In the eye of the beholder, or a bar of soap?

March 1, 2004 11:55 AM

Beyond Compare: Women Photographers On Beauty"An international photography exhibit from Dove that aims to inspire dialogue, move beyond stereotypes and challenge women to question their definition of beauty."
(Flash, mostly safe for work)
posted by ashbury (22 comments total)

Safe for work? I am so fired, thanks!
posted by crazy finger at 12:02 PM on March 1, 2004

For further reference, boobies == not safe for work. :)
posted by callmejay at 12:08 PM on March 1, 2004

My apologies, but I did say "mostly". I hope I didn't get anybody in trouble.
posted by ashbury at 12:12 PM on March 1, 2004

I'm in trouble.

But you had nothing to do with it. Great fpp!
posted by mcgraw at 12:19 PM on March 1, 2004

Very cool. Some really nice pictures in there.
posted by biscotti at 12:26 PM on March 1, 2004

I liked the breasts. And gash.
posted by mcgraw at 12:31 PM on March 1, 2004

"aims to...move beyond stereotypes and challenge women to question their definition of beauty"
Popular notions of beauty are continuously reviewed and refined in the marketplace of images. This is a highly democratic process, which has been resented by authoritarian movements since the beginning of time. Unfortunately, the physical qualities that both men and women inevitably idealize are based upon facial symmetry, overall proportion, clearness and lightness of skin, and youth, youth, youth. It’s not fair. But attacking it just makes you look… ugly
posted by Faze at 1:48 PM on March 1, 2004

The posting of a commercial-intensive site--DOVE--on Mefi makes me cringe.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:57 PM on March 1, 2004

This is Dove Bars, the ice cream, right? They would have a big commercial stake in getting women to abandon "conventional" notions of beauty, fer sure.
posted by Faze at 2:01 PM on March 1, 2004

I don't know. Some of those images were really interesting. Many were really uninteresting. Very few of them challenged a definition of beauty (to my admittedly masculine eyes at least).

Maybe it's just too difficult a topic to really bring off.
posted by willnot at 2:05 PM on March 1, 2004

No, it's Dove soap. And why does everyone always seem to believe that no corporation can ever do anything that is good?
posted by Orb at 2:13 PM on March 1, 2004

Most seemed to me to be about beauty rather than of beauty.
posted by mhjb at 2:30 PM on March 1, 2004

In case any body is interested, my dermatologist says Dove is the best soap among the ones you can find in the grocery store.
posted by bukvich at 2:37 PM on March 1, 2004

The posting of a commercial-intensive site--DOVE--on Mefi makes me cringe. - parisparamus

I initially thought of posting this as a "And why does everyone always seem to believe that no corporation can ever do anything that is good?" anti-corporation screed, but then I left it alone to see where it would go. Personally, I have my doubts that Dove and it's parent company Unilever have redifining beauty, unless that definition includes one of their products (ie Ponds), as their prime motivation in funding this exhibit.
posted by ashbury at 2:40 PM on March 1, 2004

As someone who has dabbled in photography I am rather disappointed by what I saw... I found most of the pictures frankly uninteresting.

A lot of these scream out for better composition. Also the full-face obviously-in-studio portrait was inevitable, but it's really done to death in this collection. The challenge in photography is to say everything that has to be said using the picture, and not rely on captions so much.
posted by clevershark at 3:12 PM on March 1, 2004

I'm no photography critic or scholar, although I'm somewhat serious about the photos I take, and I found quite a few compelling images in that series. Perhaps in some of the conventional portraits which clevershark refers to the interesting matter is not in the composition of the photograph but in the subject that the photographer selected. Sometimes the familiarity of a given portrait's composition makes me more aware of the subject instead aware of the photographer's artifice.
posted by Songdog at 3:48 PM on March 1, 2004

My objection is simply the length of time for the Dove intro: nothing against ya, ashbury!
posted by ParisParamus at 3:50 PM on March 1, 2004

You can be sure that P&G would never include breasts in such a slide show. Unilever is Dutch, no? Breasts are wonderful.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:53 PM on March 1, 2004

I'm not saying that there aren't any interesting pictures... just that, as a collection, I personally don't find it all that compelling.

It is all in the eye of the beholder, as the saying goes.
posted by clevershark at 4:09 PM on March 1, 2004

My favorite photo was "Girls on Bikes" by Elaine Constantine (second set, top right). Expressing yourself and having fun is beautiful!

I think the photos are great, with lots of originality. And... there are no hard and fast rules for composition. Sometimes the familiarity of a given portrait's composition makes me more aware of the subject instead aware of the photographer's artifice. Exactly.
posted by letitrain at 4:46 PM on March 1, 2004

As someone who has dabbled in pornography I am rather disappointed by what I saw... I found most of the pictures frankly uninteresting...
posted by Dreamghost at 10:16 PM on March 1, 2004

The commentary was pretty insipid, especially some of the "About this Photo" bits.
posted by Irontom at 8:11 AM on March 2, 2004