Right on the stilettoed heels of NY Fashion week, the Fall 2014 issue of Aperture Magazine was recently released. The issue is of particular note as it cast an eye onto, and attempts to
critically explore, the art of fashion photography.
Interestingly the title of Aperture #216 is “Fashion” - with quotations included. The editors stated that: ‘Though this issue’s title
appears in quotation marks, the intention is not to be ironic, or to suggest
skepticism. Rather, the quotes allude to image quotation and reference, which
are part and parcel of any creative act but are essential to the world of
fashion.’ Of course, this is of great interest to ishotkatemoss for a variety of reasons.
A collage from pop artist Richard Hamilton’s Fashion-plate series – a 1969-70 pre-cursor to the ishotkatemoss collage - appears on the issue’s cover. iskm asked Paula Kupfer, Managing Editor of the magazine, why this particular image was utilized specifically in this context?
Paula Kupfer (PK): We chose the Richard Hamilton work for
the cover because it deconstructs the apparatus of a fashion shoot through
techniques of photography and collage, pointing towards the artifice, illusion,
and transformation involved in fashion image making. Although it is part of a
series, in a single image the work does something similar as the ishotkatemoss
collage/animation, which reveals the model's myriad guises and thus points to
the ways in which the different elements of a fashion shoot are arranged and
combined to yield vastly different results, underscoring the artificiality and
wondrous aspects of this sort of production.
The magazine is guest edited by the famous “fashion” (that’s
iskm quotations) photographers, Dutch couple Inez van Lamsweerde and &
Vinoodh Matadin - most commonly referred to by the moniker: ‘Inez &
Vinoodh’.
Inez & Vinoodh have collaborated for more than twenty-five
 |
| An Inez & Vinoodh image featured in #216 |
Through pages of glossy and striking images, plenty of rhapsodic text and of course a fill of advertisements (including notably for Inez & Vinoodh's latest big gallery show) the comment iskm found most notable defined the pair's need to markedly construct and cite - from Inez & Vinoodh themselves: "... in today’s professional climate, in which clients want to see their campaign images before they are even shot, you’re only as good as your references”.
Aperture’s editors argue that ‘Referencing is delicate,
requiring thoughtful handling to avoid crossing the line into copying’, while curator Charlotte Cotton remarks in her contribution to the magazine
that ‘fashion photography’s often transparent use of references may be one
reason why the genre is criticized from other corners’.
iskm thinks that fashion photography, particularly since kate hit the scene, is rebelled against for far greater reasons than that (Questions as to body image? Image manipulation? Increased commercialization and consumerism? What about objectification, sexual identity or any other raft of criticisms?). Referencing just doesn’t seem like such a big deal in that context but of course, from an artistic stand point, it is something we attempt to address through the project. We here at iskm clearly embrace the references and furthermore promote appropriation, in a purely artistic sense. Reference (more subtly) and appropriation (directly), by our definition, need to transform – whether in actuality or through the dialogue with the idea.
iskm thinks that fashion photography, particularly since kate hit the scene, is rebelled against for far greater reasons than that (Questions as to body image? Image manipulation? Increased commercialization and consumerism? What about objectification, sexual identity or any other raft of criticisms?). Referencing just doesn’t seem like such a big deal in that context but of course, from an artistic stand point, it is something we attempt to address through the project. We here at iskm clearly embrace the references and furthermore promote appropriation, in a purely artistic sense. Reference (more subtly) and appropriation (directly), by our definition, need to transform – whether in actuality or through the dialogue with the idea.
Aperture states that 'transformation, in a broader sense, is a hallmark of
Inez & Vinoodh’s work'. It was therefore of great interest, and certainly notable to iskm, that in introducing
Inez & Vinoodh, a large, full page image of kate was placed side by side
with the title (The Art of Transformation) page.
iskm: Was there a specific reason that an image - and one
that could be argued is not confrontational, experimental or transformational -
of kate moss was placed so prominently next to the title page for Inez &
Vinoodh? Was the title of the piece in any way referential to their subjects,
including and particularly kate?
