Note: The following essay, as posted, was written late january, 2008. The latest version, currently undergoing revision, is posted in PDF here (16 pages).
Untitled (Nudes, Van, Horse), 2005 and Fireworks, 2002, various portfolios/shows, photographic film scans, various sizes, Ryan McGinley
Here are two images selected from the website of artist Ryan McGinley, under the section “Photographs” labeled as Untitled (Nudes, Van, Horse), 2005 and Fireworks, 2002 [1]. They have both appeared in a variety of shows and publications of the artist’s work, and are representative of the images he produces and sells as art. McGinley’s work may be investigated semiotically, leading to the discovery of many culturally important signs within the images. These signs can be interpreted as enforcing a myth of youthful adventure within the American spectacle. This myth is not as innocent as seen at first glance – it becomes disturbing when we examine its place in our society and who is included in this idealized vision.
Untitled (Nudes, Van, Horse), as may be expected, depicts naked youth (of both conventional genders) with a van (on top of a van, with another possibly in the driver seat) facing a horse. They are placed within a landscape, a field that stretches to a distant horizon, with a mountain sloping towards the right of the frame, balanced with clouds and the hint of a sunset on the left. The second image in the spread, Fireworks, shows a young girl, also nude, leaping through the frame while sparklers or fireworks create bursts of light around and, because of the nature of light and longer photograph exposures, through her. She is frozen solid in the frame by a flash, catching her madcap smile and extended body. Behind her, presumably to shield herself from sparks, stretches a patterned article of clothing, or perhaps a shawl or blanket.
Fireworks, along with other early images of his frolicking friends, was self published by McGinley in a book titled The Kids Are Alright in 2002 [2]. The book, which he sent to various art world icons, gained him prestigious shows and press [3]. An article in the New York Times remarks that the early images are “as playful as they are voyeuristic, straddling a line between exuberance and disorientation [4]” and a short blurb on McGinley in Time Magazine says “the images were unairbrushed and unironic, which freed them of the twin burdens of prettiness and ponderousness. [5]” However, McGinley himself seems closer to bridging the images and their meaning in our society, when talking about his work in the Times article. Though calling them a celebration of life, he follows, “they are a world that doesn’t exist. A fantasy. [6]”
The fantasy presented in the work, though certainly contemporary, is also historically familiar. In order to delve deeper into the meaning of this visual fantasy, tools can be borrowed from semiotics – often used to dissect advertising imagery [7]. While these specific images may not be promoting a product, every image makes certain statements within itself. Every part of these images may be thought of as a sign, part of a coded statement that, when examined within the rest of society’s code, can tell us more about the intended (or unintended) meaning of the image. In order to understand what the signs signify (what they mean, what concept they represent) we must continue to examine the signifiers (the representations attached to meaning) [8].
In describing the images previously, we have already started to examine the first layer of signage – in photography, this may be considered the indexical. Since this kind of photography consists of images made by light bouncing of the subjects in front of the camera, the images here directly represent (on one level) the subject matter in front of the camera. The images are also fairly iconic, since the referred are represented in a way that visually is similar to themselves [9]. Therefore, when we talk about the smiling girl in Fireworks it is understood that this picture was made by pointing a camera at the subject – this image is both of and means “smiling girl.” This most basic level of analysis, to anyone who understands the nature of photography, does not add much to the understanding of the particular images. To increase understanding, we can expand the context, and examine them in relation to the code of contemporary American culture.
It must be understood that most artists of McGinley’s generation are extremely visually conscious – he grew up spending much time in New York City during the 80s, a city plastered with all kinds of advertisements and visual amusements [10]. The horse, the sunset, and the landscape itself in Untitled may all be part of a conversation with the ubiquitous Marlboro-spearheaded advertising image of “America.” These signs represent the great outdoors, the epic and timeless landscape that must have seemed quite enticing to a Jersey boy. Fireworks also is involved in this celebration of America, as the namesake explosions are linked to 4th of July celebration as well as youthful excitement. Even the cloth flowing behind the figure is suggestive of a flag, somehow, its shape held by the pole of the girl’s body. The smile, the lighting in these photographs, the beautiful figures (human and equine) all suggest that this America must be a wonderful thing – indeed, youth, nudity, action – these are all associated with “Freedom” – the signified and signifier, a loaded concept in and of itself. While not quite as obvious, the van also plays an important role in this dialogue. It is denotive (describing directly) of a means of travel, a way to get to this “America” but it is also connotive (through inference, obviously in use and off the “beaten path”) of a higher level idea – the great American road trip, the dream of adventurous adolescents [11]. It has roots in the westward wagon trains of heroicized settlers, crosses through the travels of self discovery of cultural icons like Jack Kerouac, and now resides in the pop culture inanity of Tom Greene in “Road Trip” – proclaimed on the promotional poster, “The greatest college tradition of all!” The sexuality present here is also part of this fantasy – the sexuality of teen movies, the eroticism of a youth, McGinley, who claims inspiration from glossy lifestyle erotica of the 70s [12]. This idea of the American Road Trip is part of the broader myth of carefree explorative youth – a myth that presents itself as innocently beautiful, but is nowhere near simple.
Gillian Rose, in Visual Methodologies – discussing Barthes’ understanding of mythology – states that “myth makes us forget that things were and are made [13].” Indeed, these images were made embracing the mythology of a specific youthful lifestyle. One of the most obvious signs, however, both promotes and casts doubt upon the projected authenticity – the nudity. The girl is running naked through fireworks. The group is sitting naked upon a van. These things are out of the ordinary, which is why they are striking – but their strangeness also suggests their constructed nature. It is possible that these scenes could be found, but unlikely – it is dangerous to run through fireworks naked, dangerous to be naked on top of a car – and the technical skill evident in the images speaks to a knowledgeable shooter. It is quite possible that Fireworks is one of many images of this girl from that night, running through the sparks until McGinley was sure he had one perfect image (in fact, he repeats a similar situation many times in later work, often with strobes and gels as well as fireworks.)
On a simpler level, the average person simply does not see naked people with the same frequency as they appear in McGinley’s work. While work by earlier photographers, such as Nan Goldin, seems to share visual similarities, as photography critic Tim Conner remarks, “Then too, Goldin’s photos have a strong sense of story. Her images capture emotional pulses – mostly crises – in lives we can actually imagine. McGinley’s are disturbingly random, as though plucked, this-frame-as-good-as-that-frame, from a playacted version of endless summer [14].” It is this feeling of “playacting” that infuses his work, causing a sense that the viewer may be being sold this idea, at the cost of other critical thought. Understanding that this is not “real life” – the actors may be called into question, and it must be asked what their identity signifies. They are white without exception – white, young, beautiful (and in the case of Untitled, paid [15]). They were cast for their beauty, their youth – and it must be the case – their whiteness. It could be argued that within his background (skateboarding, art school, etc [16]) he simply knows more white people, and it is unintentional – but this seems extremely forced. He resides in one of the most diverse countries on the planet, in a city with an extremely colorful population – and no biographical example possible is as homogenous as expressed. Whether it is an allusion to the 70’s magazines he cites as inspiration or simply part of his aesthetic mode – the selection of his models is undeniably intentional.
This is an image, then, of a very specific America, a very specific American youth. Adventure and sexuality may be freer (and gay, youthful McGinley himself is adamant about this) but there is a possibly disturbing undertone that this fantasy is for a certain group of people, the people approved and selected for this lifestyle. Then, for the majority of the world, even outside of its ridiculousness, it is exponentially unattainable. You must be young, American, waifish, freely naked, and part of “whiteness.” It is here, ever more specifically, that the work continues its travel into the collective Spectacle – the domain of Guy Debord’s societal criticism – it joins product advertising in creating the image of an unattainable lifestyle – the “world vision which has become objectified [17].” McGinley shoots thousands of rolls of film, creates elaborate situations, to attain what he expresses as “the life I wish I was living.” If even he – young, hip, white, famous, and increasingly wealthy – cannot actually attain this lifestyle, it is hard to comprehend it as existing for anyone outside of the shallow frame of his camera.
Yet, as Debord states, “The spectacle aims at nothing other than itself [18].” This lifestyle representation replicates itself, not only through McGinley’s work, but an army of admirers seeking to “express themselves” and show their lives (or present their lives idealistically), flooding Flickr with commoditized images of their young sexuality. With America often claiming a puritan like nature, it is comfortable for these youth to see this as rebellion (edgy) – a rebellion in actuality easily part of the system. Debord later warns of “pseudo-goods [style, art] to be coveted. It offers false models of revolution to local revolutionaries [19].” It would be intriguing to see further research into the political and social effects of so many people, spearheaded by McGinley (who now shoots a variety of mainstream commercial work [20]) effectively producing their own lifestyle advertisements.
Footnotes
1 Ryan McGinley. “Ryan McGinley.” Portfolio Website. http://ryanmcginley.com/
2 Philip Gefter. “A Young Man With An Eye, and Friends Up A Tree.” The New York Times. May 6th, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
5 Jeffrey Kluger. “Ryan McGinley.” Time Magazine. May 29th, 2008, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1810317,00.html
6 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
7 Gillian Rose. Visual Methodologies. London: Sage Publications, 2005, p. 69.
8 Ibid, 74.
9 Ibid. 74.
10 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?_r=4&pagewanted=1
11 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=2&_r=4
12 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=2&_r=4
13 Rose, 90.
14 Tim Conner. “Ryan McGinley: Building A Youthsex Brand.” Tim Conner. May 6th, 2007. http://timconnor.blogspot.com/2007/05/ryan-mcginley-youth-brand-in-art-biz.html
15 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=2&_r=4
16 Gefter, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=2&_r=4
17 Guy Debord. Society of the Spectacle. 1967. Translated, Black+Red, 1977. Published online by Greg Adargo, Marxists.org. http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm
18 Debord. http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm
19 ibid
20 McGinley, http://ryanmcginley.com/
Bibliography
Conner, Tim. “Ryan McGinley: Building A Youthsex Brand.” Tim Conner. May 6th, 2007. http://timconnor.blogspot.com/2007/05/ryan-mcginley-youth-brand-in-art-biz.html
Debord, Guy. Society of the Spectacle. 1967. Translated, Black+Red, 1977. Published online by Greg Adargo, Marxists.org. http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm
Gefter, Philip. “A Young Man With An Eye, and Friends Up A Tree.” The New York Times. May 6th, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/arts/design/06geft.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2
Kluger, Jeffrey. “Ryan McGinley.” Time Magazine. May 29th, 2008, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1810317,00.html
McGinley, Ryan. “Ryan McGinley.” Portfolio Website. http://ryanmcginley.com/
Rose, Gillian. Visual Methodologies. London: Sage Publications, 2005.
I don’t know who (or what institute of higher learning) you’re writing this for, but it better get ya top grade!
When I went to SVA (back in the late 70′s) for a year, I chanced upon the art history professor in the elevator one day. I thought she was going to scold me for sleeping in her class all the time after arriving late everyday.
She told me she had just seen this great photo exhibit on celebrities. I replied that the danger with such an exhibit is that you sometimes have to catch yourself as to whether you’re responding to the photograph itself, or the celebrity pictured within it. “Oh,” she said, “I never thought of that.” Oh, I thought- and I’m paying you.
[Reply]
Ian Reply:
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Thanks Stan! I feel that way about a lot of work – Leibovitz, for example.
