Lee Friedlander' Madonna Nude Foto: $10K (US)

While I'm no real fan of her style of music I've always admired the woman. She has a huge amount of drive and has never been afraid to be herself (obviously). 20th century pop culture has numerous ikons and to me she is one the most notable!

No hedge trimmer needed! :angel:
 
I wouldn't spend that kind of money for her -much less for the picture of her....but what do I know?
 
I remember sneaking a peak at that issue of Playboy at the local drugstore as I wasted my allowance on hockey cards. Little did I think that years later I would become a much bigger fan of the photographer than the subject.
 
I have a great appreciation for much of his work but Friedlander's nudes are all just about as unsentimental as this. This is one aspect of his oeuvre (ooh! I just got to use that word in a sentence!) that I personally find perhaps a bit too detached.


-J.
 
dof said:
I have a great appreciation for much of his work but Friedlander's nudes are all just about as unsentimental as this. This is one aspect of his oeuvre (ooh! I just got to use that word in a sentence!) that I personally find perhaps a bit too detached.


-J.
Click to expand...

You know what word I like to use? Assignation.

P.S. I just noticed her armpits are hairy too!:p
 
Last edited:
i think madonna was rather naive at this time in her life. she didn't lock-down the rights and it was freidlander that sold them to playboy.
 
In Oz the area of a woman's body that Madge is showing us all so proudly is known coloquially as 'the map of Tasmania.' (look at your atlas!)

When I look at that pic I tend to think more of Madagascar! :angel:
 
Last edited:
A friend of mine sat a few booths away from Madonna at restaurant in L.A. and did not know it was the material girl until the waitress whispered. In street clothes, not the commanding presence she has on stage.
 
It's really a remarkably average image. If it wasn't Her, would anyone care? In this I think Friedlander got caught up by the Bellocq photos he's famous for - trying to recreate that ambiance or something of the Storyville prostitute portraits of Bellocq. Unfortunately for Friedlander, he seems to lack the essential compassion for his subjects that Bellocq had for his. As a result they're just cheesy average nudes unlike the rather artisitic portraits he's trying to emulate. And really the only reason they rise to the level of average is that he's got his technique down so that at least they're in focus and exposed correctly.

There does seem to be something about Madonna Ciccone that causes bad nudes to come about though - anyone else here willing to admit having perused "Sex"? Sheesh.

William
 
Keith said:
When I look at that pic I tend to think more of Madagascar! :angel:
Click to expand...

I'm thinking rain forest.

Actually, that's a Friedlander Nude. I don't know the size but the ones at his recent show were some of the bigger photos shown.


.
 
wlewisiii said:
There does seem to be something about Madonna Ciccone that causes bad nudes to come about though - anyone else here willing to admit having perused "Sex"? Sheesh.

William
Click to expand...

"Sex" is not the best book of photos ever published by a long stretch, but I'd have to say that Stephen Meisel did a far better job of capturing Madonna than did Friedlander. Among all photographers she's worked with throughout her career, I still think that she and Herb Ritts had the best collaboration, especially the work they did together for "The Immaculate Collection". They clearly had a great time doing that shoot.


-J.
 
Keith said:
In Oz the area a woman's body that Madge is showing us all so proudly is known coloquially as 'the map of Tasmania.' (look at your atlas!)

When I look at that pic I tend to think more of Madagascar! :angel:
Click to expand...
That description fits.

In one of my "Honey, get a look at this!" moments, I showed galfriend the photo in that link. She smiled, and wryly referred to the "It" Girl's nether region as "well-forested." I'm going to remember that one. ;)


- Barrett
 
wlewisiii said:
It's really a remarkably average image. If it wasn't Her, would anyone care? In this I think Friedlander got caught up by the Bellocq photos he's famous for - trying to recreate that ambiance or something of the Storyville prostitute portraits of Bellocq. Unfortunately for Friedlander, he seems to lack the essential compassion for his subjects that Bellocq had for his. As a result they're just cheesy average nudes unlike the rather artisitic portraits he's trying to emulate. And really the only reason they rise to the level of average is that he's got his technique down so that at least they're in focus and exposed correctly.
Click to expand...

the words "friedlander" and "emulate" don't belong in the same sentence. he does his own thing. :cool:
 
another vote for deforestation here.

Keith, I believe Australians are quite sympathetic to bush (this belief of course stems from the eighties being filled here with countless episodes of Flying Doctors on the telly)? :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom