The Problematic Concept of the 'Muse' in Portrait Photography

The Problematic Concept of the 'Muse' in Portrait Photography

Have you ever described a portrait subject as your muse? Beneath the seemingly charming facade of the word lies a complex and often problematic history surrounding the photographic muse. As we examine this age-old concept through a modern lens, it becomes clear that the term "muse" is most often reductive, sexist, and objectifying. This article explores why the concept of a muse might be best left in the past.

The term "muse" has long been embedded in the lexicon of photography and wider art genres, denoting an individual who inspires creativity in an artist. Historically, muses are predominantly women who, through their beauty, charisma, or other attributes, have sparked the imaginations of predominantly male artists. While the idea of a muse might seem romantic, it is problematic and warrants reconsideration through modern thought processes.

What Does 'Muse' Mean?

The word "muse" originates from Greek mythology, where the Muses were nine goddesses who presided over the arts and sciences. They were seen as sources of inspiration and desire for poets, musicians, and artists. Over time, the term evolved to describe a person, often a woman, who provides artistic inspiration. In contemporary art and photography, a muse is typically someone whose appearance, personality, or presence profoundly influences an artist's work.

Negative Experiences of Being a Muse

The term is inherently problematic. It can reduce the individual to a mere source of inspiration, stripping away their identity, agency, and contributions. The muse is seldom recognized as an active collaborator; instead, they are often perceived as passive, their primary function being to inspire.

The role and experience of being a muse is not passive and can often involve a complex interplay of power, control, and sometimes exploitation. It is considered that a photographer must be successful to have their very own muse. The romanticized view of the muse can obscure the detrimental impacts this role can have on individuals.

Muses Throughout History

Throughout the history of photography, numerous individuals have been immortalized as muses, often overshadowing their personal achievements and reducing them to mere sources of inspiration for celebrated male artists.

Elizabeth Siddal

Perhaps one of the most famous muses of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, Siddal was a poet, artist, and the primary model for painter Dante Gabriel Rossetti. Despite her own artistic talents, she became Rossetti's wife and modeled for him exclusively for a time, and is often remembered only as Rossetti’s muse and for being the tragic figure in his works. Siddal died of a laudanum overdose in the second year of her marriage after being sickly and melancholic.

Lee Miller

Initially known as a muse for Man Ray, Miller was a brilliant photographer and war correspondent. Her significant contributions to art and journalism are frequently overshadowed by her association with Ray, and she is most often discussed merely as an object of Ray's affection, as seen in his work "The Lovers."

https://youtu.be/ddDZhH_YZ-g

Edie Sedgwick

Known as Andy Warhol's muse, Sedgwick starred in many of Warhol's films and became an icon of the 1960s counterculture. Her tragic life and early death are often romanticized, overlooking the exploitative nature of her relationship with Warhol. If you listen to the first statement in the video below, it summarizes the situation quite succinctly.

The Power Imbalance in the Muse-Artist Relationship

At the heart of the muse concept is a power imbalance. The artist, typically in a position of authority and creative control, often dictates the narrative surrounding the muse. This dynamic can lead to the objectification and commodification of the muse, who is valued primarily for their ability to inspire rather than their personal talents or contributions.

This imbalance is particularly evident in the historical context where women served as muses for male artists. The muse is often considered an ethereal, otherworldly figure, devoid of personal agency, who exists solely to stimulate the male artist's creativity. This dynamic reinforces traditional gender roles and perpetuates a patriarchal view of women's value in the world of art and photography.

Promoting Collaborative Relationships

I regularly photograph my daughter, a talented musician, and our sessions are far from the traditional muse-artist dynamic. This label would fail to capture the depth of our collaborative relationship and the autonomy she holds. Our sessions involve a mutual exchange of ideas, with both of us contributing equally. Sometimes I send my daughter an image or a painting or begin with some visuals I have dreamed up based on her lyrics. Sometimes my daughter will be the one sending inspirational content, which can be any of the above, or even an image of an outfit she wants to wear, and I will construct an idea around this.

She suggests poses and themes that reflect her artistic identity and certainly isn't shy about expressing her preferences when she doesn’t like an idea or when she is tiring and getting to the end of the shoot. This collaboration allows her to visually express herself and helps me explore my creative boundaries. It's a mutually enriching experience that also expands our family archive, which is a little fuller than most.

The term muse personally makes me feel uncomfortable for several reasons that I have discussed throughout this article. I cringe when I see images of women in underwear (or less) in suggestive poses when the attached image caption reads something along the lines of "my latest muse." This usage of the term perpetuates a reductive and objectifying view of women, reducing them to mere objects of attraction rather than acknowledging their full humanity and agency. This underscores the problematic aspects of the traditional muse concept, which often neglects the creative input and individuality of the person being photographed.

