June 3, 2011

Voyeurism, Exposed

A brief history of the fine line between looking and watching.


In the age of Weinergate, we are all lookers and watchers. The following selection of images from Sandra Phillips’ book, Exposed: Voyeurism, Surveillance, and the Camera Since 1870, traces the fine line between the two. Covering spy and surveillance imagery, images of violence and sexuality, the rise of paparazzi, and our incurable boner for celebrity photos, Exposed‘s 249 images show how photography shapes not just what we see but how we look at it. —Mark Murrmann

Garry Winogrand, New York, 1969. Collection SFMOMA, fractional and promised gift of Carla Emil and Rich Silverstein; © Estate of Garry Winogrand, courtesy Fraenkel Gallery, San Francisco.
 

Walker Evans, [Subway Passenger, New York], 1941; Collection SFMOMA, fractional and promised gift of Carla Emil and Rich Silverstein; © Walker Evans Archive, The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
 

Harry Callahan, Atlanta,1984; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © The Estate of Harry Callahan, courtesy Pace/MacGill Gallery, New York .
 

Nan Goldin, Nan and Brian in bed, New York City, 1983; detail from The Ballad of Sexual Dependency; 1979-1996; Whitney Museum of American Art, New York; © Nan Goldin; image: courtesy Matthew Marks Gallery.
 

Andy Warhol, Blow Job (film still), 1964; collection and © 2010 The Andy Warhol Museum, Pittsburgh, PA, a museum of Carnegie Institute. All rights reserved.
 

Ron Galella, What Makes Jackie Run? Central Park, New York City, October 4, 1971; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Ron Galella, Ltd., courtesy the artist.
 

Tazio Secchiaroli, Anita Ekberg and Husband Anthony Steel, Vecchia Roma, 1958; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Tazio Secchiaroli / David Secchiaroli.
 

Tom Howard, The Electrocution of Ruth Snyder, 1928; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase.
 

Larry Clark, Untitled, from the portfolio Tulsa, 1971; Collection SFMOMA; © Larry Clark.
 
kennedy assasination

Abraham Zapruder, Assassination of John F. Kennedy, November 22, 1963, 1963; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © 1967 (Renewed 1995) The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. All rights reserved.
 

Enrique Metinides, Secuencia rescate de un suicide en la cúpula el toreo (Suicide rescue from the top of the Toreo Stadium) (detail), 1971; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Enrique Metinides.
 

Doris Banbury, Mamie Van Doren, 1950s; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Doris Banbury.
 

Benjamin Lowy, Iraq Perspectives II #8, 2003-2007; Courtesy the artist; © Benjamin Lowy.
 

Richard Gordon, San Francisco, 2004; Collection SFMOMA, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Richard Gordon.
 

Laurie Long, Compact, from The Dating Surveillance Project, 1998; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Laurie Long.
 

Shizuka Yokomizo, Stranger No. 2, 1999; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Accessions Committee Fund purchase; © Shizuka Yokomizo.
 

Trevor Paglen, Chemical and Biological Weapons Proving Ground/Dugway, UT/Distance ~42 miles/10:51 a.m., 2006, 2006; Collection SFMOMA, Anonymous Fund purchase; © Trevor Paglen.
 

Malcome Browne, Thich Quang Duc, Buddist priest in Southern Vietnam, burns himself to death to protest the government’s torture policy against priests, June 11, 1963; Collection of Alan Lloyd Paris; ©Malcom Browne /AP.
 

Marcello Geppetti, (detail) Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, 1962; Courtesy Stephen Wirtz Gallery, San Francisco; © Eredi Geppetti; photo: Ben Blackwell for SFMOMA.
 

Marcello Geppetti, (detail) Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, 1962; Courtesy Stephen Wirtz Gallery, San Francisco; © Eredi Geppetti; photo: Ben Blackwell for SFMOMA.
 

Kohei Yoshiyuki
Japanese, born 1946

Untitled, from the series The Park, 1971

If you buy a book using a Bookshop link on this page, a small share of the proceeds supports our journalism.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate