Diane Arbus has made a significant mark in the photography world. The fascination she had with ‘freaks’ makes her photos very important when it comes to the popularity and criticism she has faced. Steven Shainbergs film Fur: An imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus and Susan Sontags critique of Diane Arbus will be discussed as to what different interpretations these texts have on Arbus’ work. Both texts will show their own individual interpretations and the differnt views they have on her work, which was and can still be considered quite shocking. Arbus has described how for her “the subject of the picture is always more important than the picture” (FREAK, 121 Examples from both films will be used as to how these texts create my own understanding
…show more content…
At the beginning of the movie she is portrayed as trying to be the perfect wife, mother, worker and daughter. The movie touches on some aspects of her life with obvious fiction as many who know of Arbus know that this was of fiction with elements of truth from her real life incorporated. It has no mention of her childhood and immediately focuses on her adult life. One scene depicts her emotionally becoming upset as someone asks what she specifically does as her husband’s assistant, which does occur in Arbus’ real life. It is clear that she feels her job is inadequate as it does not seem as important compared to her husbands as she describes the mundane tasks she does. This then progresses to her wanting to photograph her own pictures of her own style. The commercial photography shows sharp opposites in the images that Diane captures. The commercials photographs are perfect, visually appealing, normal and predictable as is said by Shainbergs Arbus. Arbus is shown to have a deep fascination with defects in people, especially her neighbour Lionel who has a medical condition that makes him grow hair over his entire body. The movie links her fascination with people who are strange, different, and weird, everything that is the opposite to the social normality of her life, and society in general at the time. Through the …show more content…
When Diane finally takes a picture of Lionel, she has taken it of him looking ‘normal’ she has not captured the ‘ugly or weird’ about him in the photo. The whole movie suggests how she finds people like Lionel fascinating and she accepts them as they are and who they are but when she finally takes a picture of the ‘other’ it is of him without his unique look. The audience knows that he only looks like that because he had shaved off all the hair that covers his entire body. It takes away the importance of how the opportunity to take a photo of the other has been changed to take a picture of someone who looks ‘normal.’ The way this ended of Lionel looking ‘normal’ can be seen as a contradiction in the aim of her photography representation that the real life Arbus would take, the audience knows he is not considered normal looking and still represents the ‘other’ but someone who would not of known of his condition and looked at the picture of him would not consider him a subject of
At the beginning of the movie she is portrayed as trying to be the perfect wife, mother, worker and daughter. The movie touches on some aspects of her life with obvious fiction as many who know of Arbus know that this was of fiction with elements of truth from her real life incorporated. It has no mention of her childhood and immediately focuses on her adult life. One scene depicts her emotionally becoming upset as someone asks what she specifically does as her husband’s assistant, which does occur in Arbus’ real life. It is clear that she feels her job is inadequate as it does not seem as important compared to her husbands as she describes the mundane tasks she does. This then progresses to her wanting to photograph her own pictures of her own style. The commercial photography shows sharp opposites in the images that Diane captures. The commercials photographs are perfect, visually appealing, normal and predictable as is said by Shainbergs Arbus. Arbus is shown to have a deep fascination with defects in people, especially her neighbour Lionel who has a medical condition that makes him grow hair over his entire body. The movie links her fascination with people who are strange, different, and weird, everything that is the opposite to the social normality of her life, and society in general at the time. Through the …show more content…
When Diane finally takes a picture of Lionel, she has taken it of him looking ‘normal’ she has not captured the ‘ugly or weird’ about him in the photo. The whole movie suggests how she finds people like Lionel fascinating and she accepts them as they are and who they are but when she finally takes a picture of the ‘other’ it is of him without his unique look. The audience knows that he only looks like that because he had shaved off all the hair that covers his entire body. It takes away the importance of how the opportunity to take a photo of the other has been changed to take a picture of someone who looks ‘normal.’ The way this ended of Lionel looking ‘normal’ can be seen as a contradiction in the aim of her photography representation that the real life Arbus would take, the audience knows he is not considered normal looking and still represents the ‘other’ but someone who would not of known of his condition and looked at the picture of him would not consider him a subject of