Thursday, June 18, 2009

Carry On Pirelli: Kerr, Kershaw and McNeil rubber up for Terry Richardson via fashionologie

Last month much ado was made of the decision by Australian Victoria’s Secret Angel Miranda Kerr to be photographed naked and chained to a tree on the cover of Australian Rolling Stone. Kerr, the face of the Australian Koala Foundation's 'No Tree, No Me' campaign, did it for the koalas, reportedly telling the magazine, “I feel strongly about the need to protect our natural environment because it supports our life -- it really is that simple". Well apparently the koalas have migrated to Brazil, because in a portfolio of images released overnight by Italian Vanity Fair, Kerr is naked again – along with two other topless compatriots, Catherine McNeil and Abbey Lee Kershaw, coincidentally all from Chic Management – posing nude in Brazil for Pirelli’s 2010 calendar. And the world’s most-famous girlie calendar takes on Carry On proportions this year, thanks to photographer Terry Richardson, who has made a career out of his risqué – and even sexually explicit – imagery. Warning NSFW.

The shots revealed so far of Kerr and Kershaw seem relatively demure compared with some others.

Notably, one shot of Hungarian Eniko Mihalik with Richardson, in which the pair appear to both be simulating fellatio with bananas. Another shows Brit Daisy Lowe standing next to Richardson whilst spraying herself with a hose - which is being held by Richardson just in front of his groin, suggesting the hose is his penis.

And moreover, the shot of Mcneil (above) standing in what appears to be a rubber plantation, whilst pouring a cup of of rubber milk down the front of her body.

Yes we all know what Richardson is implying the rubber milk could be.

The image is reminiscent of Richardson’s famous shot of South African model Josie Moran for Italian fashion brand Sisley, in which Moran simulates fellatio with a cow’s udder:

The heterosexual porn innuendo is interesting, given that by all accounts McNeil’s sexual preference is for women, not men.

But look, frockwriter is sure that all the models were paid a lot of money to do this calendar. And at the end of the day, apparently that's all that counts to the models and their agents.

Come Christmas however, Kerr might want to keep the calendar under wraps when she is due to unveil her new book aimed at motivating and inspiring teenagers.

Unless of course Kerr renames the book, which is currently called Treasure Yourself, as Pleasure Yourself.

all four images above: via fashionologie

Richardson likes to blur the boundaries between art and porn in his fashion imagery and he is paid handsomely by the industry to do so.

Richardson was paid $200,000 for one Lee Jeans campaign in Australia in 2006 - a campaign which caused a minor furore at the time.

But there is nothing soft porn about Richardson’s personal work, which includes explicit images of himself having sex with a variety of women, some of them reportedly his assistants, and some of them ostensibly aspiring models.

That’s all well and good and civil libertarians would argue that Richardson, a recovered heroin addict, is entitled to express his art in whatever means he likes. Provided of course the models he uses are over the age of 18. On his website, Richardson specifies that models need to be 18+.

Even Barack Obama appears to endorse Richardson, because here he is shaking the photographer's hand:

Frockwriter would hazard a guess that if Obama was fully apprised of the extent of Richardson's oeuvre, he would not want either of his daughters anywhere near Richardson.

High profile New York womens blog Jezebel recently published a link to a Guardian story about the new Picture Me documentary made by model Sarah Ziff.

The documentary recounts a number of alarming incidents. There are accounts of models as young as 14 being pressured into nudity on fashion shoots. One model claims she was sexually assaulted whilst working on a fashion shoot.

In a separate incident, Sena Cech tells the filmmaker she attended a casting session for which she was required to strip and then touch the genitals of an unnamed male photographer - who by that stage had also removed his clothes.

Cech says she did as she was asked and was subsequently offered the job, but turned it down. She was never offered work by the same photographer again.

It is not clear if Richardson was interviewed for, or is even mentioned in, the documentary.

However Jezebel chose to illustrate its story with a cropped version of this image of Richardson enjoying a hand-job. The provenance of the image is unclear. It may be part of Richardson's 2004 book/exhibition Terryworld (linked above).

Jezebel’s clarification noted that the image was used because Richardson himself had once glibly noted the following in a public domain interview:
"It's not who you know, it's who you blow. I don't have a hole in my jeans for nothing."

Many are no doubt wondering just who Sena Cech's unnamed photographer might be.

As indeed some are wondering if Sarah Ziff, who is now a fulltime student at Columbia University, could be yet another candidate for Jezebel’s anonymous model blogger Tatiana - who, coincidentally, penned that post.


But the Picture Me revelations may merely scratch the surface of a much wider problem in the fashion business.

Frockwriter recently raised questions over some unsettling imagery which appeared on the UK Ponystep website, involving a series of young male models in Calvin Klein underwear. The story was picked up by BlackBook and Jezebel.

We have since heard some disturbing allegations about precisely what some young male models claim they have been required to do on some major fashion jobs.

Just to clarify, none of these allegations involve Terry Richardson.

But they do involve at least one other high profile male photographer.

For the moment, noone is willing to go on the record.


lorraine lock said...

wow Patty. kinda sickening isnt it ? Terry Richardson comes across as a creep who lets face it, if he wasnt in a position of 'power' none of those models would go anywhere near him

Anonymous said...

Excuse me while I regurgitate my afternoon tea. Terry Richardson should move to to porn industry.

Style On Track said...

Excuse me while I admire these hot ladies (and Aussie ones at that) and the freedom of the female body which should be admired in high fashion publications read by females! Go ladies!

A Time To Be Selfish said...

