Re-reading Martin Parr through the Camp lens by Rebecca McCann

Re-reading Martin Parr through the Camp Lens

Rebecca Thomas-McCann BA (Hons) Photography

INTRODUCTION

2-4

THE THEATRICALIZATION OF EXPERIENCE

5-8

A PARTICULAR KIND OF STYLE

9-12

THINGS BECOME MORE CAMP WHEN WE ARE LESS INVOLVED IN THEM

13-16

IN THEIR RELATIVE UNPRETENTIOUSNESS AND VULGARITY

17-20

AN APPRECIATION OF STYLE, DIVORCED FROM MORAL CONSIDERATIONS

21-25

A SERIOUSNESS THAT FAILS

26-28

CONCLUSION

29-30

BIBLIOGRAPHY

32-33

The sensibility of Camp has deep historical precedent. The word ‘Camp’ derived from the French term ‘se camper’, meaning to flaunt. The first known usage of the term ‘se camper’ was in Molière's 1671 play The Impostures of Scapin, in which ‘Camp about on one leg…Strut like a comedy king!’ (Molière, 1671) alluded to a certain theatricality and masquerade. The word acquired significant homosexual connotations in 19th century England. Frederick ‘Fanny’ Park, used Camp as an adjective in a letter to his friend and fellow cross-dresser, Ernest ‘Stella’ Boulton, in regards to their female impersonations. He described the public disregard of their queer antics; ‘My campish undertakings are not at present meeting with the success which they deserve’ (Park, 1868). The epitome of the sensibility of Camp personified is said to have resided in Oscar Wilde, famous for his epigrams and defiance against the criminalisation of homosexuality in the 19th century; ‘he became a potent vehicle for Camp as a noun, as a person’ (Bolton, 2019). It was to Wilde that, in 1964, cultural critic Susan Sontag dedicated her essay Notes on ‘Camp’. Sontag combines many ideas about the aesthetic appreciation of ‘bad’ objects, under the header of Camp. She sketches a framework for interpreting the practise as detached, aesthetic hedonism; a playful indulgence of style, divorced from substance. Camp is enjoyed purely for the sake of enjoyment. Sontag acknowledged that although the vanguard of Camp taste has been homosexuals, the homosexual taste is not Camp taste. Sontag’s metaphor of the Camp taste as ‘life as a theatre’ is ‘peculiarly suited as a justification of a certain aspect of the situation of homosexuals’ (Sontag, 1964). This essay acknowledges the assumption of homosexuality that stems from the Camp taste. However, as Sontag infers, it is important to recognise that this is just

one of the facets of the Camp sensibility. Therefore, this essay is not explicitly using the reference of homosexuality as a foundation to form an understanding of Camp, concerning the work of Martin Parr. Martin Parr is known for his photographic projects which intimately document the British social classes and modern life, as well as the wealth of the Western world. This essay will apply the Camp mode of appreciation to Parr’s photographs, by ‘seeing the world as an aesthetic phenomenon…in terms of the degree of artifice, of stylisation’ (Sontag, 1964). This essay will argue that reading the work of Martin Parr through the Camp lens offers a different way of appreciating art; one that is arguably more poignant than traditional appreciation of art, which is merely based on moralistic achievement. Parr’s photographs have a certain aesthetic. Through the use of a macro lens, he portrays the subject matter in intimate detail. His use of a ring flash makes the colours in his photographs appear saturated and bold. This essay will argue that Parr’s particular aesthetic can be defined as what Sontag describes as stylistically Camp. The subject matter of Parr’s work is mainly concerned with matters of everyday life. With his career spanning over fourty years, it is sensible to assume that some subject matter and objects he has photographed are outdated. Parr’s démodé subject matter will be considered in the criterion of Camp. Sontag states it is necessary for the viewer to be detached from an object or experience, to be able to consider it Camp; ‘time liberates the work of art from moral relevance, delivering it over to the Camp sensibility’ (Sontag, 1964). This essay will also relate this idea of the Camp and liberation of moral relevance to the supposed ‘vulgar’ aesthetic of Parr’s work. This sense of detachment will be

