diane arbus: pregnant self-portrait

com­mis­sioned by, and orig­i­nally pub­lished in blue­print magazine

a young woman, preg­nant and semi-naked, stands in her bed­room, next to a tri­pod sup­port­ing the large for­mat cam­era with which the pho­to­graph was taken. a blurry reflec­tion of a reflec­tion. the woman tilts her head to one side as if puz­zled. the image is a lit­tle known self-portrait, by and of, the pho­tog­ra­pher diane arbus. it is tempt­ing to regard this as por­tent. a metaphor for the body of work she was to pro­duce over the next two to three decades, and a reflec­tion of the nar­cis­sis­tic, obses­sive gaze which seems to be the force behind her col­lected output.

there are com­men­ta­tors who assert that in this photographer’s parade of out­siders, deviants, rejects and odd­i­ties, what we are look­ing at is not the sub­jects them­selves, but the reflec­tion of her own tor­tured perceptions.

at the v&a, ‘diane arbus: rev­e­la­tions’ (until 15th jan­u­ary 2006) brings together over 200 vin­tage pho­to­graphic prints, together with doc­u­ments, neg­a­tives, a recon­struc­tion of her dark­room, her cam­eras and note­books, accom­pa­nied by a book of the same title, in the largest ret­ro­spec­tive of her work in the last thirty years.

all of the iconic images are here:  ’jew­ish giant at home with his par­ents’, ‘boy in cen­tral park hold­ing toy hand grenade’, the dwarves, trans­ves­tites, nud­ists, strip­pers and odd­balls, what she called her ‘freaks’, a term far more shock­ing in these days of pc lan­guage, than it was then.

the influ­ence which the work of diane arbus has had on suc­ceed­ing gen­er­a­tions of pho­tog­ra­phers since her sui­cide in 1971 at the age of 48, is immense. this influ­ence, how­ever, can never be seper­ated from the con­tro­versy which her work con­tin­ues to provoke.

borgesper­haps more than any of her con­tem­po­raries in amer­i­can pho­tog­ra­phy she emerged  reflect­ing the frac­tured and un-nerved mood of her gen­er­a­tion, stand­ing out as an artist of a haunted and dis­turb­ing vision. in pho­tographs which ques­tion every­day assump­tions about iden­tity, nor­mal­ity, and respectabil­ity, her work also reveals much of the par­tic­u­lar­ity of the time of its mak­ing. there is the 1968 image, ‘an empty room, nyc 1968′.  on the tv stand in the cor­ner, along­side a ceramic pranc­ing horse, there are pho­tographs of the kennedys, jack and bobby.  there is an amer­i­can flag on the wall, another pho­to­graph of jfk along­side a fam­ily grad­u­a­tion pho­to­graph.  the image is redo­lent of its time, pow­er­fully so when seen forty years on.

there is ‘boy with a straw hat wait­ing to march in a pro-war parade, nyc 1967′.  is it satire? the boy looks both earnest and dorky.  his con­ser­v­a­tive bow tie and straw hat looked quaint even at the time, the lapel pin ‘bomb hanoi’ spits hate at the viewer, he holds the stars and stripes in his right hand.  yet in the boy’s eyes there is some­thing for­lorn, melan­choly.  such melan­choly per­vades the entire body of work, par­tic­u­larly in pho­tographs of ‘nor­mal’ sub­jects, who in her hands become every bit as grotesque and unset­tling as her beloved cav­al­cade of out­siders and freaks.

the exhi­bi­tion encom­passes her entire career from the 1940s, when she was a fash­ion styl­ist and assis­tant to her hus­band allen arbus, through her appren­tice­ship with berenice abbott, and lisette model, the lat­ter hav­ing a piv­otal role in arbuses devel­op­ment, through the period of her major work, in the 1960s and 1970s, when she acheived fame and noto­ri­ety, in no small part due to the offices of john szarkowski, pho­tog­ra­phy cura­tor at moma.

those who applaud arbus’s pho­tog­ra­phy speak of the purity of her work, and her unflinch­ing gaze, even of her compassion.

com­pas­sion was the last thing which the critic and the­o­rist susan son­tag could see, whose essay on arbus became the lynch­pin for her famous col­lec­tion “on pho­tog­ra­phy”.  for son­tag, arbus was a preda­tor.  her sub­jects were appro­pri­ated for con­sump­tion, snatched out of their social and lived real­ity, ren­dered mute.  their pho­tographs a reduced and inept simil­i­tude of surfaces.

many of these images have become so famil­iar that they have long since lost much of their dis­com­fit­ing shock.  with the smor­gas­bord of inter­net porn and real­ity tv tit­il­la­tion avail­able at a click, it might be hard to see how dev­as­tat­ing this was in its appear­ance dur­ing the 1960s and ‘70s.  yet these images, in the quiet sur­round­ings of the v&a gal­leries still invoke an uncom­fort­able feel­ing of com­plic­ity in an act of tres­pass or violation.

pro-war protestormore dis­turb­ing than any other sec­tion is the col­lec­tion taken, not long before her death by sleep­ing pills and razor blade: the ‘unti­tled’ series.  they con­sist, for the most part, of peo­ple with vary­ing degrees of men­tal and phys­i­cal dis­abil­i­ties, inhab­i­tants of state men­tal insti­tu­tions.  per­haps society’s ulti­mate out­siders. pho­tographed in hal­loween masks, and fancy dress, in grotesque car­ni­val par­ody of ‘our’ nor­mal­ity, they raise what seems an insur­mount­able conun­drum about the ethics of the gaze.  it is dif­fi­cult to study these images for long. these more than any oth­ers bring to mind susan sontag’s apho­rism; “the cam­era makes every­one a tourist in other people’s real­ity, and even­tu­ally in one’s own”

© ken edwards 2005

diane arbus revelations:

major ret­ro­spec­tive of the leg­endary new york pho­tog­ra­pher at the v&a

until 15 jan­u­ary 2006


Tweet this!Tweet this!