Text in english, here “Blondes are the best victims. They are like white, virgin snow that suddenly shows bloody footprints.” — Alfred Hitchcook — "Always make the audience suffer as much as possible." — Alfred Hitchcook — There are photographers who are very clear about what they do; without a doubt, Steven Meisel is one of them. In the April issue of Vogue Italia, which we can call his home, he presents an extraordinary editorial entitled: Horror Movie, and upon reviewing it on portals like fashnberry.com, I notice that it is one of those that has the most difference between the public's rating and the site's editors, with 57% and 90% respectively, at the time of writing these lines. image Without a doubt, we are not seeing the same thing, but in reality, it doesn't surprise me; what's more, the result of the rating I found after making the decision to write about this editorial, only confirms my first impression that it needed to be commented on. The above, because it is not a traditional editorial, nor the most revolutionary of Meisel, such as Water and Oil or State of emergency, but it is in line with the previous ones. It does not apply to the traditional solutions for a fashion editorial, but borrows from another genre of image, in this case, suspense or horror cinema for the visual solution of the images. And it is in this where Meisel shines again. Not in the impeccable realization, but in understanding that if the subject is clear, the visual solution can come from anywhere else. Throughout the history of fashion photography, we have witnessed the enrichment of the genre[i] from other photographic genres: journalism, erotic photography, the same nude photography or family photos, have contributed to the language of fashion photography, to such an extent that for many it is difficult to determine where one genre ends and where the other begins. In this case, the images as horror images are perfectly executed, they look like frames from a horror film. Only black and white was missing, and the blonde (which I would have loved) to be from a Hitchcock film; but the matter of literally copying classic images of the genre is not necessary, although the reference to The Shining (Kubrick 1980) is clear, I cannot remember the others but I am left with the feeling of having seen them before. Which is a fundamental characteristic when we make images within a genre: they must look like something we have seen before, that way we make it easier for the viewer to understand it, in that way fashion photos look alike, just as horror movies look alike and only those who know the genre perfectly can change its rules in the process of presenting us with something new; even, at the risk of not being understood by the general public. Just as it has just happened to Meisel with his horror story. PD. As I was about to publish this entry, I found a couple of notes regarding the editorial (link) that state that it is a trivialization of domestic violence. In that order of ideas, it would be necessary to say that about the horror genre, which inspires the editorial, not the editorial itself. And I believe, I stand by my point, the editorial was misunderstood. Nor do I think it is the genre to talk about the problem of domestic violence. __________________________________ [i] For many, the matter of classifying the image from genres may seem obsolete, but I consider it still fundamental when we refer to the construction of the image, and even more so in moments where many aesthetic proposals have a strong component from the transgression of their limits and the re-contextualization of their use. 126

“Fashion photography makes memory collaborate by using conventions mostly related to the model and the setting. These conventions are organized into a system of signs that can be listed and combined, that is, a code. This code makes up for the weaknesses of the lexicon it has, playing with its diachronic evolution; the popularization of images from the past considerably expands its repertoire.” — Guy Goulthier — “Seeing an image is a complex act that requires learning.” Marián López F & Juan Carlos Gauli P Undoubtedly, fashion is a complex, almost unmanageable topic in its entirety for a single person, or at least that was suggested in a recent discussion where we talked about "fashion experts." These characters seem to flourish on social media even without knowing exactly what they specialize in, whether in the anthropological, sociological, economic, historical, administrative, or any of the other disciplines that cross the (supposedly superficial) phenomenon of fashion. The apparent triviality of this concept allows many of us to participate in it, from the photographic record of a model to the writing of content based on our opinions or the creation of fashion events. I was commenting these days that fashion photography is a superposition of codes and conventions, not only of clothing, but also of the body and image, social and cultural. That what we do in fashion photos is to go to the collective memory of those shared signs to present something that we essentially believe is new. But not only in photography are there codes; there are also very ingrained conventions in fashion events. Some of these have a practical meaning, for example: seating buyers, critics, and editors in the front row of a show because, more than hierarchy, they can take a more detailed look at the materials and designs, thus better appreciating each aspect of the collection. Likewise, the location of the media cameras in front of the catwalk allows for the frontal recording of the garments but also offers greater technical control over focus and movement in low-light conditions. Because of the unrepeatable nature of the event and for a better record, it is avoided that something can get in the way between the photographers and the models. In other words: while the show lasts, that is not an area of circulation, so people are prevented from entering, leaving, or moving from their seats after the show has begun. The previous paragraphs may seem obvious, but for those of us who attended the past Barranquilla Fashion Week, they are not. Both cases – and some others – were ignored at the event. Press journalists were not in the front row, nor even in the second row, to be able to appreciate the details of the collections (It should be noted that even from the fourth row, the lack of care in the presentation and manufacture of certain collections could be appreciated). In the same way, between the cameras and the catwalk there was a permanent transit area that hindered the recording of the event. Of the lighting I will only say that it was not uniform; there are already enough entries about it in this blog to repeat it again. The convention of the clothing universes was also not respected and, although it is not an obligation, it must be entertaining to explain how, after a children's clothing show, scenes like the one in the following video are presented. You may wonder why I started talking about codes. These are learned by imitation: language, for example, is babbled and terms are tangled before being able to speak fluently; correct spelling and syntax are the manifestations of total mastery of the code called language. Fashion photography, in most cases, is learned from imitation, either by seeing photographers or simply from the empirical realization of a fashion session. And I think that's what we were doing, imitating a fashion event at all levels, from the setting up of the space, through most of the casting and what was presented on the catwalk. As for the designers, the names with experience are saved, which speaks of a lack of support for new talents. The models needed the same advice in some cases where their attitude was so feigned that it was not understood as a posture of the body, or a proposal of attitude, but as a caricature of the posture of others. Much has been said about the number of fashion events and I would think that the issue is not quantity but quality. Well-organized events, with a niche and a clear function, I don't think are the problem. But the truth is that fashion events flourish almost as much as experts in the field. Fashion as a spectacle is becoming a problem for fashion as an industry, making its dissemination a matter of ex-queens and uninformed characters, of media with the label of fashion but functioning in terms of show business and not of the industry. Of course, a celebrity who knows how to play with her image can be beneficial for marketing and be an incentive for a group of consumers who see her as a role model, but when it is accompanied by a bad dissemination of the other aspects of the business, the only thing it does is build caricatures of what is visible, but which is ultimately not understood. 136

Texto en español, aqui.