A serious analysis of Christopher Anderson’s portraits for Vanity Fair of JD Vance, Karoline Leavitt, and Susie Wiles. Looking at Anderson’s previous photojournalistic work and his tight, close-up portraits, we can understand these portraits a little better.
My Letterboxd:
Instagram:
Support us on Patreon:
#arthistory #art
Comments
35 responses to “Why These Vanity Fair Portraits Are Masterpieces | JD Vance, Susie Wiles & Karoline Leavitt”
These are masterpieces? Stfu
13 injection marks in the upper lip…? I only get 3 to 4 in BOTH lips and they're gone after one day.😮
Is her filler doc a dem on a rampage or what?😂
Proof that JD Vance uses eyeliner
11:22 This sort of outlook is what has been killing the Left. Are not Liberal ideas based on equality? You always make fun of those in power. Doesn't matter what party. That's American! I don't care what their gender, sexual orientation or race is. Stop being so damn soft. Are we going to focus on the working people or bicker over identity politics?
VANITY UNFAIR?
FAIR ENOUGH!
Im fine with the unflattering portrayals of these creatures is because enormous, near Marie Antoinette levels of expense is being paid to craft a flattering image in the first place. Noem and Hegseth are known to have blown millions on retaining a retinue of make up and hair people at all tmes for their weird cosplay reign. Undermining their desperate efforts to pretend age and reality are for peasants is fine by me.
Anderson did a great job. You can see through the pictures their useless facades, their real personalities, their roughness, their brokenness. When I see them from the distance pictures, they try so hard to look "presidential", so "official," failing so miserably. The close-ups are brutal. So uncomfortable, so shamelessly narcissistic, confused, evil, artificial, and almost nauseating🤢
Thank for this great video! And the Chopin is the icing on the cake contrasting these people.
Why do you think the photographer didn’t try to make these people look more beautiful or choose the most flattering shots?
I had to subscribe!! 🎉Loved this video (and the voice).
Great video 😊❤
Man being a compulsion liar really ages you! Karolina Leavitt looks 58 not 28 in that photograph!
The article is not a hit-piece; there are simply no redeemable qualities among these hyenas.
I Love this so much. <3
Edit: Now hearing your thoughts on the outlets and what nots on the walls.. To me, the photographs are reminisscent of painted portraits of common people/common life scenarios back in the days =) Very similar compositions and lightings, distance to the subject and so on. But with humour. =) (sorry, I can't "speak art", am sadly very unknowledgable linguisticly here though I LOVE art)
scarey monsters……….
These pictures represent the scary parody that is leading this country. Like the Schitts Creek portrait or images from The Office. I do think you are missing a lot of symbolism in the photos. Marco’s photo is funny but I think there is a lot of meaning there, he looks like he is bowing to to the lamp, but with shame and confusion. He looks miniature, like he is shrunken, perhaps this is how he looks and feels all the time in the presence of Dear Leader. The light switches seem to mean something, “it appears we are in light, but it’s artificial and we are actually in the dark” or something. Thermostat controls the entire atmosphere.
The pic of Leavitt full body: the suit is I’ll-fitting and the red is not give just power but more like Devil. The close ups feel like the masks are off.
You feel you can touch their psychosis. They eyes. The frowns. The hate and insincerity engraved into their faces even ones as young as 20-something.
I saw the picture if that moth guy who stares awkwardly at the lamp earlier today on my phone and didn't understand why people were clowning on him. Now that i watched this video on a computer i started laughing at that lamp picture immediately when it popped up on a much bigger screen!
Levitt's eyes are completely cold.
And "100% job secuity"? LOL
6:42 I’ve never seen those lips injection shots so clear in my life
😮
13:00 is that you Benito?
Re: making the piece more vulnerable to criticisms of bias: what i find interesting and potentially the justifying the bias against the admin is that this wasn't some piece criticizing them from the outaide. The admin let the journalists in, and still convinced them to participate in making themselves look foolish. Baiscally, despite their vast power and authoritarianism, someone still found a way to get as close as possible to them and still took the piss out of them.
Well as far as being unflattering – CA didn't photoshop a swastika on Steven Miller's head. So restraint. But someone will.
Brilliant! Appreciate your singular insights and analysis.
I love the tight crop. I would remark; kissable.
Good heavens, I love this essay and I just found you for the first time. Wow <3
Excellent essay. Thank you so much! They are indeed masterpieces. And Marco Rubio has the weirdest ears. I've always thought so. Very clear to see here.
As a woman, it was not a blip on my screen that Leavitt is portrayed without the political screen. I'm reminded of SE Asian shadow shows. The player is on the other side of the screen from the audience. Their image is projected as a shadow up onto a giant screen that separates the player from the audience. The audience sees only the shadow of the player. I've done this type of theater. The reality behind the screen is very different than what is projected. It's an effect. You can create a very beautiful effect with some scraps of colorful fabric and cardboard and even colorful balloons. The audience watches the projections. Little do they know what is going on right in front of them behind the screen.
I couldn't give two shits about the political part of it- I LOOOOOOATHE portraits like this. I cannot believe anyone was dumb enough to let their pics be made like this.
He is a PHOTO JOURNALIST… not a head shot photographer. What a ridiculous take. If they wanted edited portraits then they should have hired someone to do that. A photo journalists job is to tell a story. Thats what he did. Every light switch, person in a dark door frame, and crooked lamp… was very intentional.
These people are foul, if not evil. If the truth is they came from Hell itself, to walk among us, I would not be at all surprised. Commit ALL the 7 deadly sins, and break all the 10 commandments. For the love of God people wake up.
I disagree on the "bias"as you call it in these shots. They are showing us who these people are, yes, but also "who" these people are. These are people who do and say very shocking things. Who have cruelty and a mean-streak as their hallmarks. These people are amoral in many ways. So the pictures are like a mirror to reflect the sentiments they project. And also like an ink blot. But you are also wrong about your picture you put on the cover of Vanity Fair. It shows you squinting with a narrow view and that's true of your assessment. While, well-said it's is also only hinting at something you can't quite see. You only see what you, see.
So I feel like the photographer's style is quite revealing, and also revelatory. Which is that it reveals the most obvious point but its also insightful into the nature of these individuals in a way that we don't normally see them. It says a lot about them beyond what is superficial. He looked into their being and saw shallow people. More expressive for their controlled expressions. The photographer is not controlling their expressions, the subjects are doing that themselves. The way the photographer crops the shots might add more theater but the subjects are already theatrical creatures in a performative circus. They look starved for power at a power brokers banquet. Though physically separated from one another, their eyes all have share the same exact manic-panic of a ragged fear.
They wanted photos like Obama…
The photos have shadows which make them eerie. They also include light switches which may imply they have chosen to be in the half-light.