Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 8:39 AM
Sat Nov 14
65 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/10/09
11/10/09
11/10/09
11/10/09
11/10/09
NOOOO!!!! #aliciakeys
11/10/09
11/10/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
Fashion photography is not art, not in the strictest sense, because it has a commericial endevour beyond trying to sell you the image itself - it's trying to get you to pony up your hard earned cash for an item.
I don't care about depictions of death in art; I care when the violent murder of a woman is seen as a good way to get me to buy a new pair of jeans. #deadmodels
11/03/09
The frescos of the Sistine Chapel were only commissioned to attract more visitors and feed the Pope's sense of grandeur. Even Michelangelo resented his work there, but hey, he needed the money.
Not art in its strictest sense then? #deadmodels
11/03/09
However, Michelangelo was pissed about the commission because he was already working on sculptures for the Pope's tomb, not because he hated the church. And then he demanded to be able to do the work the way his vision told him to, not according to what the Church initially invisaged.
I didn't mean to suggest they lost their "artistic" value, but that there is clearly a divide between a work being created for its own self (art for art's sake) and to sell stuff. #deadmodels
11/02/09
All that death really makes me want boots! No, wait... #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
11/02/09
11/02/09
They're hilarious and awk and funny and intriguing.
Why yes, I do have a morbid fascination with death and crime scenes, how funny you should ask.
Also, I really like the K-Fed slasher pic for the laugh factor. #deadmodels
11/02/09
I'm not saying it's all fine and dandy, but it shouldn't be surprising in the least when art imitates life. #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
I'm generally very blase about violence in video games and TV, but I neglected to see this as the part of rape culture that it is.
My bad. #deadmodels
11/03/09
11/02/09
Lunchtime Poll: Seriously, has anyone here ever seen a crime-scene photo and thought "cute shoes!" ? #deadmodels
11/02/09
There's this thinking that great art must be dark, which I don't agree with. Disturbing things may be thought-provoking, but at the end of the day, they don't make you feel any better about the world. It's also incredibly easy to produce something dark and cheat your way into profundity for being basely shocking. #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
11/02/09
11/02/09
I get itchy when we start saying the image is offensive when it's really the context of that image. Very different. #deadmodels
11/02/09
I get itchy when we start saying the image is offensive when it's really the context of that image. Very different. #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
You can't paint the critique of the piece with the same brush that you use on the piece being critiqued (in your example, at least). #deadmodels
11/02/09
If you are going to say that fashion can't excuse the impact of an image based on it's immediate purpose (selling clothes) then we, as critics, can't ignore what the exact same image in another context could have a completely different impact.
Can't we learn to use fashion as thought provoking art in a positive way? #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
I may be completely misreading your point. #deadmodels
11/02/09
Are we mad because it's used to sell clothes or are we really mad because of the image. Yes, we can be angry at both. But, if a feminist artist does it to make a point about selling clothes with violence but then sells the piece does that make it ok? #deadmodels
11/02/09
11/02/09
We're back at the beginning here. Context does matter. It seems to me that what you're implying is that the viewer provides all of the context for a piece of art, and that the artist / reason it was commissioned / method of dissemination / purpose of a piece of art don't matter. Yes, every viewer brings her own experiences to bear when viewing art, and that makes each interaction with art slightly different for different people. But all of the other things I mentioned (context) also exist, and are an important part of the piece. The pieces don't exist in a vacuum. Context does matter.
The picture might be objectively objectionable in both scenarios, but the context of the first makes it worse. #deadmodels
11/02/09
Just for fun, I'd like to talk about the OP, instead of the "what if the sexes were reversed!!!!11" diversion that always gets brought up here. The context for these images, as they were created, is of an industry that seeks to make its customers unhappy with aspirational models, and excludes a huge segment of the population by demanding that they shrink to fit the product. It's an industry that exploits an endless series of young models with insane labor practices, scant pay, and rampant sexual assault. So many designers have talked about women as disposable, as sex objects, as over the hill when they're out of their teens, that it's little wonder that the fashion industry continually makes use of violence against women in ads and editorials. #deadmodels
11/02/09
Personally, I think that if an image glamorizes (positively or negatively) violence against a person and one finds that questionable it carries through to however that piece is created or sold. #deadmodels
11/02/09