The Pornography of War (Literally)
Photo story Vogue Italia — Make Love Not War
The links contain images that may not be work safe, contain nudity and some may find offensive.
We’ve seen some pretty blatant high fashion shoots, it seems chic has no boundaries these days, but this is disturbing on so many levels.
There is some discussion as to this glorifying rape. I see nothing here but a very poorly timed high fashion shoot which exploits women, and on another level exploits our soldiers.
They call it a photo story? It’s more like a photo fantasy for those who do not know that women are usually spoils of war, have fled Iraq by the thousands for fear of it, have been raped in numbers uncounted there due to the fact that in Iraq rape is something which can get you killed because it is your fault and dishonors your family.
I am also going to assume that this portrayal of orgiastic glamor would be highly offensive to our soldiers as well.
No Bravo.
It doesn’t glorify rape at all. I actually think it would have worked well if shot in a large grunge bar/dance hall. I became mesmerized by how handsome the troops were – and totally forgot for a second that it was happening in Iraq. Then back to reality, and I want nothing about Iraq glamorized – not even talking about the culture of rape, the women who have to leave Iraq etc but the fact that this shoot glamorized a war that shouldn’t be
I was attempting a rare post, but wordpress.com is down for upgrades, so here I am. First. I hate being first, because you never now where this will lead.
Some will say this is art. I agree with you. The offense goes in many directions, even if the photography is astounding.
Looking at it leaves me speechless for a lot of reasons.
Is it not ironic that the women look like starved victims of The Holocaust?
The nude human body can be beautiful in so many contexts, whether it is sexual or not. And I admit that I haven’t taken a close look at the photos, because I happen to be in a coffeeshop and don’t wish to get tossed. But when it becomes exploitative, of women, of soldiers, of sexualtiy, whatever, it becomes completely tasteless.
I realize designers are much like new writers. They want to find some manner to shock, to amaze, to prove they are different from all the rest. The shock value of nudity, much like the shock value of explatives in poetry, is gone.
Like I say, I haven’t had the chance to look at the photos much, and I’m not sure I want to.
A lot high fashion art / photography is of a sexual, if not orgiastic, nature. This is partially because instead of having the real creativity and imagination they pride themselves on they lean to the shocking to do much of the work.
I never open anything here, but did look at the first link. I think I get the picture. I’ll look at it completely later.
Yup, disturbing on many levels, yet compelling and at the same time. John comes as close as I can by saying when creativity isn’t there shock is used in it’s place.
I might view it in a different light if I were into high fashion/art/chic.
Way to make war look like some kind of seedy but chic film noir. I wonder what soldiers think about this?
I’ve never seen women who look like that except on their way to anorexia therapy, and even then they usually wear clothing.
Considering what is happening over there, to both women and soldiers, this is a big fashion mistake.
Dress the models in clothes that don’t cost a fortune, add bodies less than svelte, throw in a photographer that isn’t as capable and voila! You have porn. Since all advertising is designed to evoke a reaction, I’m wondering what the message here is. That’s the scary part.
Windows “declines” to load the item which, if the comments above are any indication, may not be a bad thing.
There is a pornographic aspect to these pictures, and it’s the worst kind — the subtext is death.
Doesn’t quite achieve the desperation, the on the edge of life theme. Nothing more ludicrous than holding a woman(supposedly post-blast)with a mannequin-mask face who’s dressed in sparkly couture.
Porn? There’s the four inch heels the women wear, the telltale sign of porn-in-progress.
But no friendly fun and frolic, only vacuous expressions (the women), disheveled, expensive clothes (again, on the women) that are torn and muddied, combined with the avid and peaked interest of young males in their sexual prime (and in group — read pack — scenes), and a pervasive atmosphere of destruction.
I can see how you’d get the rape feeling.
Photographically, the men look great, and not just because of their great bodies (but mostly). They look as if they exist outside of these pictures, their faces project personality.
Really very bad taste.
[…] Sontag’s essays in Regarding the Pain of Others and On Photography have always impressed me, for — among other reasons — the way she moves effortlessly from the public experience of photography to the way we experience it in our minds, and the connections she makes between the two. I was browsing through both books earlier this evening, in an attempt to better frame some comments on a Vogue Italia “photographic essay” described by Cooper in Is Rape In Vogue? You Tell Me. […]
Pia: It bother me in both directions.
G: ha not first after all. not ironic at all women in these things as in pornography in general always look starved and vacant like mannequins.
Coyote: Well you’ll have to look at them first. It’s not the nudity, it the portrayal.
John: I think you have it partially right. I’m am sick of seeing half dead looking mannequin type.
jacob: It’s just extremely typical, similar to that spread the Times had not too long ago and that other one …only this time they added soldiers to the mix.
Casey: Your right there.
sk: boo windows.
Pia: It bother me in both directions.
G: ha not first after all. not ironic at all women in these things as in pornography in general always like starved and vacant like mannequins.
Coyote: Well you’ll have to look at them first. It’s not the nudity, it the portrayal.
John: I think you have it partially right. I’m am sick of seeing half dead looking mannequins though not women.
Sandra: Yes of course — the vacant eyed mannequin we love to fuck. That way we have the power.…the same old same old.
Porn is not about sex or the right to view it, people are so blind to that fact that now porn is in fashion mags.
i couldn’t get past the women to look at the men.
Ciao!
The picture is a lot actually!
The wars have gained many things,but the love not always.…
Why you have changed the photo? Other girl was much prettiest!!!!!
baci baci
well,if this is what is referred to as love then i don’t see it’s difference from war,maybe worse!i even hate to comment on these pics!
