...No less. Judy was one of the photographers I admired and wanted to emulate when I was in art school, because of my interest in (sorry about the pretentious-sounding term, but it's descriptive) art-photography portraiture.
There are nudes past the break, so fair warning. Our site is used in schools, where viewing nudes might not be appropriate, and please bear in mind that in many workplaces and offices, having nudes "overseen" on your computer can violate rules against sexual harrassment. But this was the first "full frontal" nude published in the old LIFE magazine, so you know it's pretty benign. And you might well already know it.
Judy Dater, Imogen and Twinka at Yosemite, 1974
The photographer in the picture is the legendary (and beloved) Imogen Cunningham, who died at age 93 two years after the picture was taken. I included Imogen in a post about how photographers dress back on October 25th, and reader Patrick Dodds mentioned this picture, saying it "should be shared widely—it's delightful."
I replied,
Yes indeed, it is wonderful. It's been shared widely since it was taken in 1974 by Judy Dater—her best-known photograph. The model is Twinka Thiebaud, who posed for a number of prominent photographers, and who is now nearing 70 and living in Los Angeles. The photograph is thought to be based on Thomas Hart Benton's "Persephone," in which he paints himself as voyeur peering around a tree trunk at a nude woman, in a clever play on an artist painting a model.
Here's Benton's "Persephone," in case you don't know it:
"The epitome of voyeurism," in Judy Dater's words—
Persephone by Thomas Hart Benton
What came up next was a comment from Joe Holmes, who found what he thought was an alternate version of Imogen and Twinka on the Scott Nichols Gallery site. Joe wrote,
Now this is interesting. I spotted what I thought was an alternate take of the photo of Imogen Cunningham and Twinka posing at that Persephone tree. Nice find, right? But the San Francisco gallery displaying that image on the Web says the photo is by Richard Mazer. And within the same online portfolio, 'An Illustrated View of Yosemite,' the gallery includes and properly credits the Judy Dater image. What's that about? Richard Mazer and Judy Dater were both shooting the scene? Mazer was documenting Judy Dater's shoot?
...It was interesting, I thought—I'd never seen the Richard Mazer variant—and I wondered how I could find out. First I tried to find Richard Mazer, only to learn that he died last year.
So then I thought, why not see if I can contact Judy Dater herself? It turned out to be easier than I thought to find her, and she gave me permission to share her privately emailed response to my query:
Hmm, so Scott has trotted out that photo again. Not sure why, other than it is a less expensive version. The photo was not Mr. Mazer's idea. I have written this story many times but here it is again. My photo, "Imogen and Twinka at Yosemite, 1974," was taken during an Ansel Adams workshop on the nude where both Imogen Cunningham and myself and others were teaching.On one of our field trips I set up this photo as a demonstration for the students, including Mr. Mazer, on how I would pose models in the landscape using my 4x5. I arranged the models near the tree and took several shots with my camera. All the while there were maybe a dozen people behind me, with their 35mm and 2 1/4 cameras snapping away over my shoulder. I imagine there are many versions of the picture.
However, the concept was mine. When I was a kid, maybe as young as five years old, I loved to look at an art book my parents had called Great American Paintings. In that book was a painting titled "Persephone," by Thomas Heart Benton, of a beautiful young nude woman lying at the base of a tree, and a gnarled old farmer peeking around the tree leering at her. She does not know she is being looked at. It is the epitome of voyeurism. I was fascinated by this painting and when I grew up and started making photographs I was interested in the theme of voyeurism and nude people being looked at by clothed people and not being aware of it. I made several photos before this one on that theme. Imogen and Twinka was the culmination of the idea. However, in this case, there is the twist that the two people are both women and they are looking at each other. This opens up the picture to a much broader reading of what is going on, and one that people who see it have interpreted In many different ways. None of the students at that workshop had any idea where this image or the configuration of the models was coming from. They simply were reacting to a scene I had set up. The picture would not exist if I hadn't "made it happen."
Thank you for asking me about it and I hope this clarifies things for you.
Judy mentioned that the photo has been her big hit, the photo of hers that is the most widely known, and she does not plan to include it in a forthcoming retrospective book of her work. The book will be published by Marymount Institute Press from Loyola Marymount University. It will be all black and white, and include 50 years of portraits and nudes, 1964 to 2014.
That's one I'll be looking forward to.
Here's a link that includes some more of Judy's work (the English text follows the Spanish).
