I first heard about The Century Project through a Facebook group called Say No to Nude 10, 12, and 16 Year old Girls Pics Displays by Colleges.
Shira Tarrant, the Facebook friend who led me to it, writes about the show on her blog Girl With Pen:
This brought up all sorts of anti-censorship issues for me; I love the idea of women being celebrated in all their shapes and sizes. But scrolling through the show's website, I was struck by the meaninglessness of showing all these subjects in the nude. It reminded me of a porn shoot I was once on where a creepy old guy was shooting nude photos of a Barely Legal starlet in her white panties.It’s a collection of pics — nude girls and women ages birth through 100. (Get it? One hundred years of naked women = The Century Project.) The line-up for 2009 includes shows at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, Rhodes College in Memphis, and the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, VA.
The pics are supposedly a celebration of the naked female body in a variety of shapes, sizes, races, and ages. Each photo comes with a little story about the featured female. Many of these “moving personal statements,” as [photographer Frank] Cordelle calls them, are first-person blurbs about overcoming abuse, eating disorders, etc...An 8-year-old girl certainly has lots to tell us. But why does she have to do it in the nude?
Here's Shira again:
I asked John Foubert, the founder of the Facebook site, what motivated him to take action. Here's what he said:It’s the same old-same old: girls’ and women’s naked bodies on display. I saw the exhibit and talked to the photographer. For the most part, the “moving personal statements” moved me to want to vomit. The exhibit visually exploited women and put their stories on display for no apparent productive end.
Check the photographer’s website and see what he has to say under the FAQ “Why Women?” I remain unconvinced that he gets the issues. Cordelle’s explanation for exhibiting naked female bodies reinforces assumptions about women as different and needing special attention or unique protection. There’s something really off about it. He puts girls and women on display while claiming concern for our well being. Really, Frank: Don’t.
I'm glad to see that so many people from across the country are beginning to express their outrage toward a man who takes pictures of nude girls and takes money from colleges to display them. I hope that more people will begin to put pressure on Rhodes College, UNC Wilmington, William and Mary, East Stroudsburg University, and Houston Community College so that these institutions don't spend their money to pay for the exploitation of children.If you're on Facebook, check out the group.
3 comments:
I went to this website, and I'm having a hard time finding anything particularly controversial about it. It isn't sexual at all. To some degree I find myself feeling bad about staring. Its just girls and women with no clothes on. I'm not sure why that is fundamentally scandalous. It reminds me of my high school girlfriend carrying around a book of nudes to practice her drawing technique. It occurred to me at the time that she shouldn't have that sort of thing at school, but really what it does is de-sexualize the human body. Really it was only one step away from a diagram in science class. I think being offended by this type of thing really says more about how the viewer perceives nudity than about how the artist or model see it themselves. I'm actually not sure that objecting to this type of thing is very removed from the abstinence education you object to so strenuously.
I just wanted to say that I am surprised that such a seemingly progressive website would post an article about The Century Project in a negative light. I saw the project, and in fact was a model for Frank Cordell at the age of 15. Frank Cordell is a very professional man who in no way made me feel sexualized. What surprised me about the project was how Frank Cordell was able to take pictures of nude women without sexualizing them. Nudity can bring about sexual thoughts, but it is completely natural and I am surprised that the article immediately assumed that a nude woman could only be associated with her sexuality. I would also like to say that the Century Project, and especially my own photo shoot, helped me realized how distorted my view of my body was. The entire point of the project was for people to realize that just because a woman was nude, did not mean that she was displaying her sexuality. I know the project is not for everyone, but I helped with the project to come to William and Mary, and the misconceptions John Foubert was feeding administrations of future sponsors of the Century Project made me realize just how ignorant this country can be. John Foubert has not even seen the project, and so I don't see how his opinion can be considered valid.
I am VERY disappointed in this website. I thought this site was progressive, now I see that its views are just as distorted as the rest of the country.
--Lucy, just another angry american girl
I'm very glad to hear your experiences with the Century Project were positive. My own feelings about it, after spending considerable time on the website, continue to be negative.
One thing this blog is always questioning is why woman's worth or interest has to be linked to her sexuality. As much as we'd like to think being naked has nothing to do with being sexual, our culture tells us otherwise on a regular basis. So when evaluating an exhibit of female nudes, I have to look at how the nudity informs the work.
In this case, I agree with Shira Tarrant, who did see the exhibit: "An 8-year-old girl certainly has lots to tell us. But why does she have to do it in the nude?"
Post a Comment
We have moved this blog to http://virginitymovie.com where you can find all our posts and leave comments. This blog is no longer active. See you at the new site!