[Vwoolf] staging female author suicides
Jeannette Smyth
jeannette_smyth at earthlink.net
Wed Jun 19 21:30:41 EDT 2013
I have presented scholarly papers on genocide art at internationals conferences and have been thinking for 20 years about why children -- mainly pubescent girls, like Anne Frank and Sadako Sasaki -- have become the icons of genocide art.
Long story short, genocide art is about feminizing, miniaturizing and eroticising "innocent" (loaded term) "victims" (ditto). I'll not bore you with all the agonizing citations.
It has given me, let me tell you, a very beady eye for what can only be called snuff porn.
In the wake of the Vice suicide spread, which Jezebel still has up, btw -- here's the URL -- http://jezebel.com/vice-published-a-fashion-spread-of-female-writer-suicid-513888861-- I have been thinking about snuff porn.
I've never seen a snuff movie, and I hope I never do.
Vice mag fashion editor Annette Ramothe-Lamos specializes in fashion layouts which tell a story. Frequently a violent one. One spread she did had a woman in a denim dress bound and gagged in the trunk of a car.
http://portable.tv/culture/post/annette-lamothe-ramos-style-director-at-vice-magazine/
I have been thinking that giving sexually stimulating images a narrative is what some people argue makes pornography art. If I have laid a story line on it -- be it, I'll be the French maid and you be the big bad wolf, OR, this model sporting expensive clothing is re-enacting somebody's real death in a women's fashion spread in a men's magazine -- ceases to be pornography and becomes art.
This is, of course, nonsense. Equally offensive to fashionistas and feminists, who are not mutually exclusive.
Jeannette Smyth
On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:54 PM, ANNE Fernald [Staff/Faculty [A&S]] wrote:
> Greg,
>
> With all due respect, the vwoolf listserv may not be the best forum for mansplaining,
>
> Anne
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Gregory Jordan Dekter <jdekter at gmail.com> wrote:
> Brenda,
>
> I agree with you that discussion of Woolf's suicide is excessive, and the fact that it can overshadow her literary output in the minds of some is troubling. It is an unfortunate phenomenon, as you know, not at all exclusive to Woolf. For whatever reason, suicide itself (and often not the illness that drives a person to it) is a topic of great interest in society, and even more so when the subject is well known. That is not the position from which I defend this photo spread. There is no doubt the spread is cliche. I do not think it is particularly good art--but it is art.
>
> (Were there captions running under Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now informing viewers who made his clothing? Do we see that anywhere except when the clothing is being publicized as fashion?
> Yes, we do. Apocalypse Now was precisely my example of the contrary. It carried no credits at all. Not actors, writer, director, or the author that influenced it had their names displayed on screen at any time. Just about every other contemporary film we watch, however, always carries a credit to the costume designer, right along side the actors, writer, director, etc. For the purpose of a magazine we call it a fashion designer. In film we call it a costume designer. It means the same thing. The costumes in these photos came from somewhere, and crediting the source they came from is not tantamount to direct advertising.
>
> Have you ever seen someone after they’ve committed suicide? It isn’t pretty. They’re not nicely arranged on the pavement in fashionable clothing unmarred by blood or dirt, as if they’d suddenly decided to lay down gently and take a nap.
> Generally, no. Realistically, no. But art is often about shifting perception away from the real. Do you remember that photograph, published in Life magazine but made popular by Andy Warhol in the work "Suicide (Fallen Body)"? It depicts the suicide of an otherwise unknown woman. The Life magazine caption read: “At the bottom of the Empire State Building the body of Evelyn McHale reposes calmly in grotesque bier, her falling body punched into the top of a car.” The photo was apparently called "the most beautiful suicide". Here is some information about it: http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/the-empire-state-of-leap/ There is more that could be said on this. Staged vs found photographs, for one. But that is not my point. Merely, it is not the duty of art to express reality.
>
> It also implies that intellectual gifts and artistic talents in women somehow lead to suicide,
> Any group of images by an artist usually has some cohesive idea behind it. Depicted here are the images of women who did, or attempted to, kill themselves. Is it unfair to group images by theme, or do you assert that suicide is not a valid theme in art? In any case, I do not agree with your reading of the images here.