Finally, turnabout being fair play, here's Imogen's portrait of Judy, taken the same year as "Imogen and Twinka at Yosemite":
Judy Dater by Imogen Cunningham, 1974
Mike
(Thanks to Judy. Contemporary photo of Judy by Jack von Euw, from the linked article)
Original contents copyright 2014 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Joe Holmes: "Mike, fanastic! I'm so glad you kept digging. I loved hearing Judy Dater's story behind the photo, especially the back story of her long-time fascination with nudes, voyeurism, and the twist of two women gazing. (The fact that one has a camera around her neck adds yet another twist: the photographer as voyeur.) And comparing Dater's photo with the similar shot by Mazer, I can see how superior Dater's really is: the light, the poses, the composition. Clearly Dater knew exactly what kind of resonance she was shooting for. I can't wait to check out Dater's book. Keep us posted on that."
Struan: "I have always seen Cunningham in Dater's photograph as more of a rescuer than a letch. There is a bit of death-and-the-maiden and nymph-surprised-by-a-faun/Jove going on, but Twinka's pose is pure Renaissance captive. I spent many teenage hours admiring the artistic inspiration at my local municipal art gallery, which included a full size oil sketch for this oddly familiar scene."
Edie Howe: "I'm old enough to remember seeing that image in LIFE magazine when it came out: at the time I was in my teens, and rather conflicted about artistic nudity due to my self-inflicted Seventh-Day Adventism and the fact that my grandmother was an artist/afficianado who appreciated art nudes. I was struck by the ease of Twinka, the business-like attitude of Imogen. It was a revelation that nudity wasn't always sexual.
"Later in life I became an art model myself, once I got over my religiosity. Then I could empathize with Twinka, thinking that the rough bark of the tree probably was uncomfortable, hence the minimal contact; Note that her back is well away from the scratchy surface. I also noted that Imogen was dressed relatively warmly, while Twinka probably was chilled; I'd be willing to bet it was a bit 'nipply' in that forest, and I felt sorry for her.
"Now in my age of maturity (I'm 55 years old today!) and having made the transition to photographer, I note Imogen's hand gesture, and I wonder just what direction she was giving Twinka; I note the turn of Twinka's left shoulder echoes Imogen's pointing finger.
"Judy Dater's interpretation of voyeurism is a complete inversion; this speaks to me about the making of art, and the female body as art. There's power shared between artist and model, there's an egalitarian feel to it. The model is not unwitting fuel for the observer's gaze."
Interesting, thanks. Judy's photo has a very well composed look to it, with a depth and life that Mazer's shot lacks. I imagine this happens often in workshops with photographers gathered around at various angles, snapping away while watching a demonstration.
Posted by: John Krumm | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 01:28 PM
"There are nudes past the break, so fair warning."
Works for people reading the home page of the blog but not for other methods of accessing the blog.
You should also tag the title of the piece with NSFW (as is the internet custom) so that people following the previous/next post links or finding the article in a Google Search will notice the warning before stumbling into the article.
Or if looking at the title of the post in an RSS reader that doesn't grab the whole text (a good idea in a work environment).
By the time people have read sentence in the main post then they've already loaded the page (and for some IT departments that's enough!).
Better still, read this stuff on your own device ...
[Thanks Kevin. I added "NSFW" to the title. Hopefully that should help people on Monday morning. --Mike]
Posted by: Kevin Purcell | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 03:38 PM
Dear Mike,
In a massive topic thread derail...
The old pictures of Imogen and Judy sent me off to look for my signed Imogen Cunningham Baseball Photographer Trading Card.*
I can't find it! I found all the others, even the duplicates (I have two Judy Daters and enough Alan Colemans to choke a horse**), even my dupe Imogen.
But not the one signed to me, "Comrade Imogen."
I have a recollection of putting it in a safe place.
That is a bad thing.
Never did complete my full set of 134-- four players short. Anybody wanna trade?***
pax / Ctein
~~~~~
*Now we'll see how many readers even know what I'm talking about.
** Now we'll see how many TOP readers were photographed for these cards.
*** Now we'll see how many TOP readers collected these cards.
Posted by: ctein | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 03:50 PM
To put it frankly, the photo by Ms. Dater is infinitely more beautiful, more subtle and powerful than the painting by Benton. And so much more erotic too. At the same time Mrs. Dater seems a little annoyed by this photo. As the masterpiece emancipates itself from its author, the author is appalled by such boldness.
