Death does not become her: America's Next Top Model crosses the line

Thank you for thinking when I wasn't Dorothy. I enjoy ANTM in general, and this episode was no exception...when it was just an episode of ANTM. But since I watched it, you and other bloggers have shone a light on the obvious, and I regret even watching the episode in the first place.

*~...and this is where I want to live, right here between your hips~*

Actually, I really thought it was inventive. (well, as inventive as ANTM can be--after all these seasons, they are totally scraping the bottom of the barrel.) I certainly didn't think it was supposed to be at all titillating. Sure, violence against women is a problem. So is bulima and anorexia, which two models had to portray last season. In both situations, the photographs were not meant to endorse violence against women or eating disorders. Being mutilated or murdered was not presented on the show to be something for which women should strive. In fact, it was the opposite: the models were supposed to take something totally ugly and still try to "shine through that" and look pretty themselves, despite the gory make-up.

All those backstories about how the women jealously kill each other are nothing compared with the cruel things the women on this show routinely say and do to each other. Women need to start taking responsibility for NOT taking each other down more than some stupid producer needs to refrain from making up ridiculous stories.

I think this episode is being over thought alittle, I wasnt the one bit offended or appalled my the situations being depicted, but maybe i do watch a little too much CSI Ny, lol.

"Never apologize, Never explain."- Helena Peabody

I was offended by this episode, but for different reasons...for the second time in the show's history (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this), a person on the show has had someone close to them die and then--surprise!--they're expected to do a photo shoot that has some weird ominous tie-in.

This week, it was Jael-- in cycle 4, it was Kahlen. At what point do the producers step in and say, "hey, we should change this photo shoot." Apparently, never.

Yes, I get that you wouldn't have that luxury in the modeling industry, but you'd also have a choice, as a model, to say, "hey, I'm not going to do this shoot today." Besides that, Tyra is always reminding us about how ANTM is a search for inner and outer beauty and yet the producers aren't willing to show any compassion? I guess Tyra saves all that for her god awful talk show.

Honestly, I'm done with this show.

Appalling.

Enough said.

and anyone is arguing that these kinds of images are okay, in any way whatsoever.

Fetishising and sexualising violence against women is never, ever a good thing.

Just needed to echo those sentiments. These things make me so angry.

Tyra, I thought you were alright. I am questioning myself now.

I remember a few years ago in Britain when I saw an Alexander Mcqueen (designer) shoot that involved women with their lips sewn shut, and their legs sewn onto machines. it really froze my heart.

Lets all revolt and not buy these sh-tty clothes hawked in these sh-tty magazines from these questionable designers. DIY people!

I am not going to watch ATNM again. I prefer Project Runway, anyway

and lets start the dialog again concerning media and representations of violence against women. I don't think the Law and Orders and CSIs of the world are good for our collective psyches

The photoshoot was just an artistic attempt at modeling and photography. I LOVED the photoshoot because I'm a huge fan of photography...and well, gore of course. Some of the shots were gorgeous in a completely artistic sense and that's why I'm a fan of ANTM...because of the photoshoots...not cuz of the drama, or...dear god, Tyra Banks (who I swear is trying to become the next Opra) but because sometimes, every once in a while, the creative directors will come up with a completely rad idea for a photoshoot. I don't know why anyone automatically thinks that this was some sort of acceptence towards violence against women. Why did you all assume that? It reminds me of this girl in highschool that I hated, who was a rebel for the sake of rebelling and she ALWAYS thought, in every sense, just to get attention, that everyone and everything was sexist or offensive...

And sometimes yes, art can be offensive...but it's art and we must appreciate it for what it is, not what sort of offensive, biased opinion we can make of it.

And that's what I have to say.

Shorty out.

