Donatas Zazirskasi (2016)

I featured another of Zazirskas’ images in a post from almost exactly a year ago. (Incidentally: it’s probably the most popular OP in the history of this project.)

I’m still not over 100% on board with his work but I ran across this earlier in the week and I had a very strong reaction to it.

I’ll try to explain but in order to do that I do have to dissimulate–at least initially.

Nothing about this pose makes sense. You’re standing outside wearing a light dress. You bear your left breast while leaving the right covered touch your index and middle fingers to your collar bone while throwing your head back with the back of your palm seeming pressed against your forehead. Why?

The only thing that makes sense is that she’s trying to remain anonymous. As as much as I personally loathe images that decapitate the subject in order to preserve privacy–there is a fundamental contradiction between her pose and the mise en scene, i.e. she’s presented as being unaware of being observed but is also trying not to be seen while self-consciously revealing her breast; all with the background so carefully presented as to vertically bifurcate the frame.

That was my first reaction anyway. Running into it a year later, I’m almost willing to wager that this image is an extrapolation upon Fan Ho’s magnificent Approaching Shadow.

As far as an homage, it’s uneven. But if Zazirskas is actually spending time with Ho’s work then that would explain both my ambivalence about aspects of his work and the fact that I’m not exactly ready to dismiss it either.

Ho is a hell of a lot more formal and technically astute–however, I can’t suggest that it’s the wrong photographer given Zazirskas’ over style. The choice actually strikes me as thoroughly prescient.

Source unknown – Title unknown (201X)

Efff me but this is magnificent.

The palate is reminiscent of Edward Isais–the perspective, lighting, composition and more unadordned mise en scene are decidedly not, however. (The pose might as well be a doppelgänger for Yung Cheng Lin–but although the perspective and composition of this are more in-line with his work, I don’t think he’s ever done anything this tenebristic.)

I originally found it here (which looks less like the source or even the site of the model and more just a really precocious self-definition-through-curatory-reblogging).

Does anyone know the source for this? I would be very interested in learning more about whomever made it…

EDIT: It seems likely that it’s Chinese image maker pingguodang (tumblr) (behance)–thanks for the tip-off anon!

Haruo KanekoCatharina (2017)

As an image, this doesn’t entirely work.

To make sense of the whys: visualize a vertical line dividing the frame into a left half and a right half. There’s a mass of shadow detail in the left half and a mass of highly detail in the right half.

Compositionally speaking this isn’t a terrible strategy. The difficulty is that there needs to be some unity between form and function–the balance between the two halves can only be considered effective insofar as it astutely parses the frame to make things more intuitively read by the viewer. (Catharina gazing to her left is an effort to addresses this shortcoming; however, given the left heavy, off-center staging doesn’t work anywhere close to well-enough to compensate. As such: the viewer only really considers the left 2/3 of the frame.)

What are some strategies that could have addressed these compositional flubs?

Given the left side having a heavy concentration of shadow detail (which we’re going to call positive space) vs the right being so heavily skewed toward highlight detail (which we’re going to call negative space), arguably the easiest fix would be to have Catharina sit in the right most chair and the shift so she’s looking back across the frame. (There’s a natural, subconscious urge to want to see what someone who is clearly looking at something is looking at–whether or not it’s possible to see the thing upon which their gaze alights. This is an astute strategy for directing the manner in which a viewer sees your composition.)

(Also–and I will admit to being extra persnickety in this one instance–given the clumping of positive space offset by negative space, it would seem wise to position Catharina so that she’s adding positive space to counter the compositional difficulties of this given frame. Plus, the plant behind her really does sort of look like it’s growing from her forehead.)

Also: this is neither centered nor oblique w/r/t position of the camera in relationship to the subject. The angle of the line of the slabs upon which the chairs sit is less something that draws the eye and more something that comes across as merely decorative. Given the discrepancy between positive and negative space, this halfway between angled and dead on centered works better the further you commit to either extreme. (Angled makes the more visually interesting composition however there’s a lot more room to make poor choices.)

The reason I’m posting this is less to call out aspects of it that are sloppy and more due to the fact I’ve been thinking a lot about poses recently. (And make no mistake Catharina’s pose here is fantastic.)

What makes it fantastic has several ingredients. Let’s break it down:

Generally speaking most nude photography/digital imagery deal to a certain degree in/with stylization w/r/t posing. A lot of hacky curators are pulling together shows on the female gaze without really giving much thought to the visual grammar of the work and more consideration to whether or not the photographer identifies as a woman.

It’s not just that presenting woman as sexually available is problematic. The inverse–and this is my fundamental disagreement with the notion of the so-called ‘female gaze’ is that it frequently adopts a similar tenor to a lot of fine art nude work made by folks who identify as men–in which there is a diminution of any emphasis on sexual availability and more of an emphasis on something more simultaneously chaste and titillating than more erotic/pornographic material.

There’s also the scores of photographers screaming about how nudity isn’t inherently sexual but then adopting the same stylistics of posing. The point I keep trying to make is that there’s a natural way of moving and being in a space where one is comfortable that what an observer might see could be considered salacious except that the bearing of the body is such that it conveys more of comfort or being completely and unself-consciously at ease. (I frequently lay on my back on my couch naked with one leg stretched out and the other kicked back over the back of the couch. I do it when I’m alone, I’d never do it while I had company over. (OK, that’s not completely true… it would depend on the company but then the company would change the context substantially.)

What I like about Catharina’s pose is that it’s part stylization. the shoulders back confidence vs the way her upper arms frame her breasts. Her hands run down at her feet–and it’s a bit like she doesn’t know what to do with them except that it almost looks like she’s scratching a bug bite of her foot when she was instructed to look to her left. There’s something that’s wonderfully unself-conscious about it, really.

Gil BlaySeagull (2016)

I’m not here to suggest Blay is a gifted image maker. Hardly.

However, as I’ve stated previous (and it bears repeating), like the old adage about monkeys and typewriters even crappy creatives get something right on occasion.

This probably would’ve caught my attention even if it didn’t come immediately after this image of Nicole Vaunt in Patagonia by Corwin Prescott.

My first thought was when the fuck am I going to Patagonia–got damn.

My second thought was that I would’ve really liked to have seen Vaunt in a less Den lille Havfrue and more like the above.

More often than not Tumblr is super frustrating–with the porn bots, shitty attribution striping personal aesthetic as self-definition blogs but occasionally the slap dash gumbo of seemingly randomized post aggregation results in seeing things in a completely different way.

It reminds me of David Bowie’s process–decoupage, which I found out about through the fabulous BBC series Luther, featuring the formidable (and hot as eff) Idris Elba.

Unlike most of my peer group–who are decidedly secular–I was raised in an ultra-conservative Xtian cult. Unlike my friends, my folks didn’t bestow a solid familiarity upon me with regard to the cornerstones of modern art rock. (I’ve had to blaze my own trail, in that regard.)

I began to learn about Bowie after he died–which meant discovering the allegations of rape and pedophilia that (as with most similarly aligned superstars in that day and age) never quite stuck to him because he was white, rich and male. (Jia Tolentino, who gets my vote for the best up and coming young writer and is my secret dream person to guest curate Acetylene Eyes, covered this negative legacy for Jezebel with an impressively clear-headed and thoroughly nuanced analysis.)

I’ve dipped my toe into Bowie’s oeuvre. It’s not all exactly my cup of tea–but what I like I like quite a lot.

This design by Daniel Gray turned up later and I think it fits a little bit too well here not to offer it as a summation:

image