Hannah Montana or Lolita?
Quite the controversy over Annie Leibovitz photographs of Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana) for Vanity Fair. Miley, 15 years old, wears a bedsheet (?) in the photos and her red lipstick is smeared halfway across her face, not to mention the bedhead! Here's the photo:
Granted, you'll see more skin on a 15 year old at the beach, but the beach has the context for skin. Vanity Fair lacks that context, which is why I think people are so upset about this photo. I don't, however, think Annie Leibovitz meant any harm in taking this photo--she's very well known for creating photos with sexual overtones. She is probably shaking her head this very moment and thinking, "It's art for crying out loud!"
Other famous photos by Annie Leibovitz:
Demi Moore
Lennon and Ono
Whoopie
Angelina Jolie
Compare the Jolie to the Cyrus photo:
The difference? 18 years. So, if you subtract Cyrus' age from Jolie's age, it equals the legal age of an adult, which Cyrus is not . . . huh . . .
So what do y'all think? Inappropriate or art?
posted by Unknown @ 12:06 PM
23 comments
23 Comments:
inapropriate.
example: a VERY young Brooke Shields. yech
I actually find the photo of her laying all over her father to be more inappropriate than this.
This photo isn't as revealing as the ones of her pulling down her shirt to reveal her bra and laying all over some young guy that have been circulating around the net. If she's going to try and be Miss Disney Virgin of the Year (hello, Britney!) she needs to start wearing those polygmist wife dresses.
I just think she is kinda young and I liked the squeaky clean image. They already grow up too fast so why rush things?
It doesn't help that she has a baby face.
It's difficult to see the photo without thinking about the context, that she's looking at the camera with an expression and a pose of a type that are often used -- in this culture -- to sell things. The expression and pose are public, commercial, not personal or intimate.
I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that she's 16, in the context of the photo. Though in some societies she would legally be at the age of consent. Again it's hard to separate the image from all of the culture around it.
A few years back the author Judith Levine published Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex (from U. of Minnesota Press). It's one of the sanest and most intelligent discussions of the whole subject I've found in a long time. There's a good review of the book in the AlterNet website, here.
I don't really think she looks "sexy" in the photo--to me, she looks more like a drug addict or something--sort of grunge.
I do find the photo a little creepy though. The colors are dark, shaded, it almost looks like a 19th century painting of a peasant. And Cyrus is no contemporary peasant--she's worth millions and makes more in one month than many do their whole lives. So I find that ironic--in a bad way.
What's wrong with having a bubbly, teenage-type photo in more vivid colors? Why make the kid look like a 24 year old heroin addict? Let her be 15 for crying out loud. That's my take.
Hi Jenni, I pretty much came to the same conclusion that you give in your post above. The photo is creepy and she looks like a sad eastern european child slave. It's hard, disturbing to look at. I believe her claim that she thought that the photo would be artistic, but to her embarrassment, it didn't turn out that way.
Then again,nobody seems to think that the photo is sexy and it is generating debate and discussion, so maybe it is artistic. But the question remains as to the appropiateness of using a minor to make controversial artistic statements.
DavidM
"The photo is creepy and she looks like a sad eastern european child slave."
LOL. Exactly!! And the fact is she's one of the wealthiest people in this country! I think she's worth billons. See, I find THAT tasteless.
"But the question remains as to the appropiateness of using a minor to make controversial artistic statements."
Agree 100%. Thanks, David.
One of the snarky gossip sites said Miley should be more concerned that she looks like the little girl who was put down the well from that movie "The Ring."
Wow. The photo didn't strike me as exploitative at all. I think it's very artistic. Yes, she looks innocent, kind of like a kid playing dress up with a towel after her bath. She definitely got into her mother's make-up. (Until about a week ago I'd never even heard of Milly Cyrus. Shows how much I care about her millions!)
LOL, Collin! Yeah, I'm not seeing "sexy" at all.
Helen, I wouldn't know who she was either if it weren't for Caroline--she LOVES Hannah Montana. Cyrus has her own line of dolls, CD's, other toys, etc. Sort of like the Olsen twins when they were huge.
Not inappropriate. Not art. Another boring spin of the celebrity culture wheel.
This doesn't look as though the style is particularly "new." Maybe it's a Lewis Carroll/Alice Liddell homage that's supposed to look hand-tinted?
I don't find this photograph particularly beautiful, or particularly creepy.
Really interesting to read everyone's take on the same photo. Just goes to show how subjective these things are.
Jenni- Annie L. is a very smart artist. She knew what she was doing and the models in this case daughter and father trusted her to bring them across in the light of the photographer's vision. Anyone that is in front of a lens has just been shot aka killed for a moment in time. In this case we should be seeing Annie's work and what she was trying to bring across and we should stop blaming Millie and her Dad. The magazine and the photographer are the ones that should be questioned here. Just like a hunter has their prey on the wall, these two people are the display.
It is the same with any magazine. Including ours.
Oh I hear ya D. I'm not blaming anyone. I just think it's interesting how so many different people can interpret a photo. I don't think Annie L meant for this photo to be such a controversey. But it certainly doesn't hurt her to get some publicity. And Miley was the one who complained about it after the fact--if she had nevr said anything, than it probably would have passed under the radar and no one would have even noticed, except for her fans.
I had exactly your reaction - she looks sad, and thin, gray, and a little like a drug addict. Why not show a fifteen year old in a way that indicates her personality and youth? The shot does seem uncomfortable for the subject...
I totally disagree with you on two things here: Annie Leibowitz's photography is all about provocation, and the Cyruses knew exactly what effect they wanted but couldn't handle the backlash from the core fans when they got it.
I don't know that we're really disagreeing, Steven. I know AL's photos typically have sexual overtones and they are provacative (to a certain extent but actually very mild in comparison to some other things)and I already said Miley spoke up after the fact. Now whether or not she spoke up because of the backlash--I have no idea. As far as I know, there was no backlash until she spoke up. But that's just what I read.
I totally blame Miley and her has been father for creating controversy where there was none. There's nothing provocative in the slightest about this photo. They were afraid Disney was going to get mad and shaft them on a few million. I have very little sympathy for the Cyrus family. I mean, come on, it's Vanity Fair not Playboy.
I guess i'm in the minority here because I don't see what the big deal is at all. To me it's a very pretty, ethereal, and not very sexualized shot. Most fifteen year olds i see on the street look more sexualized than this pic. Skin and even nudity doesn't necessarily = sex-- perhaps i spent too much time on topless beaches in europe as a kid, i dunno. we all have skin. it's the tone of how it's shown that makes the difference and to me this is not particularly "sexy".
louise, i don't find it "sexual" either. I'm not crazy about the photo, but that doesn't make it wrong or anything. Just not my taste. And I agree nudity does not = sex.
I think this is a media spin. Controversy sells even more than sex does. And I feel that her apology is only in response to the controversy. I don't find this shot to be sexy or inappropriate. I agree with Collin, the one of Miley and her father is far more sexual/creepy than this particular shot.
That said, I wonder how many of us would argue if Annie L were taking our photos.
Post a Comment
<< Home