And I know what you mean, I’ve had some bad professors – luckily most of them seemed to be sequestered in foundation studies and were mostly good at their one area of technical expertise. This was for a Visual Culture class, senior level elective in the art history major at SCAD. I had to pull some pre-req strings to get in, but it’s been a good class and parallels well with my Contemporary Issues in Photography class in the photo curriculum.
I still feel like one semester is a very short time to cover a lot of the issues though, I could major in Visual Culture – or go for a phd or something, if I had the time/money/writing skill.
[Reply]
Comment by Stan B. — March 3, 2009 @ 11:18 pm
[...] Ian Aleksander Adams, totally ruining my day with his haughty jerk of an essay var AdBrite_Title_Color = ’0000FF’; var [...]
Pingback by "This lifestyle representation replicates itself, not only through McGinley’s work, but an army of…" | Flickrls.com - top babes from the net — March 4, 2009 @ 1:08 pm
[...] Ian Aleksander Adams, calling me/us out var AdBrite_Title_Color = ’0000FF’; var AdBrite_Text_Color = ’000000′; var [...]
Pingback by "This is an image, then, of a very specific America, a very specific American youth. Adventure and…" | Flickrls.com - top babes from the net — March 4, 2009 @ 1:35 pm
Beware of obvious distractions. I cannot fault your analysis for its thoughtfulness but the rigor needs to be there. You place McGinley in the context of ideas (Barthes, Rose, etc..) but you avoid looking at the the actual social context: Who does he associate with? Who are his peers and what do they bring to the table? Who promotes McGinley? Who is excluded, not from the photographs but from the publications, galleries, institutions, that welcome him? This would have been more fertile ground for any critic of this specific “American Vision”.
You use myth and fantasy interchangeably when they are mutually exclusive. Myths look to the past, Fantasy to the future. Myths are about history and faith, Fantasies about alternative and dreams. And that is why McGinley is in no way dangerous (by himself). As a black man from the third world I don’t feel any more excluded from his personal fantasy as I do from Tarantino’s big feet fetish. They are both rather narrow invitations but they allow me to say no thanks and have my own party. McGinley is an interesting young formalist whose work can become quickly inconsequential or grow into a position of cultural relevance. He is a mildly interesting case study for larger fields but his work doesn’t demand any sort of great scrutiny.
If you want to look at disturbing photographs look to those who want to speak for others. Look at the grand gestures. Look at those that claim to give you what you want. Look at the Pieter Hugos and the David Lachapelles and sure look closely at Blockbuster Annie. McGinley is an obvious distraction, one of those drains that exhaust intelligent discourse before it can get to something meaningful.
[Reply]
Ian Reply:
March 4th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Thanks Sebastian! I’m currently revising this paper (the posted version is from January) which is why I put it up for feedback. I’m hoping to deal at least a little with some of those issues (increasing context, looking at more critical responses, and elaboriting further on “whiteness”. I’ll post a pdf of the work in progress at the top of this article.
What you say about Myth and Fantasy is interesting to me, though I think I have to do further research on the terminology. As a gut response, I don’t agree, but it’s probably because of my experiences with speculative fictions (and their use of the term fantasy).
I can’t think about work that obviously includes some kind of lifestyle as “formulist” work though. That just doesn’t work for me.
I agree with your references to Hugo, Lachapelle, and Liebovitz – I’m certainly not pointing a finger at McGinley exclusively – he just seems to be a favorite among my fellow photo students, one that has had a lot less critical discourse about his work when compared to the others.
[Reply]
Ian Reply:
March 4th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
er – Formalist. Sorry for the typo.
[Reply]
Sebastien Boncy Reply:
March 4th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Ian, My bad. When I used the term formalist, I should have been clearer. I was not trying to characterize the work itself but my interest in it.
My understanding of the two terms (fantasy+myth) also comes from reading speculative fiction and commentary on such. Also in my current academic/photo community McGinley is not well liked and I was starting to think this was spreading nationwide. Interesting mirror action there.
I look forward to your elaborations. I’m a new reader and I already appreciate the amount of care and consideration that goes into postings and discussions.
