Gather 'round, children. I'm going to tell you a story of the dark
days Before the Internet. Once upon a time, pictures of naked people
were difficult to find, and some of us -- particularly those of us who
were young and male, as I was in those days -- would go through all
sorts of convolutions in order to see naked people. (Preferably attractive female naked people, in most cases. But not always.)
And so there came to be Playboy,
which lived in secret places in many homes, hidden or left in plain
sight by many Dads and found by many offspring. There also came to be a
myriad other magazines of varying levels of smut, some of which those
young strivers discovered in their homes, some of which they discovered
through older compatriots, and some of which they blushingly bought with
their own money and hid away. There also came to be the great Cinemax,
particularly late-night Cinemax. And there were nastier, rawer items
available on VHS and in remarkably expensive print form from very shady
purveyors in disreputable areas usually far from where we lived.
At the same time, there were slightly older young men who thought it would be neat to take pictures of naked young women themselves.
(As with so many things: many were called, but few were chosen...most obviously, few were chosen by actual naked female models.) Some did it for the sexual thrill, though they generally were very
careful not to emphasize that motivation. Some claimed to be serious
photographers, interested in shapes and shadows and the play of
light...as long as there was a naked female in the middle of all that
stuff. Some had other motivations as well: professional photographers of
other genres trying something else, hobbyists getting excited, and the
much-rarer-than-claimed boyfriend of a real exhibitionist, among others.
Some of their pictures appeared in the smutty magazines, but some aimed
at Art -- or, at least, aimed at galleries and publications that
claimed the mantle of Art, which is close enough.
Some
of those photographers even made a living from it -- I doubt as many do
now, in our lesser age, aiming at Art rather than a sequence of fifteen
pictures of a particular woman embodying at least two fetishes for niche
websites. But, in those days, many of them had big classy Art Books of
their work, and some still do, even in our Internet Age.
Erotic Photography
is a time-capsule of the moment after the Internet had made sex
ubiquitous and open and it still looked like people would continue
buying smut that they liked. (Spoiler Alert! They didn't.) It has
four pages of artsy black-and-white photos of mostly pale naked young
women -- of various body shapes but tending to the slim -- by each of a
hundred or so photographers active around fifteen years ago. Some people
will be able to make specific artistic judgments among those
photographers; for me, they all looked pretty much the same kind of
thing.
That's a nice thing, admittedly -- I do like
pictures of attractive naked female persons, as I said above -- but I
didn't see much difference between the photographers besides obvious
choices of props (this set likes B&D equipment, this other set
always works in inky black rooms, a smaller group cherishes the great
outdoors, and so on) and, in a smaller way, models.
There
are some naked men in here, but not many. And a few of the
photographers are female, which didn't seem to make much of a
difference. This book is older than its years, now, lapped several times
by a much quicker mode of communications that is much better at
delivering smut at precisely calibrated levels to all of the citizens of
the world. That doesn't make it a bad book, but it might make it an entirely superseded commercial product, which is sad enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment