Analysis of Beauty Through Works by Cindy Sherman

Key terms: Aesthetic 

         Bias is a common phenomenon among people, specifically when it comes to the topic of beauty. While I would argue that beauty is a difficult topic to define, based on cultural and decade influences. As an overall concept I’ll use the western perspective or rather Eurocentric beauty standards to make my point. Seeing as Sherman is obviously a white American woman, her portraits focus on the narrative of white women. As she claims, her work is on the focus of women in Hollywood through these photos, it should be noted that her focus can only and ever be the experience of a white woman in America. Thus when she uses these photos to stage women in Hollywood, it’s also only based off of white or white passing American women. As much as Sherman’s work is 

simple and impactful, it’s also a common trope when discussing white feminism, not to claim that she is purposefully projecting thus. Through my analysis of untitled #52  I will provide context about how Cidny Sherman uses white feminism to discuss sexualization of women in the media.

 The image is a photograph created by Cidny Sherman in 1979, a black and white image of a white blonde woman, in a white dress and satin bra. The bedspread appears to also be white with large pillows that have dots and flowers spread across, her face is somewhat cut out as she lays on her stomach. It looks as if she could be a teenage girl waiting for her high school sweetheart to call, or perhaps she’s a heartbroken girl. The context is we’re not sure, all I do know is that this is a white woman laying down, looking disassociated like a stereotypical 60’s romance movie. In some aspects I could argue the aesthetic, and pose mimics that of Sandy from Grease, a young sweet girl laying down, somewhat heartbroken over her summer romance turning out to be a douchebag. 

          There’s no doubt from an outside perspective that Cindy Sherman is conventionally attractive, which oftentimes what makes something conventionally attractive is considered Eurocentric, least within the context of the western beauty standard. In the image Cindy purposefully wears a blonde long wig, a slip dress and has this pose similar to plenty of Hollywood ‘teenagers’ in cinema, often thus caters to the male gaze. An innocent youthful woman, who seems broken down showing just a slither of skin to appear sexual. This pose is often something models also mimic, in magazines and something often argued when talking about sexualization of women in the media. The body can be used for art, Hollywood and Sherman know this, they both use the female body as transaction,

  “That what has been thought by its users to be beautiful can serve its non aesthetic functions- disseminating information or ideas, proclaiming social status, encouraging devotion, providing solace-more effectively than might artifacts perceived as devoid of beauty seems uncontentious as a historical principle. Considered purely historically, past ascriptions of beauty have no taint of the subjectivity that adheres to contemporary aesthetic judgments.” (Gaskell 271). 

Gaskell makes the point that beauty or aesthetic can be used to push a certain propaganda, whether that is through social, economical, political or even informational ideals.

      While I do criticize Sherman one dimensional argument about women in Hollywood, I can appreciate the physical aesthetic of the photo. It remarkably captures what plenty of girls attempt to achieve on social media, the look of an it girl. To be beautiful objectively towards a parasocial audience, to attract all this attention for simply looking pretty and following the male gaze. What is the male gaze?  It’s a way to cater to male audiences, they feed women into this two dimensional puzzle fitting into the patriarchal setting. Often used in older Hollywood films, where the man gets the girl and the girl is often a sweet innocent boring character, “The cinematic female sexual experience has historically been criticized for its use of one dimensional, purely aesthetic, and representational practices. Scholars have argued that this is largely due to the patriarchal ideological framework, and male gaze, that has long defined the Hollywood film industry” (Smith, 2018). Sherman uses this one dimensional character while making her stilts, it’s quite literally photos of an attractive woman posing as these characters in everyday life. She follows the bland aesthetic, adding nothing extraordinary about these women, as the characters she portrays feeds into the narrative playing second to the increasingly intense male leads.