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
March 4th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
If you’ve got some recommendations for critical writing on fantasy and the like, I’d be very interested. I haven’t read much (or primary works, even) lately, since I’m focused on finishing up undergrad. I’ve got a Sci Fi literature elective next quarter though, that I’m really excited about.
I think I understand what you mean about formalist interest – a huge part of me does like the work, it’s very seductive. He’s also taken some of the best pictures of my friend Coley that I’ve seen. I had to investigate further because I had a strange relationship with it all, one day wanting to love it, one day being really disturbed by it and not sure why. I thought it was primarily based around it’s place in The Society of the Spectacle, and the race thing only dawned on me as I was actually writing it.
Coming from nyc, western mass, and now living in georgia, I’m used to a very diverse population, and reading about how this was some kind of an ideal to him – well, you’ve read where I went with those thoughts.
If you want to see the work in progress, I posted a basic underpainting of it above. I write in long bursts and then take a while to think about it and make tiny tiny changes, so it’s definitely a work in progress – just after the burst stage now, since about 8 pages of that is from just last night.
I hope you stick around! I don’t get to write a large amount all the time, but I’m hoping to increase as and after I finish up school. A lot of my posts are of the general re-blogging variety, and a fair amount of them are about visual pieces I’m in the process of producing.
[Reply]
Comment by Sebastien Boncy — March 4, 2009 @ 1:48 pm
[...] is an interesting write up about Ryan Mcginly and his waify naked teens. Write up done by Ian Aleksander Adams. I think he touched on some [...]
Pingback by An interesting Spin | JUO Photography — March 4, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
I wonder if there is any other contemporary photographer that has gained more fame with such a mediocre body of work. Maybe he is a product of his time. Who called to jump on this bandwagon?
The good news is that the shelf life for this work will probably be short lived. I hope too many people haven’t invested in prints of his as an investment.
[Reply]
Ian Reply:
March 5th, 2009 at 1:02 am
I hesitate to name names without anything to back me up, but I can say that in my personal view there are plenty of popular photographers with mediocre work. Some of it is more commercially viable than others.
I think, generally, that investing in prints is a bad idea – I’m just not a fan of investing in art, it seems like a lot of their meaning and value lies in a place that isn’t monetary or commercial. All ties back to marx and benjamin I guess, and there are other places where one can find more discussion about all that.
[Reply]
Comment by A Fan — March 4, 2009 @ 3:14 pm
[...] the article, here. « [...]
Pingback by Ryan McGinley’s Endless Summer Critique « Can we call this something other than a blog? — March 4, 2009 @ 6:13 pm
Sebastian raises perhaps the best point: McGinley isn’t trying to speak on behalf of anyone but himself. It seems a little unfair to target him on this (and yes, I realize you are writing more on the subject and will probably include more artists). However, your opinion of his work is valid, as anyone is entitled to their own opinion.
As a small side note, to kind of see where you were coming from, I decided to look at your work, as an artist’s work speaks on their behalf and their nature (or so I gathered from this essay). I expected to see a wide range of diversity among the subjects pictured in your work, but the bulk of them contain mostly white people. If you are concerned about this issue, I hope you are attacking it and not just pointing someone out without looking inward. Then again, I suppose that’s not all of your work, and it’s just a selection that you wanted to post.
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
March 10th, 2009 at 1:24 am
Thanks for the comment Trav. First I have to point out that my intention was not to focus on a specific issue using Ryan’s work as an example, but instead to delve deeper into why his work in particular made me feel uncomfortable. So while I may explore other people’s work in the future (in fact, I’m sure I will), this essay isn’t about crusading for or against any particular thing.
In fact, as Jorg mentioned to me in email, even if there was a “token black person” or something similar in the work there would still be disturbing feelings of being sold a lifestyle (spectacle, etc).
However, since you mention my work, I guess I’ve got to address this – I understand the interest in context, but sometimes it does border on ad hominem discussion. I hope I can use it to add something instead of get off topic.
