Everyone is crossing a line
September 25, 2007 6:45 PM Subscribe
"What is so striking about the work is that EVERYONE is crossing a line: The couples who are engaged in sex in public, the Peeping Toms who trespass on that intimacy, the photographer who has betrayed his acquaintance's trust, and of course US -- so willing to look at what was not meant for us to see." See also: NYTimes slideshow Layers of Voyeurism (Via boingboing) SFW, IMHO
Wow, interesting. Reminds me of the whole gay-Republican brouhaha.
posted by nasreddin at 6:53 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by nasreddin at 6:53 PM on September 25, 2007
Wow, those are really striking images. They make me feel dirty just looking at them, like I'm one of they voyeurs. Incredible that the couples rarely knew the voyeurs were there -- imagine looking up and seeing yourself surrounded by Peeping Toms!
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 6:53 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 6:53 PM on September 25, 2007
He noticed a couple on the ground, with a small but growing ring of men crawling towards them.
Then the couple covers the eggs in sand and creeps back into to the sea, never to see their offspring hatch.
posted by DU at 6:57 PM on September 25, 2007 [9 favorites]
Then the couple covers the eggs in sand and creeps back into to the sea, never to see their offspring hatch.
posted by DU at 6:57 PM on September 25, 2007 [9 favorites]
It's like watching a morphing animation, with Dian Fossey as the first keyframe, and Bob Fosse as the last.
posted by rob511 at 7:15 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by rob511 at 7:15 PM on September 25, 2007
this looks like the couples were exhibitionists and expecting the toms... they aren't exactly subtle!
maybe it's like that thing that hit the UK media a while back, "dogging" where some watch but some join in and the couples expect this if they go to these particular spots and invite the toms to join in if they want to "play"?
posted by Maias at 8:01 PM on September 25, 2007
maybe it's like that thing that hit the UK media a while back, "dogging" where some watch but some join in and the couples expect this if they go to these particular spots and invite the toms to join in if they want to "play"?
posted by Maias at 8:01 PM on September 25, 2007
oh, give me a break.
"and of course US -- so willing to look at what was not meant for us to see."
if it's presented as a "work", of course we're expected to - and will - look at it.
posted by setanor at 8:03 PM on September 25, 2007
"and of course US -- so willing to look at what was not meant for us to see."
if it's presented as a "work", of course we're expected to - and will - look at it.
posted by setanor at 8:03 PM on September 25, 2007
Well, that means the photographer wanted others to see it. Those farther up the chain? Not so sure about that.
posted by spock at 8:11 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by spock at 8:11 PM on September 25, 2007
Were we discussing their "reasonable expectation of privacy" in the U.S., certainly the Open Fields Doctrine would apply here, eh? It is interesting/disturbing how technology is bringing the question of what constitutes a "reasonable expectation of privacy" out into the public: For example as it applies upskirt and other voyeuristic photography.
posted by spock at 8:28 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by spock at 8:28 PM on September 25, 2007
Michael Warner's "Sex in Public" is a relevant essay in this context (purely coincidentally happened to be reading it..)
posted by nasreddin at 8:50 PM on September 25, 2007
posted by nasreddin at 8:50 PM on September 25, 2007
I was quite comfortable checking it out, being an Australian - until I realised that US didn't mean United States.
Now I feel dirty.
posted by strawberryviagra at 9:19 PM on September 25, 2007
Now I feel dirty.
posted by strawberryviagra at 9:19 PM on September 25, 2007
Exhibitionists vs. Peeping Toms is the new Pirates vs. Ninjas.
And I say this as an exhibitionist ninja. It's a problem. I'm working on it.
posted by quin at 9:43 PM on September 25, 2007 [1 favorite]
And I say this as an exhibitionist ninja. It's a problem. I'm working on it.
posted by quin at 9:43 PM on September 25, 2007 [1 favorite]
Fascinating. Thanks for the post.
if it's presented as a "work", of course we're expected to - and will - look at it.
Methinks you're missing the point.
posted by languagehat at 6:09 AM on September 26, 2007
if it's presented as a "work", of course we're expected to - and will - look at it.
Methinks you're missing the point.
posted by languagehat at 6:09 AM on September 26, 2007
Thanks. Excellent post.
posted by philfromhavelock at 8:44 AM on September 26, 2007
posted by philfromhavelock at 8:44 AM on September 26, 2007
Methinks you're missing the point.
No, I don't think so. The couple, photographer and the peeping toms are clearly crossing the line, but "US"? I know it's nice to be comprehensive, but that's not valid.
posted by setanor at 10:18 AM on September 26, 2007
No, I don't think so. The couple, photographer and the peeping toms are clearly crossing the line, but "US"? I know it's nice to be comprehensive, but that's not valid.
posted by setanor at 10:18 AM on September 26, 2007
I wonder if you'd feel the same way if you were in one of those photos.
posted by languagehat at 5:34 PM on September 26, 2007
posted by languagehat at 5:34 PM on September 26, 2007
« Older Putting the "whiff" in Wiffle Ball | Allí, ese 16 de marzo, Bush, Blair y Aznar... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by spock at 6:49 PM on September 25, 2007