         She uses these stilts to question the role of women, criticizing the male gaze and how it takes a woman’s beauty in its advantage. I do feel like this topic is fairly tame for something as complex as the patriarchy, as different waves speak on the complexities, although I do understand these works were a part of the second wave of feminism which focuses on equality of white women. Sherman understands this relationship with her body, her role as a whites women that does face discrimination, “With the Untitled Film Stills, Sherman had turned our attention to the tension between the screen image and the off screen self, emphasizing not only the art of the masquerade but also the artificiality of its construction.” (Schweitzer, Cut-Throat Women). The emotion present on this woman’s face, and connecting it between film as well as the media is present. However I feel that it lacks the boldness, the action is simple, she’s pretty and yes the woman she’s presenting is pretty. However I grow more frustrated as that’s all it feels like Sherman is representing. Perhaps I’m missing the groundbreaking “artificiality of its construction” that plenty of critics praise.

         While reflecting on the stilt presented by Sherman, I couldn’t help but reflect back on Ryan’s words towards the sublime, looking beyond general aesthetic bias, 

        “The eighteenth-century discussion of the sublime is primarily concerned not with works of art but with how a particular experience of being moved impacts the self. The discussion of the sublime most fully explores the question of how we make sense of our experience: ‘Why and how does this object move me?’ Focusing on the perceiving subject, most critics cast the British discussion of the sublime as reflecting a gradual shift towards a Kantian focus not on the object judged, but on the judging mind.” (Ryan, Burke’s Critique of Reason)

    The experience of Sherman lacks more to the imagination, as she shows us everything needing to be shown, however as people we often try to search for beyond. While her critique on misogyny of women in Hollywood is there, it lacks anything of depth. It lacks an emotional response, and resembles something a girl on Pinterest could pop out in an hour or two. 

       Despite Sherman using a message to argue for women’s equality, it feels hypocritical. She’s an attractive woman, following the stereotype in these images. Not to mention the question of race with the third and fourth wave of feminism, we now mostly understand that feminism is like a road. Where white women get off the first fork in the road, following through with different minorities suffering a worse wrath. She lacks the challenge, as said, “These ramifications include a continued use of the male gaze which naturalizes misogyny. Evidence of these conversations can be seen in the abundance of research that currently exists pertaining to audience attitudes on gender and sexuality in popular media…Other studies specifically looked at film for its ability to either challenge or perpetuate dominant social ideologies in the depictions of their narratives” (Stewart, 2015; Marcus, 2018; Steinberg & Weisel-Barth, 2019). Hollywood often lacks challenge when it comes to films, although in recent years they do make the viewer question certain social roles when not creating superficial blockbusters. 

       I argue Sherman has a similar approach, her point is superficial, it’s saying ‘hey as a woman I’m tired of being objectified’, and yea I would agree with that. However the issues of the patriarchy dive deeper than that, especially with the roles of women of colour. It would be more impactful to use various women of different backgrounds in her work, the intimacy could still be there, but providing “non traditional” women these roles. These ideas weren’t even as advanced as you would think, plenty of women of colour did have roles and were famous actresses, so I’m baffled to know why she didn’t include other roles or stereotypes? Actresses such as Lena Horne, Dorothy Dandridge, Maria Montez, Rita Moreno, Miyoshi Umeki and etc. As an activist Sherman could have included more inclusivity within her works, using other women, bodies or so on, yet she capture images of herself and was praised for the bare minimum.

Works Cited

      Ryan, Vanessa L. “The Physiological Sublime: Burke’s Critique of Reason.”Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 62, no. 2, 2001, pp. 265–79. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3654358. Accessed 20 November. 2023.

Nelson, Robert S., Richard Shiff, and Ivan Gaskel. “Beauty.” Critical Terms for Art History,University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 2003, pp. 268–280. 

Schweitzer, Dahlia. “Cindy Sherman Essay - Cut-Throat Women.” Cut-Throat Women, Cut-Throat Women, 28 June 2018, www.cutthroatwomen.org/schweitzer/cindy-sherman. 

Sherman, Cindy. Untitled Film Still #52. n.d. Photograph. 

Riebe , Emily. “The Feminine Gaze: The Re-Imagination of Cinematic Female Sexual …” Uwlax, UWL Journal of Undergraduate Research XXIII, 2020, www.uwlax.edu/globalassets/offices-services/urc/jur-online/pdf/2020/riebe.emily.cst2020.pdf.