Planète Parr

July 24, 2009

IMG_0685

Parrworld: the Collection of Martin Parr

Martin Parr (Curator: Thomas Weski) :: Exposition :: Jeu de Paume, Paris :: 20/06 to 27/09/2009

The Jeu de Paume groups together photographs and collected miscellaneous articles by the prolific British Magnum photographer Martin Parr. Besides the humorous time-stamped (mostly) kitsch miscellany of Saddam Hussein watches and postcards of highways, his own collection also groups together photos of both well-known and unknown photographers which inspire him. Of his own work, we are presented with three series: One on luxury (“Luxury”), one on tourism (“Small World”) and finally an urban portrait series of the UK made in conjunction with the British newspaper The Guardian.

Luxury

In the section on Luxury, Martin Parr looks at the wealthy over the last 5 years “showing their wealth”, as he puts it. The pictures have been taken at horse races in Durban, Ascot, Longchamps and Dubai, and at a Millionaires’ fair in Moscow and surprisingly enough at the Oktoberfest in Munich. He sees his pictures as a record of a period of rapid growth before the current credit crisis set in. He talks of wealth as a global phenomena, yet you can clearly see the differences between the pictures he presents. Sometimes ‘luxury’ seems to be little more than a brand name, at other times it is a market, at other times it is elegance and again at other times just a state people find themselves in.

Let us take a look at two of them. The exhibition’s poster, taken from a picture in this series (from the Moscow Fashion week) shows a young woman wearing a colorful body-warmer, with an air of contented and fascinated greed. This light andhappy obsession, strikes a completely different chord to an unflattering one taken at a charity event in the USA (here), where we see opulently dressed guests being fed food on sticks. Because of their dark sunglasses, it is almost as if they are being fed blindfolded, as we see the hand on the left already handing them another helping, as if the food is being shoveled into them. This gives us a more cannibalistic image of wealth, and one far removed from the fascination of the young fashion victim at the fair, even if, in the same series, they could be seen as follow-up events…

Small World

Parr by dorsserAs you walk through the gardens of the Tuilleries in summer, with the thousands of tourists around you, Matin Parr offers you a critical and humorous glimpse of the very industry which brings all those people there: tourism. This is an industry built around selling experiences. To lift out two images, consider the funny and quite formal picture of someone taking a picture of a row of tulips (at the Netherlands?) wearing a red-yellow-blue coat which matches the colours of the flowers in the picture he is taking.

The lightness of the picture could not contrast more with the one taken out of a moving jeep out in the African bush, with a group of children running after them. On close inspection, we see a worrying determination in the eyes of the children running after the jeep. Then we notice the somewhat scared little white girl looking down at them, wearing an Egyptian souvenir T-shirt. If we sense some tension in the air already, then our prejudice is confirmed when we see that there is a man standing on the back of the jeep, in what looks like a military shirt. We can suppose that we are witnessing tourists touring a war-torn or impoverished nation being escorted through the zone. To finish off our feeling of discomfort, we see the man on the left take a picture of the running children, reminding you that the photographer himself is also on that jeep taking the picture of the running children, passively using the lives (or distress) of others as a source of his livelihood. A very uncomfortable thought.

If you happen to pass by the Concorde with little time, take in the “Small World” pictures which are shown in the open air. Seeing the critical and funny images of perhaps the worlds biggest industry and one which both surrounds us and in which we partake, is unique. If you have a little more time, go on in to see the rest of the collection – it’s a unique opportunity.

www.martinparr.com // www.jeudepaume.org


Tradegy at the Box-office

July 13, 2009

LolPARIS – Why does the press insist on reminding us of the financial success of films, as if the audience is composed of potential investors? Knowing that Bienvenue chez les Ch’tis was the absolute box-office hit in France in 2008, does not make it a better film. This is akin to claiming BP’s petrol is better than Exxon’s because their stock is more stable. It really is not related. But why do we keep seeing it?

This year starts with a similar curiosity as 2008, with the film Lol (Laughing out loud) by Lisa Azuelos having attracted the most viewers. Having been one of those people who walked in, but also walked out(!), something which happens to me very rarely, the thought that it would now hug the limelight is embarrassing. I had even snobbed it out of a crushing review. So how does a film like this attract so many people? Before being accused of living in some little Parisian bubble, notice that even on the IMDB only 2 people bothered to comment on its merits! But let me make a case for the attraction of the film anyway.

For those lucky enough to have missed it, the concept is actually quite appealing: the always beautiful Sophie Marceau, who was a teenager in the hugely successful 80s party film La Boum, is now back as a mother with a partying daughter. A true generational film, especially for those who were around in the 1980s to live the original with her. Sounds like fun. But the movie near opens with a young girl claiming something along the lines of “he MSN-ed me and I downloaded it from Myspace”… and you know that the film is a farce. Not because a teen could not say that sentence, but because it is so obviously constructed, like the title. A film can not be about youth and have to explain such trivialities such as “Lol” as well, should there still be anyone around who does not know what it means. But of course, this is not a debate about quality, or lack thereof. This is about misguidance.

Lol is not a good film and you would waste your time going to see it, as I have (partly) done and many others with me. No doubt some people appreciated seeing Sophie Marceau again but that does not change the appalling level of the film. If the audience was offered the chance to reward the film with a number of stars on leaving the cinema, as one does when one deletes an iPhone application, movies could be judged on appreciation instead of on financial gain or number of people who were caught out. Of course, even with appreciation level established, we could be very surprised by the result… lol.