My art work (commercial work is always somewhat separate, and I don’t include McGinley’s advertising work in my analysis) does not deal with the idea of an idealized lifestyle. While I wouldn’t call any of it documentary, it is shot in a very different manner, without budget, models, or permission. The bulk of my photographic work (I’d say Gray Days, Israel By Land, and Being Inside) is shot like this. There is some racial diversity, but it was not the point of the project, and simply reflects my immediate surroundings – for better or worse. I’m totally open to people’s interpretations of what that means (perhaps it is true that many of the people in the pictures are white, but it is not a choice. No one was cast.) In Israel in particular I was amazed both at the diversity within the jewish and arab population, but also felt out of place without a wider diversity such as I’m used to in savannah or nyc. Regardless, and with understanding that I can only show my subjective viewpoint, there is no intentional “perfect world” being presented.
With Bad News, of the 137 or so people photographed, there were a few people of various backgrounds – it pretty much ran the gamut – but people were not cast in a common sense of the word – anyone who showed up for the open call was photographed. So perhaps it says something about who responds to open calls for people willing to participate in an art project run by a SCAD student, but I’m not sure much more can be read into it in that category – and I think it would be heading in the wrong direction. Details was selected more from the people who I was close to at the time, but I can’t see any serious complaints there, in fact in examining social aspects it almost seems too Target style perfect (one asian, one hispanic, one black/native american, two gay, one red head, etc.) But again, it really wasn’t about presenting anything idealized.
In fact, I think the only area where anything is relatively homogenized is in the commercial work – and no surprise there. With no control over the casting (I’m just not that big yet, haha), I’m not sure how much credit or blame I can claim, but I can try and explain how I feel about some of the projects. Haus’ Wonderland is fluff, pure and simple. I’m glad they chose at least one minority model, but I can’t say much of a statement in any direction is trying to be made by the work. In Barking Irons, I think the intention was to give an inner city 1850s NYC feel, complete with the immigrants in that particular neighborhood at the time… but of course in their young hip looking modern equivalents. Not particularly ground shattering, but I guess an excuse to have so many redheads. I’ve always felt that Mary’s Republic was sort of dystopian, so although I’m not sure about the ethnicity of some of the models, any perceived lack might just tie into that strange conformist future feeling.
As for the LARPers, you work with what you’ve got. Make your own conclusions, haha.
Hope that helps address some of your concerns. It’s certainly a complex issue. I think if I was casting something for my idealized vision of the world, it would be a lot more colorful than McGinley’s work, but I’m also not really interested in pursuing that with my stuff. I’ve skipped over a lot that I’ve done, but I don’t think any of it is similar thematically to what he does.
Let me know if you’ve got any other questions, I appreciate the comment!
[Reply]
trav Reply:
March 10th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
As you were specifically talking about his non commercial work, I too took that into account when looking into yours. I feel it’s often helpful to read work within a context, so no one can misconstrue an artist’s meaning. But that gets hairy when you place it in a public realm with little to no text to understand. Thanks for the explanations.
The only reason I even though of race in your work was raised by this essay.
Also as Sebastien noted, the sort of miss-communication you guys had about myth and fantasy. this crosses over here a little in my opinion. I think that when McGinley says “the life I wish I were living” that doesn’t necessarily mean his “idealized vision of the world.” (and wow, how powerful a term when placed in the context of this essay!) I really don’t think race plays an ultimate role when McGinley creates. If his work were to speak about race, one would surely think he were aryan or something close (if his ideal world only contained naked white people) – but that’s probably not the case. Regardless of what I think of his work, I think he needs to be cut a little slack here, since he is also part of a “minority” (being gay and all). I’m sure if he were approached about this issue it’d be interesting to see his response.
Anyhow, that’s just what stuck out to me, the calling out of all the whiteness. Maybe that just didn’t jump out at me when i first saw his work. A very interesting topic indeed, paired with his work.