>
> which has the obvious effect of discouraging women from pursuing their own gifts and talents. Further, it encourages people who suffer from psychological problems accompanied by thoughts of suicide to understand themselves as potential geniuses rather than to understand themselves as needing professional help.
> Again you have made an assertion that I see no evidence for.
>
> Greg
>
>
> On 19 June 2013 14:56, Brenda S. Helt <helt0010 at umn.edu> wrote:
> Greg, I think a lot of those of us who teach, study, and write about Woolf’s work are “bothered by” the fact that Woolf’s suicide is so often cited and capitalized upon. In fact, many have written about this unfortunate phenomenon. I saw that exhibit at the NYPL as well, and I was definitely bothered by the fact that the curators found it necessary to link the walking stick to her suicide. Not surprised, since it’s such a common gambit, but definitely bothered by. It’s a library; how about a note mentioning the long walks on the Sussex downs she’d take with this stick while conceptualizing a novel? The result is that many students come into our classes knowing only that one fact about Woolf, just as they know that one detail about Plath. And yes, many of us are also bothered by the opening of The Hours, which capitalizes on Woolf’s suicide and aetheticizes it. I’ve seen the VICE spread, and it certainly was a (misguided, at the least) attempt to market fashion. (Were there captions running under Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now informing viewers who made his clothing? Do we see that anywhere except when the clothing is being publicized as fashion? This fashion spread--as somebody on the list already said, I believe--was suicide porn.)
>
>
>
> Have you ever seen someone after they’ve committed suicide? It isn’t pretty. They’re not nicely arranged on the pavement in fashionable clothing unmarred by blood or dirt, as if they’d suddenly decided to lay down gently and take a nap. Woolf was nearly unrecognizable after several days under water. The VICE spread fetishizes and aestheticizes the suicide of female intellectuals. It also implies that intellectual gifts and artistic talents in women somehow lead to suicide, which has the obvious effect of discouraging women from pursuing their own gifts and talents. Further, it encourages people who suffer from psychological problems accompanied by thoughts of suicide to understand themselves as potential geniuses rather than to understand themselves as needing professional help. There is no way to recuperate any of that.
>
>
>
> Brenda Helt
>
>
>
> From: vwoolf-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu [mailto:vwoolf-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Gregory Jordan Dekter
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 11:23 AM
> To: vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Vwoolf] staging female author suicides
>
>
>
> Perhaps some of you were able to see the photographs on the VICE website before they were taken down. I had only been able to find a few out of context (without captions), and so reserved my response until I could get a copy of the print edition, which I have now done. I think I am somewhat informed now to discuss it.
>
> Purely aesthetically, I would like to say that these are beautifully arranged and photographed images. They are dramatic, and evocative. They do not seem to me exploitative, or at least not in a way that is inconsistent with any other contemporary art.
>
> Most importantly they are depictions of tragic events, with any narrative enforced only by the small caption stating the subject and a brief line about their death. For example, for Woolf the caption reads:
>
> VIRGINIA WOOLF, 59
> Born: January 25, 1882
> (London, England)
> Died: March 28, 1941
> (Lewes, England)
> Cause of death: drowning
>
> Kimberly, you had said the spread is being used to sell fashion. This is really not the case. Although this series is indexed in the magazine under "Fashion", I think that is an incredibly subjective term, and the general intention of the magazine needs to be considered. This is not a commercial fashion magazine. The entire tone of VICE is artistic and/or experimental (I don't know of many other free national publications that devote entire issues to contemporary fiction). It should not be considered along side Cosmo and the like.
>
> It seems the primary reason this spread bothers most of you is that the clothing designers are specifically credited for the examples of their work that appear in each photograph. Let me clear up that these credits are minimal, and provide no information on how or where to buy this clothing. It is no more an advert than any other credit is an advert of the contributor. Clothing design is a valid medium of artistic expression, and it seems to me these designers were credited as artists, just as the models, stylist, and photographer were. There is nothing explicitly for sale in these photographs.
