|
|
|
|
Magnum
Farce
|
| Another
advert creates real problems for the value system which Magnum represents.
It was taken in the early 1980s as part of an extended photographic essay
on new Brighton, a working-class holiday resort close to Merseyside. It
was, therefore, a caught moment, and perfectly legitimate. But such is
the power of modern iconography, that the image subsequently appeared
in a much later body of Parr's work entitled Bored Couples, a series of
photographs chosen by him to illustrate the thesis that in many modern
marriages or relationships, individuals are bored with each other. Here
we have a triple-whammy. A picture taken in one reportage context over
a decade ago has been extracted and given a new and secondary meaning
in a very different visual setting. And now, Parr has allowed it to be
published a third time in a commercial context with a deliberately pejorative
caption: "No interest for two years." Magnum were unable to trace the two people involved, but nevertheless gave permission for the photograph to be used. There's a strong possibility that the relatives of the man and woman are still alive. It doesn't take much imagination to guess how they would feel seeing the way a casual image of members of their family, taken at the seaside long ago, has been used in an equally casual way, with an extremely insulting inference to sell finance for Fiats. Once again, the message is clear; particular individuals are uninteresting and unimportant in their own right. they are merely types or caricatures, captures in a vulturistic manner to convey a set of social and cultural attitudes and reinforce the photographer's view of the world. Neither we nor Martin Parr have any idea whether this couple really are bored with each other, indeed we don't even know for certain that they are a couple. They may might be brother and sister, or even strangers. The photographer shows an uncaring arrogance in his assumption that they have nothing to say each other, and it fits his purpose to stick to this, if not through thick and thin, the through a book and a financially rewarding advertisement. In the USA, the family of this 'couple' would surely take Magnum and Parr to the cleaners, and who could blame them? However as Liz Grogan points out, Magnum, like most other agencies, would not accept responsibility. "In any commercial exploitation of Magnum pictures, the user takes responsibility for any legal come-back. The advertising agency signs an indemnification clause against any litigation." Martin Parr has been hailed as an extraordinary talent, indeed the dazzling talent of his generation. In the '80s, he seemed to be showing us the unfortunate victims of an awful society, in which greed was worshipped. But far from exposing this malaise, these advertisements make it clear that Parr is part of it. By allowing his work to appear in this way, knowing what the captions would say, and aware that the subjects of the pictures would be paid, Parr is inextricably involved in the very sickness it was said he was trying to reveal. He is part of problem and not of the solution. Perhaps he was just sneering all along. David Hurn provides the final word on the implications of Parr's decision to agree to these advertisements: "I squirm for the memory of George Rodger (a founding father of Magnum who died last summer). Martin represents the genre of anarchic irreverence for everything, and he is perfectly in tune with his times. Is this way Magnum want to go? · Martin Parr's Small World is at Portfolio Gallery, Edinburgh (0131-220-1911) from July 5 to August 1 Colin
Jacobson is a freelance picture editor and visiting lecturer in the
Centre for Journalism Studies, |
|
||||
|
|