------------------

"Valentine's Day's coming? Aw crap! I forgot to get a girlfriend again!"- Fry

"The fact that viewers are so desensitized to this kind of material that they wouldnt be offended by it is really appauling, especially since these viewers are women. " -monkeypants

desensitized by what? Photos of a shoot that I watched produce? I watched the make up artists create their masterpieces of making the scenes and models look how they did. I saw it come together. So seeing these photos only reminds me of how well they did. Not "omg that's so wrong." Show me a real home video of a husband beating his wife...and I'll fucking cry. That's that. This is so diffferent...I don't know why everyone is making a big deal about it. I've been writing stories/making movies/writing songs about death and violence since i was a CHILD...that doesn't mean by any means that I SUPPORT it. I happens. It's life. It's real. And to me something REAL portrayed in any art piece reaches out to people. Just the simple fact that these photos have aroused so many mixed feelings in people has already proved that they have done what they wanted to have done. That's art. That's what it does. And that's why I'm a part of it every day. Does that make me a bad person? Does that make me a violent horrible, woman beating person? Does that make me not sympathize towards people when it comes to abuse, death and violence? No.

------------------

"Valentine's Day's coming? Aw crap! I forgot to get a girlfriend again!"- Fry

Art is to do whatever art does, question, provoke, raise awareness, be controversial, whatver. We therefore allow it the liberty to do pretty much whatever it likes.

Advertising is entirely different. It's aim is to sell things, and its method is to make these things seem as attractive as possible to the consumers, indeed even to try to create a desire for the goods where there was none before- you know all those wacky recent inventions like hair gel or whatever.

Advertising is therefore a much more direct reflection on our society than art is, it is the lowest common denominator for showing what people's desires actually are, and it is also a serious attempt to influence those desires. Unlike most art, advertising has a budget of millions, and the posters etc permeate our society- they are unavoidable.

So those people defending these adverts on the basis of their artistic merit, you've got it a bit wrong. Sure, the posters may well have artistic merit, but the thing that people are concerned about is that violence against women is being used as a way to sell clothing- and what exactly does that say about society's desires, or the norms that we want to create? Basically, it shows that we've gone a bit wrong somewhere. I mean, do we use adverts of racist mob lynchings to sell trainers? No, of course we don't, because that kind of stuff doesn't make people want to get new footwear.

This choice shows a complete lack of creativity. Clearly it must all have been said and done, if this was the only thing left to shock (and perhaps generate interest in an otherwise completely NOT interesting show). Make no mistake, this was done precisely to cause a reaction and draw attention. I refuse to email a protest to the idiots involved in this show. I won't give them the attention they so desire.

That said, we come to the question of the photos themselves. Are they of any artistic merit or was there any worthwhile purpose behind their creation? I think not. I think our society has reached a saturation point on graphic imagery. Look at the film world. 300, Grindhouse, Hostel... graphic gore is now the norm. We can routinely view beheadings, dismemberment, torture, etc. One could argue that it is a cathartic display of what we imagine our own nation is doing in Iraq, to be sure.

But my thoughts are not on catharsis, art, or even the crime rate. I am opposed to the banality of it all. None of this interests me. I really have no desire to view it in a photo spread or in the theater or on television, nor do I want to hear about it in song, or read about it in a book. Yes, life is cheap, we know, we know, we know... You're born, you suffer horribly, and sometimes you die violently and leave a rotting putrid corpse... c'est la vie. Blah blah blah...

Can we just move on to something else? Can we just find the "next big thing" and all embrace it and rejoice over it and twist it and turn it and beat it to a pulp til it too is no longer of interest to us?

My next American Model should bring a strong cup of coffee and an apple danish. She should sit on a bed of ivory-colored linen with rose petals all around her. She should smell as good as she looks, and she should make me want nothing more than to crawl into bed with her and spend the day there, enjoying the taste of her skin, the softness of the rose petals, the warmth of the sheets, and other glorious delights. Then when we rise from the bliss we can enjoy the coffee and the danish, as we lay in bed, reading the Times, and shaking our head at all the violence that exists in the world outside.

Now THAT would be worth watching... er... well... living.

she's always been crazy...SURPRISE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujj_sGzNbtQ

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T21UUEyw_c4