considered in regard to how it allows the viewer to read the photograph through the Camp lens and apply a different mode of appreciation; an appreciation of style, divorced from moral implications or social context. The theatricalization of subject matter in Parr’s work will also be explored in this essay, concerning Sontag’s description of the Camp sensibility as a metaphor for ‘life as a theatre’ (Sontag, 1964). Parr’s work will be explored through the Camp lens, focusing on the visual exaggeration of character. Sontag’s definition of the Camp sensibility as vision of the world based upon style, unconcerned with morality will be considered in relation to ethics behind Parr’s practise. This essay will consider that reading through the Camp lens has a potent impact on the morality behind a piece of art, namely the ethical standpoints of honouring its aesthetic style over the morality of its content. Sontag’s dichotomy of pure Camp and deliberate Camp will also be considered in this essay, regarding how Parr creates his work and the intention behind it. The Camp mode of appreciation will be compared to the traditional standards of art appreciation. It will be argued that, compared to the traditional reading of art, reading the work of Martin Parr through the Camp lens offers a more considered view of the stylisation and moralistic expectations of his photographs.

Figure. 1. Martin Parr, Haute Couture Printemps-EtĂŠ, Paris, 2007

THE THEATRICALIZATION OF EXPERIENCE

The Camp sensibility is often described as exaggerated and dramatic. This notion taps into the vein of the sensibility being a ‘theatricalization of experience’ (Sontag, 1964). This is something Parr incorporates in his work. He has often described his practise as ‘creating fiction out of reality’ (Parr, 2015), observed in the extravagant photographs Parr takes of people and the way they live their lives. It could be argued that reading Parr’s photographs through the Camp lens exaggerates his subjects insomuch they become characters in the theatricalization of reality that Parr creates in his photographs. Figure 1 is from Parr’s 2009 photographic project, Luxury. The series has been described as a ‘clear-eyed appraisal of wealth and how it looks’ (McGee, 2009). The photograph was taken by Parr in 2007, at a Haute Couture Printemps-Eté showing in Paris- a high-fashion event. Therefore, the people in the photograph have an influential position in the fashion industry, and presumably have a large amount of disposable income. The protagonist in Figure 1 is testament to this. The woman is extravagantly dressed in fur. She wears sunglasses from the luxury fashion house Chanel. The brand’s logo on the side of her sunglasses take up a large portion of the photograph, heightening the sense of immodesty cultivated by the wealthy. From her skin texture and the size and shape of her pursed lips, it is apparent that she has spent a large amount of money on facial enhancement surgeries, which signifies her wealth. The photograph and its subject matter depict a luxurious lifestyle, as the project title suggests. This lifestyle can be seen from the extravagance of its protagonist and social context. This is likely not relatable for the average viewer, presuming they are from a 6

lower social class. This distancing, through the viewer’s inability to connect to the photograph’s content or context, allows the viewer to read the photograph with the Camp mode of appreciation, as a ‘vision of the world in terms of style’ (Sontag, 1964). As Sontag writes, ‘We are better able to enjoy a fantasy as fantasy when it is not our own’ (Sontag, 1964). By reading Figure 1 through the Camp lens, the viewer can appreciate the photograph in what Sontag describes as an aesthetic phenomenon (Sontag, 1964). The photograph is a ‘gaudy celebration of all things bling’ (McGee, 2009). The viewer appreciates the photograph as a visual experience. The essence of Camp is its ‘love of the unnatural; of artifice and exaggeration’ (Sontag, 1964), which materialises in the photograph through the woman’s visual extravagance. It can be argued that reading Figure 1 through the Camp lens constructs the protagonist into a character. The woman’s excessive wealth and extravagance distances the average viewer, as they are unable to relate to that lifestyle. It is also the exaggeration of this woman which could make her appear ‘fictionalised’ to the viewer. Perhaps they read her as a personification of wealth and luxury, based on stereotypes created by the lower-classes, who do not experience the lifestyles of the of the upper-class. For example, the sense of immodesty of the wealthy; the large size of the Chanel logo on the woman’s sunglasses, alludes to the stereotype of the ostentatiousness of the upper-class. The Camp is historically rooted in the idea of ‘flaunting’; the word Camp derived from the French term se camper, meaning to flaunt. The way in which Parr has captured this ostentatiousness, through the use of a closeup angle, has exaggerated this ‘trait’ even more. It is true that Parr has documented the way this woman actually lives her life. However, by reading through the Camp lens the viewer is reading the photograph on the aesthetic, surface level. It could be argued