Being a woman, my own personal experiences have shaped the way that I treat the people in front of my lens. They already arrive at the shoot with a good idea of what we will achieve that day. I discuss what I am doing, I let them know which section of their bodies are in the frame so that they know when I move from a half-body shot to a close-up, etc. This not only affords better posing but also leads to a more trusting environment. If I position myself lower, for example, I might explain the context of viewpoint on power dynamics and how traditionally women were photographed from a slightly elevated viewpoint to make them look smaller or more submissive, and men were traditionally photographed from a slightly lower viewpoint to make them look taller and more important. I make a point of photographing most people from a lower viewpoint for at least a small portion of the shoot, whether it's adults or kids. Everyone should see themselves in a metaphorically elevated position.

The Modern Muse: Redefining Inspiration in Contemporary Art

While I personally think the word muse should be retired, the concept of the muse has evolved significantly from its historical roots, and the photographic subject is no longer acceptable for a model to be a static figure of inspiration. The modern muse embodies a more dynamic and collaborative role in the creative process. This shift reflects broader societal changes toward gender equality, recognition of diverse voices, permission, and agency within artistic processes. Characteristics of an updated collaborative relationship between photographer and subject would give the sitter agency over their appearance and representation, rather than being a passive subject. Ideas could be contributed, and they are at very least consulted beforehand with an opportunity to say no or make adjustments to make them more comfortable. Whether they are artists, thinkers, activists, or everyday individuals, their qualities and achievements are acknowledged and celebrated. A sense of who they are might be more visible in the images, rather than just what they look like.

Closing Thoughts

The term muse in photography and art, while historically significant, carries with it problematic connotations of objectification, power imbalance, sexism, and lack of agency. The negative experiences of many muses underscore the need to reassess this concept and consign this word to the history books. By instead embracing collaboration, diversity, and mutual respect, photographers can enhance creativity and provide greater authenticity, which leads to richer and more powerful images.

My views are formed as a female photographer, which naturally plays a role in my analysis. It would be great to hear from both male and female photographers in the comments to broaden the discussion.

Lead image ©Kim Simpson 2023

Kim Simpson's picture

Kim Simpson is a photographer based in the West of Scotland. Her photographic practice is an exploration of the human experience, with a particular emphasis on themes of identity and belonging.

Log in or register to post comments
24 Comments

While I appreciate the view point I can't say I agree with the conclusion that the concept of a Muse inherently "carries with it problematic connotations of objectification, power imbalance, sexism, and lack of agency" as you state. I feel this like so many other subjects are being shamed simply because there have been parasitic instances. Just because this have been negative occurrences does not mean that the entire concept is negative or parasitic, I for one have quite often seen that the Muse has been a active participant and given fair credit for the input and effort they have contributed to many projects. This like so many other things are subject to individual experience and when the situation is abused that is not the fault of the concept but instead a transgression of the person who abused it. To put it simply this is like blaming cameras for all bad photos, just because a crappy camera can make a bad picture doesn't mean all camera's will or that all bad photos are the fault of the camera. Just as the reasons for a photo being poor are far more complex than just the camera, so is the situation of a muse infinitely more complicated than just the term. As such I would say that rather than banishing the term muse to the history books as you say we should, that instead we should be trying to combat the mindset of people who would treat the person who is thier inspiration and often equal collaborater in such a poor fashion as you describe here. Shunning a word will not change those that have acted improperly, but instead there will just be a new word that gets used for the same concept and that new term will just as soon be tainted by the same misdeeds that fouled the first and once again someone will be calling to retire that term. Instead of just repeating the cycle lets instead treat the problem and break the cycle.

The notion of the "muse" is deeply rooted in our cultural and psychological heritage, representing the archetypal source of inspiration that drives human creativity. To dismiss it as merely a tool of oppression is to overlook its profound symbolic significance. The muse is not about objectifying individuals but about acknowledging the mysterious and often unconscious forces that inspire artistic creation. Reducing this concept to a simple power dynamic ignores the complex, reciprocal relationship between artist and muse that has fueled much of our greatest art and culture.

I do not think the term muse reflects anything particular positive but does reflect quite a bit shady stuff. No person should be reduced to somebody’s muse. Never used the term and don’t need or want it. Your loved one should not be a muse trapped by your obsession, that’s not love. Why do I think this is connected with mental illness and obsessive behaviour damaging for both parts, particularly the “muse”?

I actually kinda like the idea / concept of a muse!