PK: The title refers to the work of Inez & Vinoodh in
general. They have worked extensively with Kate Moss, thus she’s been the
subject of many such transformations. The placement of the image was a design
and editorial decision - it’s a stunning photograph of someone whose visage has
become iconic, in its chameleonic incarnations - a great way to open the
cornerstone piece in the issue.
 |
| An Inez & Vinoodh image featured in #216 |
iskm found this comment particularly interesting as the vast
majority, if not all, of Inez & Vinoodh's images of kate are straight
shots without much apparent ‘transformation’ (google: "Inez & Vinoodh, kate moss" if you want to see further examples), particularly relative to the exoticness
and eccentricity of much of their other work and certainly compared to the way
in which the vast majority of other photographers turn her into something far
from everyday reality.
The magazine articulates that ‘in the end what matters is
how a reference is used: when adequately transformed, you may sense a quotation
but won't recognize its course.’
This is important as such a view only begins to cut to the heart of what iskm is doing
and why. Yes, what matters is how the reference is used. We wholeheartedly
agree. When 'transformed', sensing a quotation while not recognizing
the course is however not nearly enough. By its definition, it must be
transformational. It must not only alter the creative process and creation itself but ultimately it does so in order to change the viewer’s perception and understanding.
Most importantly, we believe it must reshape the course of one’s thoughts and hopefully behavior (is that not the purpose of the 'art'?), and
no, not by simply incentivizing you to go and purchase something.
Free range photography. Organic art. No undue influence. That is what we ask of the iskm collaborators, and that is
the standard that we should expect from those that, in theory, independently
critique.
iskm: Is it ‘art’ when the photographer has to work to
satisfy commercial interests? Do the artists need to compromise due to an economic
necessity?
PK: Everything depends on the type of client and
commission, their vision for their product, the photographers. At best it will
be a creative collaboration between everyone involved. While I can't speak
for Inez & Vinoodh, their comments suggested that sometimes situations do
arise where every aspect of a shoot or campaign is prescribed from the outset.
On the other hand, other clients give photographers free range.
 |
| overseeing kate at an Aperture talk |
In another piece in the magazine, fashion photographer Emmanuelle Alt, in response to the question "Wouldn't a client say "Oh Emmanuelle, remember that amazing shot you did of Kate [Moss] in the water with the bikini? Can we have that again?", stated: "Yeah, and sometimes I'd say, "Great, we haven't done that character in a long time; let's do it!" and other times, I'd be like, "I've done that too many times, and this girl's got nothing to do with that one - she's going to look stupid in this outfit."
Of course, iskm is not held to commercial pressures - from advertisers, funders and budgets - and the need to self-reinforce facets of industry, from creation to critic to collector.
iskm would certainly have found the analysis more legitimate without the paid fashion and perfume ads that mark the issue while also we question the validity of articles discussing the “extraordinary visual culture” associated with an international skin-care firm, with that firm's name smeared throughout.
iskm would certainly have found the analysis more legitimate without the paid fashion and perfume ads that mark the issue while also we question the validity of articles discussing the “extraordinary visual culture” associated with an international skin-care firm, with that firm's name smeared throughout.
While, we are not here to alienate those generating the
conversation, we certainly attempt to push the boundary of the dialogue and the expression. So, we recommend that you check out the issue for yourself and make your
own judgment.
And one last thing, Aperture's editors state that Inez & Vinoodh are "fashion's most iconic and imitated photographers" therefore, we believe, making them a wonderful reference point for an iskm submission. Maybe someone out there can specifically investigate and
react to the lead image of kate and think about these ideas of transformation? If
you do so, we promise that you will not hear from a single advertiser or get a commercial gig out of it!
Better yet, maybe we can get Inez & Vinoodh to 'appropriate' one of their own images and transform it for the iskm collage?
Dear Inez & Vinoodh: Observe. Slow Down. Shoot. Submit.