>
> Let me put it another way. The clothing we wear, often overlooked, is an essential part of our existence. Every shirt, dress, or pair of pants you put on was designed and made by someone. Should a designer of something not rightfully be credited for their work if the thing they designed is for sale? Or do you all consider "fashion" too flippant a form to be taken seriously? Or, conversely, should no one involved in a particularly heavy subject be credited at the risk of distracting from, or devaluing their own work? (The film "Apocalypse Now" was originally shown without opening or closing credits for this reason--but it is a rare instance).
>
> If the distaste is that the images use the theme of suicide as a point of interest, I am reminded of a recent experience I had. Last year I attended an exhibit at the New York Public Library that included some Woolf artifacts. One item was a diary. Another was her walking stick. Interestingly, the exhibit made particular note that the walking stick displayed was the one Woolf had with her when she walked into the River Ouse the day she killed herself. I wonder what additional enticement the curator felt describing the item by its final use would create. Was the simple fact that the walking stick was owned by Virginia Woolf not enough? Was some additional allure manifest in its passive connection to her suicide? I don't know the answer to this, but I also do not remember anyone being bothered by it.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On 18 June 2013 19:55, Jean Mallinson <annaj at telus.net> wrote:
>
> I'm glad it was taken down but the apology shows a failure to grasp jut how deeply offensive the whole scheme was. It is a kind of suicide porn and suggests a very depraved taste. It made me feel sad and angry.
> Jean
>
> On 6/18/2013 1:24 PM, Melanie White wrote:
>
> Apart from VW, the characters in The Hours were fictional, and VW’s death was decades ago, whereas Iris Chang’s family and loved ones probably are still very much processing their grief over her suicide. The image of her was breathtakingly insensitive and offensive to me for that reason.
>
>
>
> From: vwoolf-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu [mailto:vwoolf-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Kimberly Coates
>
>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:27 PM
> To: Gregory Jordan Dekter; Anne Margaret Daniel
>
> Cc: vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Vwoolf] staging female author suicides
>
>
>
> Greg:
>
>
>
> There is no comparison. The VICE spread is using suicide to sell fashion and in doing so it glamorizes and aestheticizes female bodies in pain. It also takes our attention far away from the amazing work all of these women accomplished. You would think that in an issue announcing itself as covering Women's Fiction that the work would be their concern. Whatever you want to say about Michael Cunningham and/or the film version of his novel The Hours, he isn't guilty of promoting suicide to sell shoes and vintage attire!
>
>
>
> Kim
>
>
>
> Kimberly Coates, Ph.D.
>
> Associate Professor of English
>
> Affiliate Faculty Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies/American Culture Studies
>
> Bowling Green State University
>
> Bowling Green, OH 43403
>
> Office Phone: 419-372-9189
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Gregory Jordan Dekter <jdekter at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:08 PM
> To: Anne Margaret Daniel <daniela at newschool.edu>
> Cc: "vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu" <vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Vwoolf] staging female author suicides
>
>
>
> I'm just wondering of those who oppose this, are you equally offended by the portrayal of the same event in "The Hours"?
>
> On 18 June 2013 15:03, Anne Margaret Daniel <daniela at newschool.edu> wrote:
>
> VICE has removed the online photos, not apologizing very much ("to anyone who was hurt or offended") and stating, defensively, that their "main goal is to create artful images, with the fashion message following, rather than leading." Taken down online, but still in print.
>
> Here is the Vice statement: http://www.vice.com/read/last-words-000741-v20n6
>
> And here, still online at Inquisitr, is the photo of the model portraying Woolf, standing in water and holding a large stone. No words for it, really.
>
> http://www.inquisitr.com/793059/vices-suicide-fashion-apology/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Melanie White <melanie.white at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/06/18/193014174/book-news-vice-draws-ire-by-staging-female-author-suicides?utm_source&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=20130617
>
>
>
> Someone said this has been taken down now.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> AMDaniel
>
> www.annemargaretdaniel.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
>
>
>
>
> --
> Anne E. Fernald
> Director of Writing/Composition at Lincoln Center,
> Associate Professor of English and Women's Studies
> Fordham University
> 113 W 60th St.
> New York NY 10023
>
> 212/636-7613
> fernald at fordham.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vwoolf mailing list
> Vwoolf at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
> https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwoolf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/vwoolf/attachments/20130619/e2d3aede/attachment.html>
More information about the Vwoolf
mailing list