But ..... I photograph wildlife, not people, so for me to have a muse in the traditional sense is not possible.

But after reading this article, the idea of having a muse, or multiple muses, appeals to me. So maybe I can start to think of certain animals as my muse. This would be using the term in the true sense, because the animals themselves are what inspires me to create. It is my passion and obsession for the wild animals that makes me want to be a photographer. And certainly there are some individual animals that have caused my inspiration and enthusiasm to surge, because I find them to be so majestic, or beautiful.

This Whitetail Deer buck was a muse of mine for several years, from 2017 until 2022. When I would hike out into the deer woods he was the deer that I thought of, he was the deer that I hoped to find. And when I would see him far off through the trees, my excitement would spike and my heart would beat with a desire to get close, to be able to exploit his majestic appearance by capturing images of him.

He passed sometime between the 2022 mating season and the 2023 mating season, as I did not see him last November when I took my annual month-long trip to the deer woods. So now I am left a little empty because of his absence, and I need to find another muse, another buck with his great looks and majestic stature.

So come November, I will again head off to the deer woods, in search of another muse, and I have no problem with either the word or the ideas behind it. The term fits, because when I photograph wildlife, my goal is to exploit my subjects for my own visual pleasure, and I am not going to pretend that it is anything more noble or unselfish than that.

The whole notion that a "muse" inherently carries with it problematic connotations of objectification, power imbalance, sexism, and lack of agency is absurd. Words have nothing to do with behavior.

For a people photographer, having a collaborative subject/partner or two or three is one of the best things that you can do to improve your craft. You learn the value of collaboration, communication, and just simply taking photos of people. You can experiment in an open, trusting, and collaborative manner. It helps to pull us out of the echochamber that photographers tend to construct around themselves. Personally, one of the best things that I did for my people photography was to have a handful of muses that I work with and experiment with regularly; weather it's lighting concepts, thematic concepts, techniques, etc.

Currently I have a handful of female muses that I love working with. Sometimes they initiate an idea, sometimes I do. They trust me enough to feel that they can present an idea to me and that I will be open enough to work with them on it. And vice versa.

That being said, I'm currently on the lookout for a male muse or two because I lack experience photographing males. The problem for me is that there are far fewer males interested in doing regular photo sessions. It's something that many of my peers have experienced, too. Both male and female photographers.

Sigh. People really need to stop trying to cancel anything they find offensive, when it's not. Reminds me of a couple years ago, a handful of people with their manufactured anger, trying to cancel the terms "master" and "slave" from flashes.

--- "carries with it problematic connotations of objectification, power imbalance, sexism, and lack of agency."

No, that's just you. Whenever I see muse used, the first thing that pops into my head is collaboration.

--- "The negative experiences of many muses"

And, therein lies the problem. You cherry pick a handful of cases from a long long time ago. Did you make any effort to analyze the positive side from past and current? Or just gaslighting to sway a narrative?

--- "need to reassess this concept and consign this word to the history books."

No, it can stay where it's at. If you and your family don't want to use it, then don't. Let the chips fall where they may.

Woke activists are so tiring. Always looking for the worst in everything, never the best.

Completely agree. This whole concept that various groups of people have been oppressed for centuries, and now we need to rethink everything we say and everything we do to reverse things, is just asinine. People are tougher than we give them credit for. We don't need to tiptoe around every word we use and every role we cast and every policy we make for fear of marginalizing anyone.

As someone who is woke, I can tell you that this backlash that you are so offended by - oh my gosh, I can't use this word, boo hoo! - is because sensitive people for such a long time have been insulted and been put down by insensitive, mean a-holes calling people nasty names. (Trust me, growing up, it does hurt.) So you can't use certain words anymore. Cry me a river.

(See my post below. It's not more of the same.)

I will have to disagree with this article. As a creative loner, the lack support from people - most everybody ("be independent! do your own thing!") has really made it psychologically difficult to pursue my artistic interests. A muse would definitely give me more confidence. And yes, I would treat her very nicely.

I've always been a loner and I really don't like taking photos of people because I'm very self-conscious. i don't like my photo taken. But (too slowly) over the years, I've gotten a bit more confident though I still don't ask people if I can take their photos - even friends and family. However, this past winter in Sevilla, Spain, I noticed this one young woman trying to get her mother to take her photo properly. She tried twice to explain. So I just spontaneously went up to her and said, pointing to my camera, that I'm a very experienced and I'll take some and send them via e-mail. So I took 25 photos in 2 minutes. After a few, I said that they were very good. (I noticed later that it was then she started looking at the camera.) When I sent them to her later, she thought they were great and that if I was Rome, we could meet up again. I've never done a model photo shoot before and she made it so easy for me.

