The photographs which I chose to “read” are by Del La Grace Volcano. When I saw the photographs, I admit that my first thoughts were not the average ones—I had seen them before. I realized after several minutes that “Jax Back, London, 1991” and “Jax Revealed, London, 1991” were the front and back covers respectively of Masculinidad Feminina (the Javier Sáez translation of Judith Halberstam’s Feminine Masculinity). After putting this from my mind, I looked at the pair of photos again—always scanning “Jax Back” first, followed by “Jax Revealed” since it is in that order that the photographs are presented to the viewer.
“Jax Back” suggests to the reader that one is looking upon the body of a man—not only because of the muscularity of the body shown to us, but by the military-camouflage pants and shaved head which would generally imply maleness to the general public. The photograph is in black and white creating a sharp contrast between Jax white body and the pure black of the backdrop. The sharpness created in this fashion brings and even harsher (read: masculine) feel to the photograph in general.
In Gayle Salamon’s “Transfeminism and the Future of Gender” she discusses a New York Times article by Paul Vitello which employed the use of photographs of a transman named Shane Caya. Salamon discusses how in the first shot of Caya he is shown with “his ex-partner Natasha, and their three-year-old child. All three are smiling as Shane lifts the young child into the air.” (Salamon 128) Del La Grace Volcano’s photograph “Jax Back” reminded me a lot of this photograph. They both seem to just be set ups for the viewer. They seem to say “Look at this normal picture. Nothing here is awry or strange or queer or different. Just a happy family (Just an army man’s muscular back).”
“Jax Revealed” is meant to shock the viewer. This masculine body in camouflage pants has turned around and is in the process of taking off a shirt—but now we can see small breasts on the masculine figure. The photograph is also in black and white which still accentuates every white muscle against the black backdrop, but this time also emphasizes the outline of the subject’s breasts.
Salomon describes Caya in the second photograph (Shane Caya shirtless) used by the New York Times by pointing out “He sports a head of short, salt-and-pepper hair, an upper arm covered with tattoos, and a muscular, well-sculpted male chest.” She goes on to say “The caption of the photo reads: Shane Caya displays his mastectomy scars.” (Salomon 129) “Jax Revealed” reminded me a lot of the photograph which Salomon describes here—both asking the viewer to “read [the] body for evidence…the ‘tell’ that would give the lie to that maleness.” I do not know what gender Jax identifies as, however, regardless of whether she is a rather muscular (masculine?) woman or he is a transman, Del La Grace Volcano asks us through the title “Jax Revealed” to not only view the photograph of Jax as a person taking off clothing, but also as a masculine body revealing female parts.
This brings me back to Masculinidad Feminina. The viewer is clearly meant to approach the book and see first a man’s back. Then when one read’s the title they are to be confused and start looking for the tell. They turn to the back cover and the tell is revealed to them in the revealing of Jax’s female parts. I have to wonder how ethical it is to scrutinize every inch of the body upon which we gaze—even in critiquing I find myself feeling somehow uncomfortable with the concept of looking for “tells” even if I am asked to do so by the artist themselves.
Works Cited:
Salamon, Gayle. "Transfeminism and the Future of Gender." Women's Studies on the Edge. Ed. Joan Wallach Scott. Durham: Duke University Press, 2008. 115-36
I like your interpretation of the person with their back facing the camera "jax back". I like how you said the contrast from white skin and a black background was sharp and appeared "masculine" I agree with you that bold colors or darker colors put together are often associated with masculinity. Also the fact that the individual is muscular really visually confirms societal stereotypes the create our studiums as viewers. Without knowing the photo series, I think i would be shocked if i glanced at a photo assuming i was looking at a male/man and in fact the individual was a female. I would feel like I shouldn't be so assumptive in the future and open my eyes a little wider.
ReplyDeleteI really like your last comments about scrutinizing the body in such intense ways. This has been a conflict for me, I find problematic the level of obsession around or attention payed to the body. This is in part why I found Jane Marcus' work more approachable than Cameron's, because Marcus' focuses less on exposing bodies. At the same time, both works aim at different things and have different focus, Cameron's self portraits evoke histories of representation and performance in the photos themselves, when Marcus approaches it with faces, trying to "humanize" a marginalized constituency.
ReplyDeleteI forget which author said it, but one of the ones we read for this week compared photography to surgery… and your comment about being uncomfortable made me think of that. The more I think about it, the more I like that idea. The medium of photography, well maybe just art photography, asks us to critically look at an image – to dissect it, if you will. Dissecting things - whether physically, visually, or mentally – is a pretty weird experience so I can completely see how it can be an uncomfortable or unpleasant thing.
ReplyDelete