Breast-cancer portrait: Poignant or pornographic?
I am mystified by letters such as the one from Jennifer Mills of Clovis in Tuesday's Bee. Thankfully, we got very few letters like hers, which used the word "pornographic" to describe a photo of Bee staff writer Tracy Correa in the Oct. 21 Bee. Tracy has breast cancer and she wrote a compelling first-person story about her journey through treatment. The image was used on Page A1 because it was a masterful portrait of Tracy's fear and worry. It also showed her face, chest and the part of her breasts that showed where the tattoos that were placed so the doctors know where to apply the radiation treatments that they hope will kill the cancer. In a powerful way, it showed Tracy's face -- an unforgettable expression of a woman clearly vulnerable and frightened.
I’m stunned at any kind of negative reaction to a journalistic photo essay by The Bee's award-winning staff members, photographer Heidi Huber and staff writer Tracy Correa. Actually, I shouldn’t be surprised at all by such weirdness because my husband used to be The Bee’s sports editor. He could count on a few strange people calling him on the phone -- using very loud voices -- anytime the sports section featured a woman athlete in a tight uniform worn by swimmers, runners or gymnasts. It was pretty sad.
Oddly, we never hear a peep from people like Ms. Mills when The Bee runs -- as it has recently -- pictures of Britney Spears, Demi Moore, Jennifer Hudson, Helen Mirren, Virginia Madsen, Cheryl Burke, Lisa Rinna, Tyra Banks or models in swimsuits, underwear, evening gowns. They showed far more skin in those pictures. Isn't it ironic there were no letters to the editor complaining about them?
However, Heidi's images of Tracy tell a dramatic and life-affirming story of one woman's ultimately victorious journey over a life-threatening disease. How that sends the minds of some letter-writers to a sexual place rather than an empathetic place is pretty disturbing to me.
The message I get from these people is that it’s just fine for folks to see women’s breasts so long as they are being used for entertainment. But it's somehow wrong to show authentic emotion in a medical and instructive context?
I congratulate Heidi for capturing Tracy's courage on paper. The women following her difficult path will surely now know they are not alone.
To see the multimedia presentation of stories and photos and Tracy telling what happened in her own words, click here.
To read Jennifer Mills' letter, click here.
Comments
Ms. Mills must have a warped sense of reality ... the photo is a work of art and very well presented by the Bee.
I am a cancer survivor -- but I am old, ugly and male, so my photo would not be of interest.
I linked most of your cancer series to my eMail list here in the Orange Cove area --- all seemed to appreciate the truth and reality presented in the Tracy Correa and other stories.
eldon
Posted by: Eldon Thompson | October 31, 2007 1:11 PM
I wouldn't fret about the negative comment. To me, the picture depicted Ms. Correa's humanity and vulnerability. I also saw strength in her expression in addition to the fear. As for the skin, there are underwear ads in the paper every day that show far more skin than that photo did. Ms. Correa is an attractive woman, but I don't think any guys out there will confuse that photo with a Playboy centerfold. I think Ms. Mills is just over-reacting.
Posted by: Mike D. | October 31, 2007 2:08 PM
The photo of Tracy was in no way pornographic. It was a masterpiece of emotion that is along with her story very important to young and old alike. Children, both boys and girls would not see it that way either. It could be of great help to them if in the unfortunate event that they face cancer one day they will have a better concept of what can be done and teach them early on that checkups are very important for early detection. Cancer doesn't have to a death sentence as Tracy has told in her very well written story pictures and all. If anybody saw it as pornographic they have a very demented perception.
Posted by: Jackie Krage | October 31, 2007 2:22 PM
I am going to have to side with the majority here. That picture was wonderful.
She seemed very strong and ready to face what was coming head on.
I have seen pornography, lots and lots of pornography. That picture is most assurdley not pornographic. =)
Posted by: John zacharias | October 31, 2007 3:20 PM
How embarrassing that a woman would say such negative things about another woman going through breast cancer. You’d think as a woman, she’d understand.
It took a lot of bravery for Tracy to tell her story. Ms. Mills is focusing on one aspect of the story and missed the point completely.
Lets hope Ms. Mills' children don't inherit her judgmental ways.
Remember, “If you don’t have something nice to say, then don’t say anything at all.”
Posted by: Sharyn | October 31, 2007 4:34 PM
She's entitled to her opinion but if you want soft porn just look a little further for the underwear ads- sometimes with underage kids. I do think the Bee used it for shock value but it got me to read further.Can't wait to see the photo for the story of the guy with prostate cancer.Fair and balanced.Right?
Posted by: Brian Murray | November 1, 2007 7:13 AM
Ms. Mills didn't say anything negative about Tracy! She said she found the story outstanding but that the photo "bordered on pornography" and the Bee made a mistake running it. Please tell me that we (I work at the Bee) at least considered such things before making the decision to run the photo. For someone just picking up the paper without knowing Tracy or having prior knowledge of the topic, of course it was a bit much on A1; it was soft-focused and had special framing like a boudoir photo. And the marks on Tracy's skin? Who the heck could see those until they were directed by the caption? Would I have run it? No, but it's a beautiful photo and if others thought it was the right call, fine. Please just tell me that there was some thought put into it. I often wonder if falling newspaper circulation nationwide has a lot more to do with this attitude we seem to have -- that readers who disagree with us are idiots -- than any technological or economic trends.
Posted by: Kent | November 1, 2007 9:29 AM
As the reporter -- and cancer survivor -- in the photo, I can tell you we did have a fair amount of discussion about the photo. I was very comfortable with the photo and I am a rather conservative about my body. I thought it showed a woman who is both strong and vulnerable, which is how I felt. I could never imagine people would turn a photo of a cancer-stricken woman into something sexual. There was reason to show the markings on my chest. Did critics read the caption at all? Maybe you should take in all the information before you cast judgment. Before we published the photo, I ran it by my two teen daughters and my mother, who all loved it. I would never do anything to embarrass my family. My mother -- who is nearly 70 and rather conservative -- called the photo "beautiful."
There is more flesh shown in ads for underwear! Maybe critics shouldn't look at sale ads or watch TV either. The story was about breast cancer and it was raw and real. So was the photo!
Posted by: tracy | November 1, 2007 10:37 AM
I second what Tracy said. If the goal was to increase circulation, the Bee would be printing photos of semi-naked celebrities on the front page, like British tabloids do - not photos of cancer survivors.
Posted by: Mike D. | November 1, 2007 11:04 AM
I thank Tracy for sharing her story and photo. It was very heartfelt and true. Those that see that photo as ponographic have got to have their mind in the gutter to start with. She is a creation of God and may he restore her mind and body.
Posted by: Jackie Krage | November 1, 2007 1:12 PM