that this exaggeration of the woman’s extravagance reads as a fictionalisation, as the woman playing a ‘character’. This could be because of the viewer’s inability to relate to the character’s lifestyle; it does not exist in their reality. The Camp particularly appreciates instant character. Parr’s use of a still, twodimensional medium to capture this woman does not allow any character development. The viewer is only able to respond to the surface level aesthetics of this photograph; no further context is given. Sontag states that ‘character is understood as a state of continual incandescence- a person being one, very intense thing’ (Sontag, 1964). The medium of a static photograph restricts the viewer to only read the photograph on an aesthetic level. The intensity of character in this photograph resides in the woman’s excessive extravagance.

Figure. 2. Martin Parr, Weymouth, England, 1995-1999

A PARTICULAR KIND OF STYLE

Martin Parr is known for his poignant documentation of western civilisation. The majority of his photographs feature garish colours and unflattering angles. Figure 2 is a testament to Parr’s aesthetic. Figure 2 shows a photograph from Parr’s 1995-1999 series Common Sense, taken in Weymouth, England. Common Sense documented modern consumerist culture, through photographs highlighting everything from tacky clothes and jewellery to different kinds of junk food. From 1995, Parr implemented a ring flash and a macro lens in his practise, a combination ‘usually associated with medical photography’ which ‘comes in very close and has a flash on either side of the lens’ (Parr, 2015). The close-up forces the audience to observe every detail of the subject matter, creating an unsettling atmosphere which evades any sense of privacy, as well as highlighting every detail by flattening the image. This forces the audience to consider all aspects of the photograph with equal attention, creating an invasive, tense atmosphere. In the foreground of Figure 2, an out-of-focus woman stands, smiling. The background of the photograph shows a typical British seaside town; people relaxing on deck chairs, a sandy beach laden with families and their windbreakers, and a busy promenade. Yet the invasive nature of the photograph creates an overbearing sense of unease. The photograph resembles a family holiday snapshot, not only because of the seaside subject matter, but the out-of-focus foreground of the photograph deceptively uses the visual language of an amateur photograph. The colour palette of the background is saturated. This contrasts with the colour palette of the foreground; the woman’s rouge skin tone and the earthy colours of her headscarf. It makes her 10

seem out-of-place, like she does not belong in the photograph. When reading this photograph as an amateur holiday snapshot, the uneasy atmosphere, the outlandish woman in the foreground, contrasts with the nostalgia of a holiday snapshot. This sensation of ‘the off’ is an element of Camp style referenced by Sontag; ‘Camp is a vision of the world in terms of style- but a particular kind of style. It is the love of the exaggerated, the ‘off’, of things-being-what-they-are-not’ (Sontag, 1964). It could be argued that ‘the off’, the sense of unease in Figure 2, is an indication of a particular type of style, part of the Camp aesthetic. The photograph reads as tense- the flattening of the image forces the viewer to invade every aspect. However, through the Camp lens, this sense of unease in this photograph is appreciated by the viewer as an aesthetic phenomenon. Perhaps by reading Figure 2 through the Camp lens, the viewer appreciates the photograph’s aesthetic qualities. For example, they may be drawn to appreciate how the colour palette of the foreground contrasts with the background, and the visual experience of how each colour palette intensifies the other. As Sontag described, ‘the Camp eye has the power to transform experience’, and in Figure 2, the experience caters to the Camp’s ‘love of the unnatural; of artifice and exaggeration’ (Sontag, 1964). Sontag argues that the traditional elitist appreciation of art incorporates a moralising aspect; good art isn't just enjoyable- the quality of its content does certain things which are morally right. Perhaps it elevates the art form, demonstrates new heights of technical mastery or genius, or deliberately achieves a particular goal of expression. As Sontag puts it, ‘truth, beauty, and seriousness’ (Sontag, 1964). That rubric can be deliberately undermined, but there will always be a moralistic foundation of what the artist is choosing not to do. As supposed to consuming these moralising aspects, or