What a great metaphor about the ambiguity of art, because everything is already in the photo itself, from the start. Imogen's revenge in some way...
Posted by: jean-louis salvignol | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 03:56 PM
The two photos show what stepping a couple of feet either side can really change the image.
A good teaching lesson.
But as a former news photographer, we often saw this. What I shot versus the competition.
Posted by: Rogerbotting | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 06:39 PM
Fascinating!
A gem of historiography of photography, art (or the history of anything for that matter).
I'd love to read a compilation of such gems (from TOP) in book form. It doesn't have to be a tome.
Posted by: Sarge | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 06:43 PM
Great post, thanks for digging.
Just a heads up that you have different dates ('76/'74) for the two portraits, but you say that they were taken the same year. My guess is that Imogen and Twinka should be dated '74?
[Yup, sorry, fixed now. Imogen died in '76, picture was taken '74. --Mike]
Posted by: Ben | Sunday, 16 November 2014 at 08:01 PM
Very interesting article and pictures. I'm glad you did a Paul Harvey and took the extra step to bring us the rest of the story.
Posted by: David | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 12:06 AM
Ctein- Think I didn't collect them because they didn't come with gum (least, I don't think they did).
Posted by: Stan B. | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 01:00 AM
@Ctein
* +1
** not me
*** good luck on your search to complete the collection -- wanna show your favorites?
scott
Posted by: scott kirkpatrick | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 01:55 AM
Is art pretentious?
Posted by: Frank | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 03:27 AM
Thanks for that interesting post Mike. Cunningham's pose, as well as the angle from which the picture was taken, manages to make Dater's picture a more gentle and life-affirming photo than Mazer's.
Posted by: Patrick Dodds | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 04:17 AM
C'mon how can you say Dater's photo is better. Mazer's looks much sharper!
Posted by: Roberto | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 05:17 AM
Mike,
Now that you've established contact with Judy Dater, how about a print sale?
Posted by: Andrew R | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 10:07 AM
Mike,
I think you know what you need to do next: find Imogen Cunningham's photo from that shoot!
Posted by: Bernard | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 12:25 PM
I'm afraid this image always makes me laugh -- it's one of the dafter photographs to enter the canon, a true pictorialist throwback, and I'm not surprised Judy Dater is leaving it out of her retrospective.
Ah, 1974, you had to be there...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Chisholm | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 12:35 PM
This is one of my all-time favorite photographs, and for a longer list of reasons than I will include here. One thing that is rarely mentioned but which seems obvious is the powerful statement on mortality and beauty and aging, made more powerful by the different sorts of beauty of both women and by their gazes at one another.
The more I think about this photograph, the more I love it.
Posted by: G Dan Mitchell | Monday, 17 November 2014 at 03:04 PM
There is good humored comedy in this.
Posted by: Norm Nicholson | Tuesday, 18 November 2014 at 12:29 AM
I bought Imogen and Twinka as a greeting card so many years ago it hurts. I probably still have it.
Posted by: Paul De Zan | Tuesday, 18 November 2014 at 12:45 AM
Dear Stan and Scott,
The way this crazy place works, I'm expecting to see an article in a couple of days titled “We Hear from Mike Mandel…”
Yes, the cards did come with gum. Official Topp baseball card chewing gum, in fact. Mike Mandel cut a deal with them.
A Google search turns up quite a bit of information about these, including the fact that they're fairly heavily traded these days, which, not surprisingly, amuses Mike–– it is humorous that what was a satirical commentary on collectibles becomes, after four decades, collectible itself.
Turns out the average selling price for the cards (actual selling price, not asking price) has been 10-$15 a card of late, with lows several bucks below $10 and highs above $50.
Seeing as I have about 200 duplicates, maybe I should think about doing something about that. It's not like the dupes are of any use to me (except maybe to trade for the four cards I'm missing).
pax \ Ctein
[ Please excuse any word-salad. MacSpeech in training! ]
======================================
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com
======================================
Posted by: ctein | Tuesday, 18 November 2014 at 01:21 AM
Here's a pretty good view on Flickr of the Baseball Photographer Trading Cards that Ctein has been talking about: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mikemandel/sets/72157608071445589/
Posted by: Joe Holmes | Tuesday, 18 November 2014 at 07:37 AM
Great post and discussion. I want to add, though, a shout out to the lovely portrait of Ms Dater by Ms Cunningham. Love it!
Posted by: Greg Wostrel | Friday, 21 November 2014 at 10:16 AM