Lohan’s photoshoot sparks controversy
Lindsay Lohan posed for photographer Terry RichardIIson at L.A.’s Chateau Marmont
They say art, culture and evolution should never be measured. But how does one react to Hollywood’s trouble-child Lindsay Lohan’s latest antics where she posed with a gun in her oral cavity for a provocative photo shoot? The credit for these ‘disturbing’ photographs goes to Terry Richardson, a fashion photographer, who posted them to his Tumblr page, terrysdiary, before abruptly removing them.
While many raised concerns over the message it sent to emotionally vulnerable people, think tanks in the city feel that creativity knows no bounds and that artistes should be free to express themselves in whatever way they want to. And there was no line that could be drawn to indicate this was the limit.
Fashion designer Nitin Bal Chauhan, whose collections condemned brutalities against prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib
and focused on the horrors of life in an urban society, feels that as a liberated individual one is free to take inspiration from anything and everything to express his or her feelings.
“The constant degradation of human values and actions has been a constant source of inspiration to artists around the world. I believe such works can prove helpful to sensitise society towards what’s wrong and unjust. It creates a mirror, a reflection of mankind’s dark side,” explains Nitin.
An artist has the ability to force people to think about issues they don’t normally want to confront. Aditya Kriplani, copywriter with Lowe Lintas says that in a way it’s good to be able to bring something like suicide to fore through art. He says, “However, it really depends on the intention of the artist. If the intention is to sensationalise and grab eyeballs, then it’s not acceptable, but if the idea is to bring to light a certain pattern in society, it should be supported.”
Prasansha Saha, design director, Aharin India adds that using the theme of suicide could be quite creative and if someone does shoot something like this with Lohan, it could even become a social movement. Ultimately it depends on the way you perceive it, she says and adds, “It’s just a form of art. In history artists have picked the craziest of themes to represent their works. I think it should be acceptable until it stays just an expression of art.”
But who will discern what’s right and what’s wrong? Isn’t our sensitivity subjective? Photographer Sanjay Austa holds the view that freedom of expression is meaningless without the freedom to offend. “Doing something provocative should not get your work banned. I find these photographs utterly ridiculous and distasteful. Even if we assume that the said pictures are for a campaign against suicide, they’re crass. They need not be so controversial and in your face. Having said that I still believe that the photograp-her/artist has the freedom to express his feelings in whichever way he feels right.”
Post new comment