[Reply]
Ian Reply:
March 10th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
No, you’re right – I’m not sure race is associated with the “ultimate role” of McGinley’s work. It is something I wanted to see questioned at least. I think just letting it exist without questioning the role of race in the work would be sort of dangerous.
I don’t believe, however, in cutting people slack because of their own minority status – there are plenty of racist jews, black, gays, etc just as there are plenty of homophobic people of various ethnicities. The article I link to in the second version of the essay on counter critic has a good comment about that.
I think there is a bit of a history of minority groups being wary of other minority groups. In fact, I think minority groups, already scared for their own, are often manipulated into believing in scapegoats among other minority groups (inner city NYC in the early years is a good example of this, all the waring ethnic gangs.) It’s often disheartening since you’d think there would be more kindred spirits instead of mutual distaste – but it makes sense in a sad way when you see that they were often being sold the same propaganda that the “majority”/”superior” groups were. I’m sure you’ve heard stories of the various groups the Nazi’s went after reporting each other or ignoring the plights of others that would seem to be their allies against hate. Getting a little off the point here though.
All this aside, the first version of this essay (which may be a better version) is just as focused on Debord’s idea of the spectacle and how that ties into McGinley’s work. Race is just one (perhaps the most loaded and problematic) of the ways in which his ideal vision is unattainable to most people. I still DO think that his work is promoting a lifestyle, regardless of intentionality.
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
March 10th, 2009 at 1:30 am
Oh, and my first rolls were simply of family and my significant other at the time (who was hispanic if you’re nitpicking, haha). Of course, I would have chosen a more diverse family if I could have ;)
[Reply]
Comment by trav — March 10, 2009 @ 12:02 am
[...] response to the McGinley paper, Trav raises the question of race in my own work here. I figured it was worth addressing this in another post (though I replied to the thread there as [...]
Pingback by Comment on McGinley Analysis - Race And My Own Work | Ian Aleksander Adams — March 10, 2009 @ 1:46 am
i would prefer a fantasy by, for, and about white people than token multiculturalism. white people need an identity as much as anyone else, and there’s something to be said for the continuity of the ideals present in his work.
naturism started in germany, of all places, at the turn of the last century, and it’s not unusual for naturists to see each other nude. mcginley’s models aren’t naturists, but i think they are pretending to be. how would you compare his work to, say, diane arbus, jock sturges, and mona kuhn, who photograph people who are naturists? the fact that his models aren’t real naturists is made clear by some of his more explicitly sexual photographs, the sort of which is unimaginable in the work of any of the other photographers i mentioned.
about the danger of running naked through fireworks, i’m reminded of a scene in “the wickerman”. a police investigator is shocked to see naked girls running through a fire, and the leader of the pagans explains that if they weren’t naked, their clothes would catch on fire. seems reasonable enough. i don’t know much about paganism, but that would be another thought to follow.
[Reply]
Comment by aizan — March 11, 2009 @ 8:12 pm
[...] Here [...]
Pingback by Critique of Ryan McGinley’s Endless Summer « +/+/+/+/+/+ — June 4, 2009 @ 7:30 pm
[...] work which discusses the culturally important signs within these images. To read the whole article click here. All of the images suggest youth, nudity and action – associated with freedom. The great [...]
