LECTURE NOTES - CENSORSHIP & 'TRUTH'

- Stereotypically beautiful images.

- Classic landscape photography.
- Very true.
- Long time before digital photography.
- Digital has widened the scope for manipulation.

- Manipulation of image.
- Dramatically change.

- Dark room manipulation.
- Does it matter in these images?
 
- One sided truth.
- Seen in society today.

- Fell out with Stalin.
- Eradicated from history.

- Similar eradication of a person from history.
- Photographs no longer show the truth.

- Much easier to do it today.
- Photoshop.

- Similar to Adbusters.
- Not real.
- Scrutinising the advertising industry.
- Where should the line be drawn.

- Is there a real problem in manipulation to sell a product?
- Does matter in documentary images.
- Truth should be the truth.

- Newspaper responsible for the manipulation not the photographer.
- Changes message.
- False reality.

- Not called Robert Capa - pseudonym.
- Is this a staged photograph - does this matter when giving a message?
- Actual photograph of the death of the soldier - not a fake.
- Spanish Civil War - Siesta after lunch.
- Photograph was supposed to be a staged charge but soldier was actually shot.

- Convinces you and makes you believe what they want you to see as true.
 
- Published in American magazines.
- Portrayed as poetic.

- We are all susceptible to persuasion. 

- Simulation.
- What you see has no resemblance to the truth.

- Questions the role of the photographic journalists.
- Controlled by the US Forces.
- Controls on what they were allowed to show.
 

- Chose not to cooperate with this.
- Photographs were not shown until after the war.

 - Shocking imagery.

- More truthful representation of what happens in war.
- Lets the viewer see what really happens.
 

- Friendly fire.
- Persuasion propaganda.

- Very different to what the government and the press wanted to reveal and show you.

- Distressing and real images.
- Caused a lot of offense. 
- Simulated or designed war for the media coverage.
- Started 6:30am EST so it could be broadcast rather than that being the relevant time.
 
- Strange reality of seeing war on CNN.
 

- Very real images of carnage and death.
- Black & white - detract from impact and shock and horror.

- Appeared on many English newspapers.
- Accurate reproduction of colour photographs.
- First truly shocking image on the front of a newspaper.
- Too true.
- Newspapers were fine.

- Most information that comes from the war was from the pentagon nd therefore imbalanced.
- Do we want the real truth or to live in our own bubble.
- War was a consumable good.

 -Never the actual truth.

- Black and white as well as colour.
- Beautiful images.
- Look for the beauty in war.

- Landscape photography with war.

 - Different representation but equally as accurate?

 - Bleak perception of the world.

- Sexual ambiguity.
- What you see it as is defined by you rather than the advertiser?
- Other connotations.

- Say more about certain individuals or a more global thing.
- UK advertising is self-controlling.

- Adverts that have shocked.
- Questions notions of racism and sexuality.
- Staged or not?
- Actual truth or manufactured truth?
- AIDS seen as a homosexual disease - frowned upon by catholics as it has been made to look like a dying picture of Jesus.
 

 - By having an advert banned, does this not give you the same recognition, if not more.

 - Appears on billboards on a vast scale.

- Highly complained about.
- Sexually suggestive.
- Seen as being sexualised linked with opium and drugs.
- Nipple made it unacceptable.

- Why is this less sexualised?
 

- Distorted image.
- Not correct physically.
- Mother and son.
- Acceptable as this is what is called proper culture.
- Acceptable because it is mythological and classical?
- Similar to the argument of black and white photography.

- Loved or hated.
- Highly sexualised images of young girls.
- Hints on what has happened or what is about to happen.

- Recreation.
- Singer in the band was 15 at the time.
- Fine art or graphic design.
- Does fine art sit outside of restrictions.
- Is it justifiable as fine art.
- Having it as a record sleeve changes the way we see it.

- Jeff Koons
 

- Asks 3 questions as to whether work can be seen publicly.
- Fine art audience.
- Does 'the average person' exist.
- Do they understand what is actually being portrayed on an artistic level.
- Should uneducated people be allowed to decide on what is artistic and what is not.
- Does it have a serious value.
 

- Tarnished by line between speech and non-speech. 
- Where is the dividing line?

- Is this damaging to the children?
- Is it akin to child pornography?
- Interviewed now the children say there was no issue.
- Just a documentation.

 - Saatchi gallery closed for police investigation.

- Are they compromising positions?
- Are they indecent?

- Naive person.
- Former fashion model.
- Can the gaze theory be applied here.
- Males looking at females.
- Mask - innocent or not?

- Baltic Gallery, Gateshead.
- Police again brought in.

- Mother allowed shoot.
- Appeared in a mens magazine. 

- Change in law and public perception.
 

- Sticker on censorship.
- Cheaper to put a sticker on than to have a huge rerun.

- Brooke Shields approached photographer.
- Reclaim back her own body.
- Is it redressing the balance or playing to preconceived perceptions of women in art.