trying to subvert them, Camp creates an entirely new standard of appreciation- a gleeful, sensuous celebration of style. This standard of appreciation is one that can be applied to Figure 2. Contextually, the photograph is from a series exploring global consumerism. The signifiers of this appear in the photograph in the setting of leisure pursuits; the idea of travelling to a specific place to have an experience of enjoyment and relaxation. This is the foundation of the tourism industry. However, as supposed to wholly embracing the photographâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s social context, the eye of the viewer is drawn to the woman at the centre of the photograph, and therefore the sense of unease from her outlandish appearance. The style and aesthetics appear to be foregrounded in the image; the context and its commentary on consumer culture would require a more active engagement from the viewer. It applies to the Camp mode of aesthetic appreciation, as its style is favoured over its substance.

Figure. 3. Martin Parr, Taunton, Somerset, England, 1998

THINGS BECOME MORE CAMP WHEN WE ARE LESS INVOLVED IN THEM

Figure 3 is a photograph from Parr’s 2016 project Real Food, a collection of over 200 photographs of food and foodstuffs. The aesthetic style of Figure 3 is a testament to the particular style Parr is known for; ‘the motifs he chooses are strange, the colours are garish and the perspectives are unusual’ (Weski, n.d.). In the middle of the photograph is a pink, meringue dessert, formed into a rounded caricature of the children’s TV character, ‘Mr Blobby’. The yellow stripe piped around the character’s neck, presumably meant to be interpreted as his yellow bowtie, sits crooked and tight, conveying an uncomfortable choking sensation to the viewer. The askew, red piped nose and smile appear to be done by that of an amateur. This is contradictory to the conventional, sophisticated presentation of a meringue dessert; that of delicate details performed by a professional pâtissier. The lack of left eye on the figure and various cracks of the meringue around the neck and face suggest the creation of this food was a rushed job for commercial purposes, reinforced by the presence of many other meringue figures behind the one in the centre. They appear stacked, ready to be sold. The colour palette of the photograph is bright and rather overwhelming- but the colours themselves are complementary to one another. Mr Blobby was a symbol of childhood for any ‘nineties-kid’. However, nearly thirty years later, the character is merely a relic of that time. Parr choosing to photograph the interpretation of Mr Blobby as a meringue dessert feeds into what Sontag describes as the necessary detachment provided by the old-fashioned object. The photographed figurine of Mr Blobby’s character ‘liberates the work of art from moral 14

relevance, delivering it over to the Camp sensibility’ (Sontag, 1964). This is because the viewer is detached from the idea of looking at food to eat, or arguably from looking at a well-known TV character. It is because the character is outdated that the viewer may be distanced from any emotional relevance of the photograph, allowing them to merely appreciate it on an aesthetic level, detached from any context. As Sontag states, ‘things are campy, not when they become old – but when we become less involved in them’ (Sontag, 1964). The meringue figure, with its cracks and alarmingly crooked appearance, does not look appealing as food to buy and eat, dampening the viewer’s appetite. However, the viewer can understand that they are not being sold this dessert, they are merely appreciating a photograph taken of it. Therefore, the viewer is detached from the idea of consuming it as food. They are therefore appreciating the photograph through the camp mode of appreciation- detached from any context, and therefore any moral implications. Parr’s close-up portrayal of the food eliminates any context. The viewer is detached from the substance of the subject matter; they are not looking at food, intending to eat. They are merely appreciating the aesthetic elements of a photograph, as in the Camp mode of appreciation. Sontag stated that the Camp incarnates a victory of ‘‘style’ over ‘content’, ‘aesthetics’ over ‘morality’, of ‘irony’ over ‘tragedy’’ (Sontag, 1964). Reading Figure 3 through the Camp lens allows the viewer to appreciate the photograph’s aesthetic style; for example, the strong, complimentary colours. The Camp sensibility ‘transforms what was ugly yesterday into today’s object of aesthetic pleasure’ (Bolton, et al., 2019). The viewer honours the aesthetic elements of the photograph, which play into various notions of Camp. The colours in Figure 3 are an example of the visually