Pingback by Ryan McGinley ‘I know where the summer goes’ « ALMOST VELVET — August 4, 2009 @ 4:08 pm
Just giving my two cents here. The thing I enjoy about Ryan’s work, is that he makes it look easy, too easy in fact, and I think everyone knows that to make things look easy, it takes a lot of work, dedication, discipline and finally, vision. When I see the “fantasy” images he constructs, it taunts me, as if I can just go grab my used Olympus Stylus Epic camera and start shooting my friends acting silly in dive bars or camping trips. Yet, I know those images will not be of much substance because they are not what I believe in. However for Ryan, I am assuming that is what he believes in, because you can feel the emotions through the specific images he creates. You can sense the freedom and playful youth, that all of us experienced at one point in our lives. But then we all grew up, became responsible, got jobs, married, have kids, etc. So when this young photographer suddenly comes around and throws imagery in our faces of the uninhibited lives of his friends (some of the models are hired) maybe we are slightly curious, perhaps envious of this fantasy lifestyle. Maybe we want to be running through the fields, naked? It begins to remind me of J.D. Salinger’s Catcher In the Rye. Do we just grow up to be the phonies, the corrupt adults that Holden despises. Or do we want to try to recapture and save that innocence we lost along the way?
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Except this so called innocence is just as phony, constructed, and every bit a part of the same cash consumer culture.
And why can’t being responsible and supporting your children be a lovely dream?
Why all the glamor for “partying with your friends” etc.
[Reply]
Comment by OV — September 3, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
By stating that his work embodies his fantasy McGinley is making a world simply, full of freedom and youth- his ideal way of living. If he was depicting his ideal society of white people, why would all of the extras have any role? (fireworks, etc). McGinley is involved with Jack Walls and in some of his work there are indeed black models.
Commenting on your reply to OV, “and why can’t being responsible… be a lovely dream?” Well, because this is McGinley’s, and basically solely his. He has said that he creates those fantasies for pictures, but does not live like that. He is more voyeuristic.
Also, with his new series Moonmilk, it’s hard to find that theme of white superiority, etc. …
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
October 5th, 2010 at 1:48 am
I’m not sure I ever mentioned white superiority. It’s more of a general ignorance, really, not a malignancy. A shallowness maybe, but not intricate evils.
[Reply]
Comment by Jen — November 28, 2009 @ 9:53 pm
Great article/essay, although i do think it was a product of his having simply known more white people. If you look at his “Everybody Knows This is Nowhere” project you’ll see a bit more diversity. Despite that I think you’re spot on
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
October 5th, 2010 at 1:46 am
Which, funnily enough, came after this essay. Not that I’m sayin’ anything ;)
[Reply]
aizan Reply:
November 21st, 2010 at 12:08 am
i was reminded of this thread today when photo-eye featured ‘life adjustment center’ among their new arrivals. took a quick look at the new book and ‘everybody knows this is nowhere’. it’s interesting to see mcginley trying his hand at studio portraits, as well as including people of color. the new work is ok, i guess, but he ain’t no robert mapplethorpe, that’s for sure!
in response to some previous comments, there is plenty of literature on white people as the ‘people of light’ (not so much celtic as anglo-saxon, which has a long, conflicted history). that’s a major theme in ‘moonmilk’ and his other work in general. there is also a lot of pagan imagery involving the natural elements (earth, wind, water, and fire). i didn’t read about this until recently, but the photographs where people are up in trees is a reference to the druid ritual of oak and mistletoe. taking pride in your heritage is a great thing, and the work is stronger because of it.
[Reply]
aizan Reply:
November 21st, 2010 at 1:53 am
just read a bit on celtic mythology. lots of stuff about “the shining ones”.
gonna have to look at the new studio work more to get a sense of what he’s doing with light and b&w.
[Reply]
Comment by jeremy — October 5, 2010 @ 1:44 am
Do you think you could possibly take a look at my color images on my website jeremyhandrup.com and give me a few thoughts/possible directions? Specifically concerning the four projection ones. I appreciate all the input I can get.
[Reply]
Ian Aleksander Adams Reply:
October 12th, 2010 at 3:00 am
I could, but if tried to respond online you’d get a rushed and unsentimental response, which I’d feel bad about.
Do you want to email me your phone number and a time to call and maybe I can do a better job actually giving you feedback? Sounds weird, but I’ve realized I’m absolutely terrible at getting back to all the people who email me asking for words on their work. It tends to pile up.
[Reply]
Comment by jeremy — October 5, 2010 @ 4:04 pm