(She didn't want her boots in the photo but I didn't want to cut off her hand. Completely, unedited photo. No, it's not up to perfection standards but this was purely spontaneous with completely natural lighting.)

Maybe it's just that most true muses are vastly underappreciated and are mainly known (unfortunately) through the negativity of the few tragic, famous muses in history.

Muses can be very inspiring and motivating!

(Muse means one of the nine ancient Greek goddesses who inspire creativity.)

An excellent, thought provoking article. Most of the comments are depressingly predictable but also strengthen your arguments. Thanks for sharing your powerful insights.

Thank you Ian, I have been watching the responses with interest, an overwhelmingly male perspective not able to put themselves in the shoes of the person in front of the camera/the subject of their gaze. I am not motivated to try and change anyones mind due to the expectations of subsequent responses. I have even had some hate mail from someone not brave enough to enter their thoughts in the comments, pathetic.
I'm not interested in arguing with closed minded individuals over an opinion article.

Well, I had hoped that we could have a meaningful discussion, but the fact that the only post you chose to respond to was this one, and the tone of that response makes me think that any chance of that is pretty slim.

You asked for the positions of others, and I quote:
"My views are formed as a female photographer, which naturally plays a role in my analysis. It would be great to hear from both male and female photographers in the comments to broaden the discussion."
But then the only response we get from you is hyper-reductive of others in the very way that you complain the term "muse" is, openly dismissive of the opinions you asked for, and, to be frank, passive-aggressive toward those who did not agree with you. Please do what you ask of others and step out of the echo chamber into the shoes of the people you are presuming to know so that we can have a productive discussion and just maybe you will find we are not as different and sinister as your article implies.

To be honest it was the hate mail that I received that took me out of the position of wanting to discuss further but you surmise that my non response to other comments is passive aggressive, when I perhaps needed to engage with someone supportive.

Sorry it took me a bit to respond you'll see why shortly. Two things: first, I understand what you are saying about hate mail but I don't think running away from the discussion because of it is the right decision, because by not engaging with the rest of us you have let them suppress you but I guess to each their own.
Second, To be clear, I did not say your non-response was passive-aggressive. I said your one and only response at the time was. But I will move on from that. I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you, and I know I probably stand little chance of changing your view. In truth, that's not really my goal here. If anything, all I hope for is to get you to examine your position from a new perspective. Perhaps that will lead to a conversation that brings us to a middle ground that we can all agree is fair.

In light of that, I conducted a small experiment of my own to test your position and see if I was missing something. To this end, I contacted a sizable group of people (I did not keep count, but it is in the area of 100) with whom I am acquainted in different walks of life and around the world, but primarily photographers and models (both groups predominantly female) about this subject. First, I asked them what their thoughts and responses would be to someone saying they were their muse. The males generally said to the effect of it would be interesting to know they had inspired someone or they would see it as a compliment. The female responses I received were nearly unanimous in that they intimated they would see it as a compliment. Of the two that did not fit into that, one just shrugged and said it would probably be nice to know they had inspired someone else. The other had my favorite response, so I will quote it here: she smirked and said, "I can do you one better than answering hypothetically because I am someone's muse and damn proud of it." Please note that she is a model (on a sidenote when for the next part I had her read your article. She at first thought it was a fake article and a joke just trying to get a rise out of her, she said "You expect me to buy that someone is trying to cancel the word Muse, you seriously thought I would believe this?" She made me show it to her here to prove I wasn't just messing with her. Later I found out she wasn't the only one that thought I was messing with them at first). Having gotten that information, I then asked them all to read your article without knowing who or where it was from to eliminate any possibly of bias and then asked them if they still stood by their original response, to which all but one said their answer stood. That one, being the woman who originally shrugged, said after having thought about it, "My position hasn't so much changed as having thought about it a better way to sum it up is, I think it would bring me pleasure to be that influential in someone's art." So then I asked what they thought of the article, and most just shook their heads or commented to the effect that while your heart was in the right place, your ire was misdirected to be attacking a word instead of the behavior of the person or group that treated someone the way you described in your examples. Once done I did give them the link to this article just so they could see the original and see I had not changed it other than not showing the name of the author or website. When I told them of my intention to post the results of this here many said they would check back to see your reponse. Now before you say anything about of course those around me would be of like mind, note these people are not my close friends, just people I know, many of whom have very differing opinions from mine on plenty of major life topics. We have quite spirited discussions about them too, but we respect each other because we know we can be brutally honest about those things and discuss them openly without it devolving into the petty chaos and obstinate name-calling that is far too common. It is due to this that I feel I can trust that the positions they expressed are their true feelings on the matter. The only thing in this group I made a particular point of doing was to seek out as many of the female photographers and models I knew as I could, since those are the groups you talked about in your article and I had the best chance of finding someone who saw this the way you do. Having done this, I hope you can say I did my best to be fair to your position, but the results I got do not support your view on getting rid of the word Muse. I know that talking to about 100 people is still a small sample, but it is large enough that statistically it would have yielded at least a few people if there was larger support for your take on the matter. In conclusion, I found that while we all sympathized with your wish to root out this bad behavour in society, we all felt that your approach was not one that would accomplish that end goal. I will leave you with the words of one of those that I spoke to for this as they summed it up quite well: "The intentions are good, but Kim's going about this the wrong way. Getting rid of that word won't change peoples mindset or behavior. The only thing getting rid of that word will do is to deprive the language of a singular descriptive term for something that inspires us."