mesmerising colour palettes often seen in Parr’s work. The use of the flash uplifts the colours, making them appear brighter, appealing to the idea of visual extravagance found in the Camp. The subject matter is aesthetically vulgar; the cracks and crookedness of the food make it look unappealing. However, this adds an element of comedy to the photograph. The state of the meringue is almost so bad that it is laughable. This comedic element of the subject matter appeals to how ‘Camp proposes a comic vision of the world’, and Camp’s aim to ‘dethrone the serious’ (Sontag, 1964). Sontag describes the element of comedy in Camp; ‘comedy is an experience of underinvolvement, of detachment’ (Sontag, 1964). By photographing this comedic subject matter, Parr has created a sense of detachment between the viewer and the photograph’s content; the viewer reads the photograph through the Camp lens, appreciating its comedic element.

Figure. 4. Martin Parr, Benidorm, Spain, 1997

IN THEIR RELATIVE UNPRETENTIOUSNESS AND VULGARITY

Camp has a relationship with what is aesthetically described as the ‘vulgar’, something that is not aesthetically pleasing. However, the sensation of reading something as Camp is not a reaction of repulsiveness. It is an appreciation of style, a mode of aesthetic delight. Figure 4 is from Martin Parr’s 1995-1999 series Common Sense, taken in Benidorm, Spain. Benidorm is a city in the province of Alicante, in eastern Spain, and is most famous for its hotel industry and boisterous nightlife. Benidorm has a reputation for being a holiday destination for the English. Perhaps this appeals to Parr as a place to photograph because of his relationship with photographing British culture. The visuals of Benidorm are often described as garish, comparable to the overwhelming colours found in Figure 4. The woman appears to be sunbathing on a cobalt blue beach towel, which accentuates her sunburnt complexion. She wears tanning goggles over her eyes, of a similar colour to the towel she is lying on. On her pursed lips she wears red lipstick, the colour of which clashes with her sunburnt complexion. She relaxes her hands on her head, presenting her gold chain bracelet, which matches the chain she wears on her neck, as well as her gold earrings. It may be argued that this photograph is ‘stereotypically Benidorm’; as the photograph coincides with the stereotype of Benidorm as being visually garish. In traditional appreciation of art, the colours in the photograph read as unpleasant, as does the content. A holiday-maker relaxing in the sun; the garishly blue plastic of the tanning goggles matching the towel she lays upon; the colour of her sunburnt skin contrasting with the gold jewellery she wears. The atmosphere is uncomfortable- the viewer may feel embarrassed; Parr has exploited 18

this woman’s lack of taste and good judgement by ‘picturing it all, latterly in the brightest of colours’ (Williams, 2014). However, Figure 4 can be interpreted through the Camp mode of appreciation, which offers an alternative approach to this photograph’s ‘vulgarity’. Camp is a certain mode of aestheticism, which sees the world as an aesthetic phenomenon. On the surface, Figure 4 is stylistically nauseating due to the intensity of the colours, and ‘lack of taste’ of the woman and her chosen holiday location. However, reading the photograph through the Camp lens ‘transcends the nausea’ (Sontag, 1964). The ‘phrase of Camp enthusiasm…it’s too much’ (Sontag, 1964) applies to Figure 4 and its overwhelming use of colour. The viewer sees the colours are vibrant and bold, as part of the aesthetic phenomenon. Through the Camp lens, the photograph and its content transcend vulgarity and becomes a spectacle. The viewer admires the strong contrast of colours. As Sontag wrote, ‘the lover of Camp appreciates vulgarity’ (Sontag, 1964). This is not to say that everything can be transformed through the Camp lens. The Camp is not a phenomenon which turns everything deemed ‘bad art’ into ‘good Camp’ by applying a different mode of appreciation. A piece of art that does not confine to traditional standards of ‘good art’ does not automatically become Camp. The viewer is able to read Figure 4 as Camp because it is ‘too much’. Arguably, the lack of ‘good taste of the subject matter and colours, means the photograph reads as ‘bad art’. However, it could be argued that Figure 4 transcends being dismissed as ‘bad’, because the photograph contains what Sontag describes as ‘the proper mixture of the exaggerated, the fantastic, the passionate and the naïve’ (Sontag, 1964). Parr’s use of exaggeration, from the use of close-up angle to accentuate the character’s eccentricities, and the use of flash to amplify the colours read as ‘too much’. This