Sorry to be away for a while (was kind of busy supporting my wife in her design job to my blog) but I am here again and to say Amen to every word of your post. Amazingly, I think this campaign is flirting with the stories recently published about rape, Iraq and the involvement of US soldiers in such stories. I have no doubt the creative team was perfectly aware of the recent stories. No doubut the subject was brought up and discussed. then someone said something like, “yeh, sure it might turn against us as some pretty ladies will claim this and that, but think about all the people who would talk about it…”. Any advertising beginner knows the basic rule that any publicity is good publicity.
True, the “any publicity is good publicity” equation might be changing nowadays, in light of the the new “age of conversation” trend in business. Still, things are changing slowly and this campaign will probably achieve its mission. some of it thanks to Cooper who wrote this and me who commented.
G, the assertion that these women look like victims of the holocaust is hyperbole at best.
Here’s a picture for you to make the comparison to give you a little perspective. http://bennettkids.homestead.com/files/starving_victim_experiment_dachau.jpg
No it’s not Rape by any objective definition. Is it in poor taste, yes. Is it offensive, to some probably immeasurably, yes.
Is it rape, no.
I saw this yesterday and had to find the right words. I don’t think I have. It doesn’t offend me any more than usual spreads where girls show tits and ass do though the use of the war and our soldiers as a backdrop to a fucking Vogue photo spread is beyond offensive and inappropriate.
I really and truly agree with Pia… I don’t see rape at all either… but as Pia said, “the fact that this shoot glamorized a war that shouldn’t be”… and regardless of how we feel about this war that indeed shouldn’t be, it demeans the troops, their experience there, their sacrifices with the regular-business-as-usual demeaning shots of women that goes on anyway with fashion shoots thrown in on the side…
And as Pia said, some of the shots could be great if done against a different backdrop and though no prude, I personally prefer non-gratuitous nudity and most of these shots were plain idiotic and moronic… it just came across as the photographer reaching to be deep and artistic, failing to achieve being either one of those things and, instead, delivered us unto pictorial evidence of his low IQ and flaming stupidity… and I don’t have high words of praise for the models who partook in this experience either, both male and female…
But I simply do not see rape, just idiocy, a lack of artistic integrity and sensibility, business-as-usual misuse of nudity and underfed women stupid enough to think they are muses… most of all I see the type of inappropriateness and unbelievable stupidity that goes hand in hand with Ahmadinejad believing his request to visit the World Trade Center was fair…
*sigh* Still not the right words but it’s what happens when made to wake up and get out of bed against my will by two little, waaaay-too-damn-energetic bohemians…
This is gratuitous shock factor disguised as something else. To be a woman or a soldeir today — both are hazardous.
As for the “rape”, technically it is not rape of the body but the contnual rape of true essense, again on many levels.
Cooper,
Sex sells.
It’s unfortunate that this type of ‘advertising’ is so ubiquitous. In my opinion, it denigrates women and gives the impression that they are amoral, loose, available and thereby ‘there for the taking’.
What ever happened to decorum, chastity, prudence?
These types of advertising send mixed messages to adolescent males, in that, it gives them the idea that girls/women who dress as they do, are inviting sexual liaisons — and, I’m afraid, this also applies to post-adolescent males as well.
I do not blame women, I blame society and those that profer this type of advertising.
It’s just one more part of the debacle in which we find ourselves.
How sad.
Hanna: It says more about the people who made it.
Yes blog log ate the avatar although it shows up in cache.
Ciao
fefe70: The concept Love Not War from what I can tell was so different at one time. Now it’s opportunist
exploitation.
Gil: Yes Gil, next time please fill out a leave of absence form.
Most people go away for a time. I don’t usually do much scrolling around on weekends although I sometimes stay logged in to different sites I’m usually not here.
I don’t see the need for fashion magazines to do this kind of thing. I look at it from the standpoint of the women though, the women who always ends up being portrayed as already stated as a vacuous non being.
Jon: As much as I stated I don’t see rape there I imagine it would be hard to see it unless one had been in a situation where one is treated as an object or unless one was of the gender most likely to be raped. The variety of opinions on this is what I find most interesting.
Mizzy B: Has arrived. Thank You.
Like I said, I enjoy the varied opinions on this, yours is always most appreciated.
I think so much of the feeling provoked or not by this comes from ones past and ones beliefs about many things.
morgan: Personally I’m not a prude and don’t promote chastity. I know conceptual artists, if that is what we call these people, are selfish not selfless. I also know that sex sells, but this is not about sex… I don’t care if people buy sex. As with porn this is not about sex, it is about power and exploitation.
I did get a chance to look at them, and I really fail to see the beauty the photographer was trying for. I don’t know about the rape side of things, but all in all, it seems pretty pointless all around. There’s no shock, there’s no comment being made by the photos, there’s nothing really artistic about them. They’re just unrealistic bodies in uncomfortable, impractical clothes in a fake location. Just sad.
I found the photos aesthetic, but the message is very strange.
[…] Thanks for the provocation… heh heh heh … and your comments on War as a Spectator Sport (Part One). There will be […]
Don’t think it glamourises rape, really, but it does add those tags associated with good fashion photography to war — when the light’s great, the models are hot, and the clothes are well, hi-fashion. Giving war the ‘fashionable’, ‘stylised’, ‘desirable’ elements, and for recent collective memory, that would of course, mean the Iraq invasion, by now, well-acknowledged for the bad decision of political aggression it was. For all you know, the photograpehr was attempting some vague political statement, all the while getting paid buckets of money for it.
I think the concept of paradox escapes a few good (?)men.
this is outrageous, they portray Iraq or those type of countries as being a massive party land where soldiers are having fun!
Are these sticks women? God! How the hell could women in war-struck countries look like that?! These photos are stupid and humiliating for soldiers.