Simply put, don’t ask for feedback or opinions if you’re not ready to hear different viewpoints or experiences. Imagine how boring the world would be if we all agreed on everything, especially in the arts. If you can’t handle that, it’s perfectly fine—just write an editorial and disable the comments.

A woke activist defines open and close minded as agreement and disagreement respectively. Their arrogance is abnoxious.

First and foremost, no words should ever be removed, just as history should never be sanitized. Just because a segment of society dislikes or disagrees with something doesn’t mean it should be erased or altered. Why not? Because that’s how we evolve and hopefully learn as society. Now, why would I remove the word muse? a word that sounds so beautiful and inspiring?

I’m a very creative person, but coming out of the COVID bubble a couple of years ago, I felt drained, like all my creativity was gone—I was empty! Then, a model I’d worked with in the past contacted me to do another photoshoot. I told her no; I had no story, no concept, no idea what to do. Thankfully, she didn’t take no for an answer and told me to pick a location. I did, she came camera-ready as always, and things just started to click again, no nudes! She’s someone who will do whatever it takes to get great shots. Imagine this: she’s a nude model, and she knows I’m not interested in shooting nudes. After we finished, I thanked her for not taking no for an answer, I said, “I guess you’re my muse.” She gave me a big smile and thanked me for the compliment. Since then she always refers to herself as "Hello, this is your muse..."

I have no idea where you come up with the objectification, power imbalance, sexism, etc., we are no longer living in the 50s. Are you talking about the arts or a Dom/Submissive relationship? I’m genuinely confused. Obviously, I’ve had a different experience. The world isn’t as ugly as you might think or read about. Life can be simple but we often insist on making it complicated.

Thanks Kim, a needed and well expressed point of view with predictably unfortunate comments. People use the term "woke" as if the alternative- asleep- is a better thing. The step from muse to predominantly female nude subjects is another, but closely related topic. I'm a cis-gen hetero guy, and it seems outrageously disrespectful that in this day and age female nudes and semi-nudes are predominant in photo industry ads and online forums. "The beauty of the human form" apparently exists only in human females.

--- "it seems outrageously disrespectful that in this day and age female nudes and semi-nudes are predominant in photo industry ads and online forums."

Can you be anymore woke? If anything is outrageously disrespectful, it is your misogynistic mansplaining. It's is not up to you decide what they can or cannot do, whether it's for an ad, personal project, etc, etc.

--- "'The beauty of the human form' apparently exists only in human females."

No.

There is none so blind…

Paul Shambroom wrote:

"People use the term "woke" as if the alternative - asleep- is a better thing."

No we do not.

We are offended by the term "woke" because we were never asleep in the first place, and we feel that "woke" is a deceitful misnomer used to further widen the gap between the left and the right.

Paul Shambroom wrote:

" 'The beauty of the human form' apparently exists only in human females."

Then why do I see gazillions of photos of mostly nude men all over the place - in ads, magazines, greeting cards, etc., etc., etc,?

What I find offensive is the assumption that adult females are, in your mind, apparently incapable of making rational personal decisions.

In a generation, today's woke nonsense will be looked back on not unlike today's world looks back on Victorian era scolds.

"I'm a cis-gen hetero guy,.." Welcome to the community, Paul. While I appreciate your introduction, I wonder if identifying oneself through labels is truly necessary or adds value to any conversation. The same applies to those who feel threatened by terms like "woke.". This is a space dedicated to photography, let's focus on that and leave the distractions outside.

"predictably unfortunate comments..." , it’s perplexing to see someone ask for opinions and then react negatively when those opinions don’t align with their own. We are all unique individuals, and the ability to agree to disagree seems to be increasingly lost amid the surrounding noise.

Rene