“It’s not about what I think. It’s what I see.” So says Bill Cunningham in the first few minutes of
Bill Cunningham: New York, a splendid documentary about the eighty-two year old New York Times street style photographer who has been documenting street fashion in New York City for nearly half a century.
I’ve been thinking lately about what the job title of ‘street style photographer’ actually means these days. I’ve observed them photographing others, I’ve been photographed by a small handful, and I even went out on a limb and played the role myself for thirty seconds about a year ago in New York during fashion week. That photo at the top of this story is the result of that singular outing: a guy on his phone, hand on his hip. I used the largest zoom my sad excuse for a point-and-shoot camera could handle; I was about a hundred feet away. He never knew I was there, and I know I certainly preferred it that way.
When it comes to street style photography, it seems as though there are two different approaches. There are those who pursue their point of view by seeking out and showcasing specific pre-selected trends and aesthetics of their own selection. And there are those who take the approach that Bill Cunningham spoke of, maybe having an idea in one’s head, but letting what the people are wearing out on the street dictate what gets photographed.
This dichotomy, although the two easily overlap to some extent, is interesting. Some photographers specifically seek the trendiest of the trendy. Some let whatever they’re feeling that day or week be their guide. Others document in a more historical context. Is one method more true to what street style is than the other? And who gets to decide what ‘true’ means? I know I don't, but if anyone wants to take that on I'd like to see what they have to say.
The public has fairly simple expectations of street style photography, but there doesn’t seem to be a actual consensus. Do you feel as though when you click over to the blogs you have on some level made a kind of invisible handshake with the photographer, creating an understanding that the people photographed were truly found as is, as they are? (I used to think that, I don’t anymore). What if the photographer had approached someone and said, ‘I like your look, but come back with some makeup on/wearing black tights/without that scarf in two hours, and I’ll shoot you.’ Do you feel as though lines are blurred if the photography subject is styled or coached in any way? (Obviously, I'm not saying that
every street style photographer operates in this fashion).
Things street style photographers have said to me:
Smile.
Don’t smile.
Relax your mouth.*
Relax your eyes.*
Pretend you’re laughing.
Could you hold your bag in your other hand?
Could you put your bag over to the side?
Could you unbutton your coat?
Could we cross the street where the light is better?
(Also, nothing at all.)
If you’re a street style photographer and candid shots aren’t your thing, chatting with your subject to make them feel comfortable sometimes gets a better picture, and I understand that in order to get hits on your site and build your name, you have to make your reputation on having quality work and quality subjects. Is it therefore out of the question to approach a subject in a stunning ensemble and say – before you start clicking away – ‘Sir, your outfit is smashing, but could we just lose the propeller beanie for a few minutes?’ Are you creating a potentially more popular visual, or are you cheating, just a little bit?
Speaking of blurring lines, I believe that street style blogs should hold up a mirror to society and show us what we’re wearing and who we are. So what happens when people dress in a way to specifically be “discovered” and get photographed? It’s no big secret that this practice has been happening for years, predating blogs and going back to when ‘street style fashion’ offered up for mass consumption was little more than the latest issue of
FRUiTS in a specialty magazine store.
I'll be the first to say that dressing up as an exaggerated version of yourself is fun. However, doing it to court photographers and gain those almighty click-click-clicks, makes me wonder. Perhaps it comes down to inner motivation and intent, something an outside observer can’t really discern simply by looking in. Just like I can’t really tell if a subject was styled and coached before being shot. But I can still dislike the notion of it. We are in a new age. The early days of street style photography have morphed into something far more complicated, calculated and, to a certain extent, compromised.
As the credits start to roll at the end of
Bill Cunningham: New York, a guitar begins to strum and Nico’s voice softly coos:
“I’ll be your mirror, reflect what you are, in case you don’t know.” Street style blogs have been playing an increasingly larger role in how we view ourselves, dress ourselves, and digest the personal aesthetics of people in different cities and countries via this niche form of photography. Do photographs still tell the truth? I suppose that depends upon whether or not you ever thought they did in the first place.
*Way to make a girl feel completely haggard, thanks!