allows the photograph to be read through the Camp lens, establishing an appreciation of the photographâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aesthetics as supposed to an aversion. Parrâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s photography is, above all, a visual extravaganza. The way the viewer reads the photographs, through the Camp lens or not, affect the way they appreciate it.

Figure. 5. Martin Parr, New Brighton, England, 1983-85

APPRECIATION

STYLE,

DIVORCED

FROM

MORAL

CONSIDERATIONS

The Camp sensibility honours the aesthetics of a work of art over its morality, which can be applied when reading the photographs of Martin Parr. By honouring style over substance, reading a photograph through the Camp lens neutralises moral indignation and sponsors playfulness. Sontag describes the Camp as the ‘solvent of morality’ (Sontag, 1964). This expands upon what has previously been noted about how the Camp mode of appreciation implies a separate criterion of how we interpret art. Traditional ‘good art’ has a moral achievement; it does something that is morally correct- it achieves ‘truth, beauty or seriousness’ (Sontag, 1964). However, the relationship between art and morality can be considered through the Camp lens when reflecting upon what is universally accepted as ‘morally right’. When reading art through the Camp lens, the style of the artwork is honoured above the substance. This can be problematic, particularly when the substance of the artwork is controversial or complex. How should morality be considered through the Camp lens? Throughout his career, Parr has acquired a vast amount of criticism regarding the ethics of his work. The majority of this criticism began with the emergence of his 19831986 series The Last Resort. The series consisted of photographs taken in the working-class, seaside town of New Brighton, England. It was said that Parr exploited the working class in this series. The Last Resort is referred to as Parr’s response to the British government at the time. When Parr began this series, Margaret Thatcher had been Prime Minister for four years. The effects of her government had vastly disenfranchised Britain’s labouring-class. Working-class towns began to collapse; 22

New Brighton was one of which Parr decided to photograph as a response to Thatcher’s unwavering patriotism, despite the working-class of the country crumbling under her actions. The Last Resort was, and still is, criticised as making a mockery of the working-class. Parr’s social class and upbringing put him in a position of power over the people he was photographing; Parr was a ‘child of suburbia’ (Williams, 2014), spending his childhood in an affluent, middle-class area of Surrey. His position of social power is apparent considering he was photographing people of a lower social class compared to himself. He has been condemned for profiting off of this exploitation, in terms of financial gain, and the increasing reputation he gained as a photographer in the years following this project. Figure 5 shows a photograph from The Last Resort. The eye is immediately drawn to the centre of the photograph; the distressed child, crying in their highchair. It could be argued that an unpleasant atmosphere is already created from the child’s distress. The two prominent adult figures in the photograph presumably have some relation to the child, yet they are not paying attention, appearing callous in the way they refuse to tend to the child. The eye is drawn to their bizarre choice of sun-bathing spot, which is the concrete ground, on which lies their shoes and various pieces of litter. Overall, Figure 5 has a tense atmosphere; from the sympathy the viewer feels towards the distressed child, to the frustration they feel from the two prominent figures’ carelessness. The photograph casts a negative shadow on the figures, accentuated by the literal dark shadow created on the wall behind them. It could be argued that Parr is criticising the working-class in this photograph, by choosing to highlight their mannerisms which come across as lazy and unconcerned about the child. It could also be argued that, by choosing to take this photograph, Parr has questioned the

intelligence of these people. The viewer asks, ‘why are these people sitting on concrete when the beach is presumably nearby?’. The way they live their lives- their supposed flaws, have been exposed by Parr. It could be argued that Parr is guilty of ‘exploiting our lack of good taste and judgement’ (Williams, 2014). Therefore, there is a problematic stance regarding the ethics of this photograph; Parr being of a higher social class and profiting off photographing people of a lower social class in a derogatory way. Parr has defended the content of this series, applying his personal opinions on Thatcher’s patriotism in the 1980s; ‘I was angry, in the 80s, about what was happening in Britain…you had to make photographs that showed people in situations where it wasn't particularly complimentary’ (On Camera: Photographers at the BBC, 2017). Parr addresses that this was at the expense of individuals, resulting in a documentary of these years ‘in a more oblique angle’ (The World According to Parr, 2003). His work has also been defended by insisting The Last Resort was not a condemnation of the working-class, merely an exercise in looking. (Williams, 2014) Despite the historical context and Parr’s defence of ‘The Last Resort’, the moral implications of photographs found in the series casts a negative shadow on the working-class. Through portraying the people in a derogatory way, Parr has opened them up to criticism and mockery. Over thirty years later, the legacy of Thatcher’s government is still being felt today; much like the ever-present criticism of The Last Resort. The photographs have more of a harmful effect compared to any good that can come of negatively portraying the vulnerable, working-class of Britain. Parr was documenting the working-class from a place of middle-class privilege, which meant he was looking at the people in his photographs from a comfortable position.

When reading pieces of art in the criterion of Camp, it is important to consider the moral implications of honouring style over substance. Camp is often described as having a shock value. Figure 5, like the other photographs in The Last Resort, has a shockingly negative portrayal of vulnerable people of a social class lower than that of the photographer, who therefore has the power to exploit them and their flaws. The moral implications of such a portrayal feed into an offensive stereotype of the British working-class, opening them up to ridicule. Parrâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s photographs may be stylistically Camp, but it is important to consider whether they are morally right.

A SERIOUSNESS THAT FAILS

In Notes on ‘Camp’, Sontag states that the Camp sensibility rejects the traditional elitist appreciation of ‘good art and ‘bad art’; the camp mode of appreciation is entirely separate. For Sontag, traditional measures of artistic merit are commonly used as elitist justification for rejecting works of art as ‘not fit for appreciation’ (Camp- So Good It's Bad, 2019). She invokes an analogy of an aristocratic 19th- century dandy, whose sensibilities are so refined that he’s disdainful towards anything that isn’t of the absolute finest quality. Camp disregards the good-bad axis of conventional aesthetic judgement. However, there’s an element of aesthetic elitism in the recognition of Camp too- the ability to distinguish ‘good Camp’ from “bad art”, or to classify ‘good Camp’ from ‘bad Camp’ is also an indication of refined judgement in aesthetic sensitivity. Sontag acknowledges that this notion had previously been explored, albeit briefly, in Christopher Isherwood’s 1954 novel, The World in the Evening. In his novel, Isherwood ‘presents camp as a dichotomy: High Camp versus Low Camp’ (Bolton, et al., 2019). High Camp is constructed upon an ‘emotional basis’, and is a ‘sophisticated, connoisseurial mode’ (Isherwood, 1954). Isherwood regards High Camp as much more fundamental than Low Camp, of which he describes as an ‘utterly debased form’ and gives a crude example of ‘a swishy little boy with peroxided hair, dressed in a picture hat and a feather boa, pretending to be Marlene Dietreich (Isherwood, 1954), alluding to the unsophisticated nature of Low Camp. In her essay, Sontag elaborates on this notion by making the distinction between ‘pure/naïve Camp’ and ‘deliberate Camp’. Isherwood’s distinction between High Camp and Low Camp was based on

The work of Martin Parr is known as a visually thrilling and emotionally aggravating documentary of the way we live. By appreciating his work under the Camp sensibility, the work is being re-read as an aesthetic phenomenon, divorced from moral considerations. This is an entirely separate approach to the traditional appreciation of art. Through re-reading the work of Parr through the Camp lens, the viewer considers the aesthetic elements differently. The Camp lens also considers the moral aspect of Parr’s work, which may impact society and its values. It is important to consider that the distance placed between the viewer and the photograph allows it to be read through the Camp lens. This can be seen in the detachment the viewer feels from the subject matter. The sense of detachment could be due to the passing of time, the detachment from the social context, through social class or a close-up angle limiting context. This detachment liberates the photograph from moral relevance, ‘delivering it over to the Camp sensibility’ (Sontag, 1964). By reading Parr’s photography through the Camp lens, the viewer is reading the photograph with a ‘consistently aesthetic experience of the world’ (Sontag, 1964). The theatricalization in Parr’s work corresponds to Sontag’s metaphor of Camp as ‘life as a theatre’, with the people in his photographs portrayed as characters. Reading Parr’s work through the Camp lens revises what may have been seen as stylistically vulgar according to the traditional appreciation of art, as an aesthetic phenomenon. What may be seen conventionally as ‘the-off’ is honoured for its stylisation. Reading through the Camp lens means the viewer reads the surface-level aestheticism of Parr’s photography, as style is honoured over substance. Through the Camp lens, the viewer considers Parr’s work within Sontag’s dichotomy of pure Camp and deliberate camp. This is based on Parr’s intentions behind his work.

It could be argued that through intentional exaggeration of subject matter, Parr’s work reads as deliberate Camp. However, considering his intention of merely documenting the way we live, it is most likely that Parr’s work falls under the rubric of pure Camp. The Camp lens ‘neutralises morality’, honouring style over substance. Perhaps this relates to how Parr defends his most controversial work as ‘merely documenting’, dismissing any ethical implications. However, his cutting depictions of the workingclass, as seen in The Last Resort have fed into a negative stereotype of that social class. Perhaps it is because of Parr’s position as a member of the middle-class, making him exempt from implications on a wider societal basis, which results in his naivety of its effect. Perhaps when applying the Camp lens to Parr’s work, and therefore neutralising morality, it is important to also step back and evaluate what effect this has on a wider, societal basis. It is universally accepted as morally wrong to do something which harms a marginalised group or community, something of which Parr is guilty of. Reading his work through the Camp lens should not dispose of moral implications in a way that has serious implications on society. The Camp is a tender feeling, but the Camp is also very powerful.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bolton, A., 2019. Camp: Notes on Fashion Gallery Views | Met Fashion [Interview] (May 2019). Bolton, A., Cleto, F., Godtsenhove, K. V. & Garfinkel, A., 2019. CAMP - Notes on Fashion. 1st Edition ed. New York City: Metropolitan Museum of Art. Britain in Focus: A Photographic History. 2017. [Film] United Kingdom: BBC. Camp- So Good It's Bad. 2019. [Film] Directed by THUNK. USA: THUNK. Isherwood, C., 1954. The World in the Evening. Minnealpolis: University of Minnesota Press. Kindon, F., 2018. Where is Mr Blobby now and who played the disgraced Noel's House Party star?. [Online] Available at: https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/mr-blobby-now-whoplayed-13618581 [Accessed 17 October 2020]. Martin Parr, P. S., 2009. Luxury. 1st ed. London: Chris Boot. McGee, G., 2009. Aesthetica. [Online] Available at: https://aestheticamagazine.com/the-world-of-martin-parr/ [Accessed 20 October 2020]. MoliĂ¨re, 1671. The Impostures of Scapin. s.l.:s.n.

On Camera: Photographers at the BBC. 2017. [Film] Directed by Chloe Penman. United Kingdom: BBC. Park, 1868. s.l.:s.n. Parr, M., 1999. Common Sense. Stockport: Dewi Lewis. Parr, M., 2009. The Last Resort: Photographs of New Brighton. 1st ed. Stockport: Dewy Lewis. Parr, M., 2015. My life in motion picture. Arles: s.n. Parr, M., 2016. Real Food. 1st ed. London: Phaidon Press. Parr, M., 2017. Martin Parr â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 'Photography is a Form of Therapy' | TateShots [Interview] (15 December 2017). Parr, M., 2019. NOWNESS. s.l.:s.n. Sontag, S., 1964. Notes On Camp. s.l.:s.n. The World According to Parr. 2003. [Film] Directed by Rebecca Frayn. United Kingdom: BBC. Weski, T., n.d. Martin Parr. [Online] Available at: https://www.martinparr.com/introduction/ [Accessed 22 October 2020]. Williams, V., 2014. Martin Parr. 2nd Edition ed. London: Phaidon Press.