Terry Richardson and Dov Charney are the twin peaks of sexual depravity in the fashion industry, although I think in the case of Richardson, it's almost sociological. Were it not for the concrete evidence of Richardson's shoots, I suspect some might doubt just how sleazy and exploitative fashion can be.
That being said, the first thing I noticed about the Pirelli images wasn't that they're raunchy (they're Richardson after all), it was that Miranda Kerr is really quite shockingly thin, even by modeling standards. Why isn't this commented on more often??

Emma said...

Great post. The Ziff film sounds heartbreaking - the trailer alone was so sad.

I also agree wit A Time To Be Selfish about Kerr - its ironic that she is lauded for her "curves". How did that happen?

Imelda Matt - The Despotic Queen of Shoes said...

'A Time' makes a valid observation...I've never noticed how thin Kerr is, but I'm wondering if it's a height issue (as she looks much shorter in the group pic). As for the calender, I think it more a case of being underwhelmed.

A Time To Be Selfish said...

Kerr is a fair bit shorter than your average mod at 5'8, but I think there's a bit more to the skinny thing than that.
Kerr is compared to Elle McPherson all the time (Grazia called her 'The New Body') but when you line the pair up, it looks like it would take two Mirandas to make one McPherson. I guess being small means there's even more expectation of slenderness, but as Emma said, it's off-putting given she's often touted as 'curvy' and 'healthy' (,,23622064-23272,00.html).

Anonymous said...

I agree, I also wonder how long Miranda Kerr can continue to have it both ways, appearing on the cover of teen mags such as Girlfriend talking about health, spirituality and yoga and being an inspiration for young teens at the same time as posing for men's magazines...???
About her thinness, I think with Miranda, her naturally round face and dimpled cheeks, give an illusion of health, whereas other models tend to get quite gaunt in the face when too thin.. it is very obvious how hard she works to maintain that body, if you look at her early work she is an average sized girl, when you are working that hard it is easy too take it that little bit too far.. I think she's on the edge of extreme for her body type, but still probably healthy, I wouldn't want to see her take it any further
Also to clarify, I have nothing against the models making their own choices, but agree with you Patty that miranda's going to have to rename that book! (your title gave me a good chuckle!)

Anonymous said...

Thank you Patty, for bringing this to my attention.

Anonymous (comment #2), that is completely nonsensical. Why would Mr Richardson shoot porn stars when he can shoot supemodels?
Jealousy is a curse.


sonny said...

oooh, stop it, Miranda is fine, I've know her for years, her body has been the same since her "early " work
You take a pic of yourself in the mirror, then lie on the floor like that and take a same pic at the same angle and you look how much thinner you will look and how some bones will portrude.
As for your Diesel story Patty, news in that Diesel Gold is pulling out of the new york schedule


JC Superstar said...

I can't believe that Pirelli would stoop so low as to us Terry Richardson. I have always thought of Pirelli as being the height of class, but Terry Richardson is far from classy. Actually, he is kinda tacky...

Anonymous said...

That is truly disturbing. "Men" who ask children to hold their penis while photographing them and are nothing but pedophiles, agents who suggest children should sleep with photographers are peddling pedophilia. Although there's not proof he is a pedophile, what Richardson does is pornography and is perfectly fine away from the fashion industry and the eyes of impressionable youth. Richardson may specify that the girls have to be 18+ but does he check they are psychologically ready to agree to be photographed like that, are they confident or looking for an adult to tell them what is right and wrong, does he check they understand the consequences of it? Pedophiles and their enablers in the fashion industry need to be brought to justice, they are criminals. Simply knowing that this is happening and not reporting it is a crime, why are these "men" being protected? Ugh makes me so angry!

I was just as angry when I found out that Russh magazine shot Zippora Seven when she was still a child in a sexually suggestive photo shoot. Obviously it didn't bother me until I found out that she was a child but its just wrong.

Patty Huntington said...

Last anon -

Let's just clarify something here. Firstly, the model who claimed she was asked to touch a photographer's genitals is now over 18. It's not clear what age she was when it happened. But even if she was over 18, does that make it OK? No, it certainly does not. But it does not make it paedophilia.

Secondly, although Terry Richardson's name was certainly dragged, by Jezebel, into a discussion of the film Picture Me - in which those allegations were made - they justified it by pointing out that they were talking about sleazy photographers and Richardson once joked in an interview that getting ahead in the industry was about "who you blow".

So, the film does not name the photographer. And Jezebel didn't name the photographer.

You ask why these people are protected. It's an excellent question. And frankly, I don't understand why people seem to be going to so much trouble to protect the identity of the photographer in question here. If the model was prepared to go on camera and talk about the incident, then why on earth didn't she name him? Legal threats? Fear of reprisals, being marginalised and never working again? Apparently commercial interests are what's most important in the eyes of many people here. If you think this makes the photographer in question an Untouchable, you're spot on. And sadly I doubt very much that he's alone.

In spite of all this innuendo, there is no evidence that I am aware of to suggest that Terry Richardson was the photographer. Just as there is no evidence - that I am aware of - to suggest that he works with minors.

If anyone has any information regarding this, then please feel free to contact me (email address linked under my profile on the top RHS). I'll wager noone wants to go on the record however.

Here is what one agent told me yesterday about the models in the 2010 Pirelli calendar. That's right, they too declined to go on the record:

"They're adults and he's Terry Richardson".

Anonymous said...

hmmm.... I wonder which agent that could be.
I find this all very disturbing, it's a worry for young girls who want to make it in such an industry. Shame.

Anonymous said...

This thread made me feel a bit sick. I'm not joking. I was eating some food and it put me off eating. Why would some of the 'A' list models bother to get involved with this sort of slimy work? It has changed my opinion about them. You think they would consider their future and not do things like this. Yuck.

Blog Archive