Look back in anger

Gerard van der Leun‘s article on photographer Jill Greenberg’s decision to use of her Atlantic assigment to take pictures of John McCain so that she could digitally alter and post them on her website focuses on her unprofessional behavior. Professional behavior, is of course, another word for customary behavior in a particular profession. Gerard explains that what Greenberg did was not the done thing. But custom is changing. The question is why. Gerard writes:

“I imagine that Ms. Greenberg was in full charm mode with Senator McCain at the same time she was executing her little partisan plot. Indeed, I am certain she was nothing other than sweetness and light to him. What she was doing was quite another thing, a vile thing. Simply put, it was betrayal for a cheap political frisson for her.

Then Greenberg extended the betrayal to her Client, The Atlantic. She either did not deliver all the images of the shoot to the client or she began to manipulate them for her own uses as seen above. In this digital age, she probably ftp’d the images to The Atlantic, kept the originals on her own system, and then made the cheap and disgusting photoshops seen above.

I’m not sure how the art director of The Atlantic, Jason Treat, feels about this, even though I have written him requesting a reply. Still, during the years that I hired and worked with illustrative photographers, product photographers, news photographers, and fashion photographers in London and New York City, my art directors and myself always got all the film to review. Depending on the contract, the film would or would not go back to the photographer. When digital came it, it was always understood that the out-takes or images we commissioned and paid for would be kept confidential by the photographer — as specified in the rights agreement. At the very least, we would have exclusive use of them for a considerable period of time.”

Whatever restraint — or pretense to restraint — that has not already been abandoned in political discourse is going out the window. For reasons sociologists best understand, the peculiar mix of candidates and issues in the 2008 Presidential elections has proved particularly combustible.  Polite argument is now very difficult at least in the public space. Whether the topic is Barack Obama or Sarah Palin, political discussion is now only possible at near apoplectic intensity.  Sometimes extreme feelings and deep anxiety are the product of a subconscious realization that the old order is ending; that the time-honored rules no longer apply.  In the financial arena at least, recent events on Wall Street have proved that the immovably solid can be ephemeral. Bear Stearns is gone. Lehmann Brothers is tottering. Merill Lynch? Check back next week.

The media industry is also undergoing a revolution. The New York Times ain’t what it used to be.  Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman are the new, perishable faces of network broadcast journalism. They will not be missed; but the loss of the sense of permanance may have brought an air of desperation, and with it a kind of wild abandon.  Jill Greenberg shoots covers for magazines. Who can say how many of them will be left in five years? This uncertainty suggests that despite the slogan of “change” what many really hanker for is certitude; for the time when when it was easier to be sure of your paycheck and moral superiority; for the easy condescending civility and the reluctance to waste anger on cultural yokels. Things are in flux and people are nervous. Gerard van der Leun calls the picture of the chimp a portrait of Greenberg’s soul. But maybe it’s really a snapshot of where her ambitions and aspirations are going.

Update:

“[Atlantic] Editor James Bennet said Greenberg behaved improperly and will not be paid for the session. He said the magazine is also considering a lawsuit.”

Tip Jar.