Here's the latest addition to the FantasticMag website. Photographed by one of my favourite photographers Andy Houghton and featuring model Lewis Holland Clark (Mint Models). Complete set available here.
For me Houghton is nothing more than a good imitator of Steven Klein. He has great skills as a photographer, he creates strong and stylish images, but I can almost never look at a Houghton pic without thinking of Klein's work. Similar themes, similar concepts, always that sex-agression-religion thing, beatiful nudes with disturbing details, plastic gloves, leather and lace, guns, crosses, plastic foils, rust, industrial decay etc. 6-7 years ago, when I first saw his work on flickr, I was like "ok, he saw X-static Pro=Cess", "ok, he saw Confessions outtakes". "he saw Blame it on Rio", "he saw Madonna by Sølve Sundsbø for Harper's Bazaar". Now I can see a talented photographer without really inventive and original concepts. That's ok, just somehow not enough for me. I'd like to see something mosre original or personal stuff, I don't know... If he was a painter from the past centuries or such, and we didn't know his name, we would easily call him "Follower [or School] of Steven Klein, early 2000s. Ok, "imitation is the most sincere form of flattery", and I know the aesthetics of postmodernism, but for me it's really difficult to see Houghton as an independent artist with a personal point of view...
Thanks for your comment. I can find myself in a lot you say and I guess one has to be blind not to see the connection between Andy Houghton and Steven Klein.
But when you compare photography to, for instance, music, you can say the world is big enough for more of the same. There are many songs playing on the radio that sound the same and can be enjoyed individually.
Same with these photographers. They give the same vibe, but I enjoy both of them.
I can understand your point of view. It's really difficult to express what my problem is with Houghton. An example: when I look at a painting of Hendrick ter Brugghen or Gerrit van Honthorst, I see a ter Brugghen or a Honthorst, even if I know that they're both members of the caravaggist movement, and (mostly in their works religious works) they use a style developed by someone else. When I look at a Houghton photo, I see only Klein, and somehow I can't see Houghton himself. But maybe I'm stuck in my own prejudice, and I'm not able to forget my first reaction to Houghton's work. And I also know how influential Klein is today. About the "same vibe" thing: when I wrote my previous comment, I flipped through Houghton's flickr account, and found a pic taken in January 2011. http://www.flickr.com/photos/andyhoughton/5360195357/in/set-753297 It was impossible not to think of GGW. Same vibe, same style, same influences, that's OK...
That last example suits my point very well. We all get inspired. We all copy. Conscience or unconscience, we all take images in our head and get inspired by them. It's unfair to say people copy.
Take the whole Gaga-Madonna discussion earlier this year. Is it copying or growing up with certain music and get inspired?
In this world of everybody being connected through the internet it's hard to be original, but I guess we can all bring our personal elements while getting inspired.
Ok, that's a BAD imitation without any touch of originality... Do you remember "The Horse and his Boy" by Roberto Chiovitti? A cheap imitation of the "Madonna Rides Again" / Confessions Tour intro/Future Lovers-theme with some gay stuff added. From this point of view Houghton's talent and skills are clearly visible...
"The Horse and his Boy" is also on my blog somewhere. I was referring to Future Lovers in that post ofcourse :)
But even Steven Klein imitates Steven Klein. Look at his work for Gaga's Alejandro. Many references to X-static Pro=Cess and classic Madonna videos. It's not a bad thing to copy, as long as you bring your own elements into your work.
Yes, I also noticed the X-Static Pro=Cess (I never know how to spell it accurately...) references (amongst many others, including Vogue, Express Yourself etc.) in the Alejandro video. I had no problem with them, because the result was a strong and independent work of art. Same with Guy Bourdin vs Hollywood. In that case I never undestood why people were talking about plagiarism (maybe they'd never heard of post-modernism). I mean the Bourdin references were crystal clear, Mondino accurately recreated (or Madonna re-enacted)some shots, but they did it in a different medium, and this "plagiarism" resulted one of the most interesting and disturbing Madonna videos of the 2000s. (I have very few favorites from the 2000s and Hollywood is one of them). The reaction of Bourdin's son was totally strange to me... One more thing: I like the Alejandro video, but I was totally disappointed when I saw Not Myself Tonight which used Express Yourself, Human Nature, Blond Ambition etc. references, but sadly, I found the result crappy and mediocre...
I never understood that whole Hollywood thing either. Clearly a beautiful hommage to a classic photographer.
I guess his son thought he could make some money out of it or something. Too bad when people can't see the difference between stealing and paying tribute.
Oh and about Not Myself Tonight... let's just forget about that cheap-ass video and move on ;)
One more thing about influence/hommage/plagiarism: an editorial by Budapest-based Ukrainian photographer Oleg BorisUk with Hungarian Actress Kata Dobó: http://www.olegborisuk.com/sequence.php?category=editorial&sequence=002.K (And naturally there are also many Klein influences in Borisuk's work)...
10 comments:
For me Houghton is nothing more than a good imitator of Steven Klein. He has great skills as a photographer, he creates strong and stylish images, but I can almost never look at a Houghton pic without thinking of Klein's work. Similar themes, similar concepts, always that sex-agression-religion thing, beatiful nudes with disturbing details, plastic gloves, leather and lace, guns, crosses, plastic foils, rust, industrial decay etc.
6-7 years ago, when I first saw his work on flickr, I was like "ok, he saw X-static Pro=Cess", "ok, he saw Confessions outtakes". "he saw Blame it on Rio", "he saw Madonna by Sølve Sundsbø for Harper's Bazaar". Now I can see a talented photographer without really inventive and original concepts. That's ok, just somehow not enough for me. I'd like to see something mosre original or personal stuff, I don't know... If he was a painter from the past centuries or such, and we didn't know his name, we would easily call him "Follower [or School] of Steven Klein, early 2000s. Ok, "imitation is the most sincere form of flattery", and I know the aesthetics of postmodernism, but for me it's really difficult to see Houghton as an independent artist with a personal point of view...
Thanks for your comment. I can find myself in a lot you say and I guess one has to be blind not to see the connection between Andy Houghton and Steven Klein.
But when you compare photography to, for instance, music, you can say the world is big enough for more of the same. There are many songs playing on the radio that sound the same and can be enjoyed individually.
Same with these photographers. They give the same vibe, but I enjoy both of them.
I can understand your point of view. It's really difficult to express what my problem is with Houghton. An example: when I look at a painting of Hendrick ter Brugghen or Gerrit van Honthorst, I see a ter Brugghen or a Honthorst, even if I know that they're both members of the caravaggist movement, and (mostly in their works religious works) they use a style developed by someone else. When I look at a Houghton photo, I see only Klein, and somehow I can't see Houghton himself. But maybe I'm stuck in my own prejudice, and I'm not able to forget my first reaction to Houghton's work. And I also know how influential Klein is today.
About the "same vibe" thing: when I wrote my previous comment, I flipped through Houghton's flickr account, and found a pic taken in January 2011. http://www.flickr.com/photos/andyhoughton/5360195357/in/set-753297 It was impossible not to think of GGW. Same vibe, same style, same influences, that's OK...
That last example suits my point very well. We all get inspired. We all copy. Conscience or unconscience, we all take images in our head and get inspired by them. It's unfair to say people copy.
Take the whole Gaga-Madonna discussion earlier this year. Is it copying or growing up with certain music and get inspired?
In this world of everybody being connected through the internet it's hard to be original, but I guess we can all bring our personal elements while getting inspired.
It keeps being a very interesting subject.
Here's another example of a Steven Klein adapt:
http://zephyr1974.blogspot.com/2009/12/inspiration.html
When you look at this post you have to admit that Andy Houghton at least tried to give his own signature while being inspired.
Ok, that's a BAD imitation without any touch of originality... Do you remember "The Horse and his Boy" by Roberto Chiovitti? A cheap imitation of the "Madonna Rides Again" / Confessions Tour intro/Future Lovers-theme with some gay stuff added. From this point of view Houghton's talent and skills are clearly visible...
"The Horse and his Boy" is also on my blog somewhere. I was referring to Future Lovers in that post ofcourse :)
But even Steven Klein imitates Steven Klein. Look at his work for Gaga's Alejandro. Many references to X-static Pro=Cess and classic Madonna videos. It's not a bad thing to copy, as long as you bring your own elements into your work.
Yes, I also noticed the X-Static Pro=Cess (I never know how to spell it accurately...) references (amongst many others, including Vogue, Express Yourself etc.) in the Alejandro video. I had no problem with them, because the result was a strong and independent work of art.
Same with Guy Bourdin vs Hollywood. In that case I never undestood why people were talking about plagiarism (maybe they'd never heard of post-modernism). I mean the Bourdin references were crystal clear, Mondino accurately recreated (or Madonna re-enacted)some shots, but they did it in a different medium, and this "plagiarism" resulted one of the most interesting and disturbing Madonna videos of the 2000s. (I have very few favorites from the 2000s and Hollywood is one of them). The reaction of Bourdin's son was totally strange to me...
One more thing: I like the Alejandro video, but I was totally disappointed when I saw Not Myself Tonight which used Express Yourself, Human Nature, Blond Ambition etc. references, but sadly, I found the result crappy and mediocre...
I never understood that whole Hollywood thing either. Clearly a beautiful hommage to a classic photographer.
I guess his son thought he could make some money out of it or something. Too bad when people can't see the difference between stealing and paying tribute.
Oh and about Not Myself Tonight... let's just forget about that cheap-ass video and move on ;)
One more thing about influence/hommage/plagiarism: an editorial by Budapest-based Ukrainian photographer Oleg BorisUk with Hungarian Actress Kata Dobó: http://www.olegborisuk.com/sequence.php?category=editorial&sequence=002.K
(And naturally there are also many Klein influences in Borisuk's work)...
Post a Comment