mann is an American photographer known for her intimate black-and-white portraits of her family. Her images appear old-fashioned due to her interests in early photographic expertise; Mann usess an 8 x 10 bellows camera to achieve this traditional art. ("Sally Mann")
Furthermore, much controversy of Sally Mann stemmed from her portfolio of “Immediate Family.” The main conflict critics had with these photos had to do with the nude photographs of her young children—Jessie, Emmett, and Virginia. These photos caused uproars and calls for censorship. The nudity of Mann’s children has made problems for many publications, including the New York Times. For example, when The Wall Street Journal printed a photograph of Mann’s daughter Virginia, it censored all parts of her bare body with black bars. Artforum, one of the major magazines of the New York art world, refused to publish a picture of Jessie in the nude on a swing. Also, Mann's photos of childhood injuries – Emmett’s nosebleed, Jessie with a swollen eye – led critics to challenge Mann’s right to photograph such scenes of pain. The San Diego Tribune wrote an angry headline labeled: "It May Be Art, but What About the Kids?” (Woodward).
Along with the issues of artistic credibility, Mann’s work has raised concerned on more personal measures: motherhood. Critics posed different types of questions to her: “has she knowingly put them at risk by releasing these pictures into a world where pedophilia exists? Can young children freely give their consent for controversial portraits, even if -- especially if -- the artist is their parent? And apart from legal and epistomologic matters, is the work any good? Do these sensual images emerge from the behavior of her subjects or are they shaped by the taste and fantasies of the photographer for an affluent audience?” (Woodward). Obviously, people felt a disturbance to her photos, without understand her true meaning and purpose behind it.
As I wrote in my research paper, one quote from her book “Immediate Family” stood out to me: “many of these pictures are intimate…but most are of ordinary things every mother has seen. I take pictures when they are bloodied or sick or naked or angry.” These words really strike me because being a kid and raising a kid is not easy and it is not perfect. Mann found a way to show the raw truth about having children: it is crazy and messy and you must deal with the good and the bad.
Tal Mcthenia said it perfectly: “The photos are the product not of icy veins but of an abiding trust between Mann and her children, a spirit of collaboration (sometimes gleeful, sometimes weary) and an engrained value that few American families hold dear: the belief that art is bigger than the individual. Mann raised her children to see art as a very large importance, which makes it easier to model for a picture that might make someone else uncomfortable. (Mcthenia).
Overall, I am very pleased with the work of Sally Mann and think critics just don’t truly understand her. It’s unique and eye opening.
Works Cited
McThenia, Tal. “Apocalyptic Imagination: A Conversation with Sally Mann.” The Hive, Vanity Fair, 7 May 2015, www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/05/sally-mann-hold-still-interview.
“Sally Mann.” Self-Portrait with Dog by Constantin Brancusi on Artnet, Sotheby's London, www.artnet.com/artists/sally-mann/.
Woodward, Richard B. “The Disturbing Photography of Sally Mann.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Sept. 1992, www.nytimes.com/1992/09/27/magazine/the-disturbing-photography-of-sally-mann.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment