Smile, You’re On Camera
The aesthetics of surveillance
There was a genre of photography that absolutely ran my corner of the internet in the early 2010s. It is impossible for me to say whether photos of skinny teens being a smidge mischievous were inescapable on Tumblr and Pinterest, or if the almighty algorithm simply clocked how longingly I poured over these images and calibrated my feeds accordingly.
A few years later, when I was finally sneaking out and partying around campfires, I am unsure if my motivation was purely adolescent hedonism, or if I was chasing the high of recreating these images I had seared into my brain. In that sense, my wild teenage escapades amounted to a pretty by-the-numbers rebellion.
Last year’s “teenage dirtbag” trend on TikTok, which involved sharing images of one’s younger self taking part in teenage-y dirtybag-y activities, made me reevaluate the iconography of teenage delinquency. Despite how much I desperately attempted to visually recreate the music videos and Skins episodes and Pinterest images that crafted my idea of what being a cool teenager meant, I have very few “dirtbag” photos. I came of age firmly in the age of surveillance. Many of my friends had tracking apps on their phones, which my parents thankfully deemed too invasive or too much of a technical headache to deal with. We spent as much time lusting after the taste of rebellion as we did meticulously leaving no trace of our escapades. That included never taking pictures, lest a cell phone get into the hands of a parent.
A genre of aspirational image that often pops up under Pinterest’s suggested “teenage dirtbag aesthetic” search term is the CCTV selfie. A gaggle of teenage girls pose under the security camera footage displayed over a store’s entrance or self-checkout as a central figure snaps the pic. Perhaps these photos are popular due to the simple fact that the high angle and grainy effect of security camera footage amount to an immensely flattering reflection. But maybe there is some meaning here, intentional or not, in the documenting of one’s own surveillance
Being surveilled is the baseline state for the modern young person. Voyeuristic cameras don’t just exist in the convenience store parking lot where you drink your slushy, they’re also on your parent’s Ring doorbell and in your back pocket. When the actions captured by both can incite punishment, what difference is the phone camera from the camera above the Target self-checkout?
To position oneself as a surveilled entity is to assert that you possess the capacity to contravene. A young girl who might never actually venture into the world of kleptomania may instead photograph herself posing for a store’s security camera, the assertion that she could engage in theft is subtextually left up to the viewer.
Eric Höweler coined the term “Paranoid Chic” in a 2002 article for architecture magazine Volume to describe the phenomenon of surveillance inspired fashion imagery, and how those images transformed the condition of unwanted attention into a luxury commodity. Referencing Givenchy and Versace advertisements peddling in recreations of surveillance footage, Höweler made the point that the voyeuristic nature of surveillance footage fascinates and repulses the viewer by making them complicit in the observation of the pictured individual.1 As put it for Höweler Loud Paper’s Paranoia issue, “Surveillance is sexy. Big Brother is watching, so you have to look good.”2
Manchester band The Get Out Clause filmed an entire music video in 2007 effectively for free by utilizing security cameras. The band performed in front of over 80 security cameras before requesting the footage from shopkeepers, which British law mandates they release.3 The resulting video, shared to YouTube, was inventive and cool enough to warrant brief virality for the otherwise unknown rock band.4 Like Cheap Trick at Budokan using the sounds of cheering Japanese fans to springboard into American stardom5, The Get Out Clause manufactured an air of celebrity and import by playing to an audience of digital voyeurs. By documenting instances in which they were surveilled, the band visually insisted they were worth watching.
Actual celebrities, the ones hounded for paparazzi photos, are less inclined to welcome surveillance. In the age of the gossip mag, many celebrities responded to unwanted photography with offensive gestures, rendering the resulting photos too explicit for print. Designer Saif Siddiqui launched an anti-paparazzi scarf in 2015 that bent light in order to ruin any potential flash photo of the wearer. Celebrities from the Jonas Brothers to DMX to Paris Hilton were spotted in the scarf not long after.6
While a nasty inconvenience, I’m sure, paparazzi surveillance allows celebrities the unique opportunity to silently send a message. Julia Roberts still refuses to admit that her DIY tee shirt reading “A Low Vera” was in any way a reference to her now-husband Danny Moder's then-wife Vera Steimberg.7 Roberts was photographed practically gloating in the shirt in 2002, positioning her jacket just-so to ensure the slogan readable, as gossip magazines reported that Steimberg was resisting divorce from Moder.
In much the same way, the average person can communicate through their own surveillance. By purposely posing for a red light camera as one might the souvenir photo cameras on a roller coaster, the driver of the infracting car gains subjectivity within the image. If she later shares this surveilled selfie online, pouty lips and peace sign hand gesture just barely visible through the windshield and photo grain, the image is completely recontextualized.
When I stare into the all seeing eye of the Target self checkout camera, I usually fix my hair and always jut my chin out slightly in an effort to conceal the flabby slope of my soft jaw. In effect, I pose without really meaning to. I wonder how long Target holds on to this footage. According to urban legend, Target will wait until you’ve shoplifted $1,000 or $800 or $2,000 over multiple visits in order to charge you with grand larceny.8 Would that require Target to keep all security footage in perpetuity, racking up permanent records in dusty data storage centers? It seems far-fetched, but if my image may actually live forever in the name of retail theft prevention, I might as well try to straighten my bangs. For better or worse my teenage revelries exist only in my memories and my late night run for Annie’s Shells & White Cheddar is caught on tape.
https://archis.org/volume/anxious-architectures-the-aesthetics-of-surveillance/
http://www.loudpapermag.com/articles/paranoia-chic-the-aesthetics-of-surveillance
https://www.npr.org/2008/05/14/90425187/in-surveillance-video-band-rocks-big-brother
www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2iuZMEEs_A
https://loc.gov/item/prn-20-023/
https://archive.vn/261bk#selection-1731.25-1731.38
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/pictures/julia-roberts-and-danny-moders-relationship-timeline/
https://www.businessinsider.nl/target-employees-claim-the-chain-will-wait-to-arrest-shoplifters-until-thieves-steal-enough-to-get-felony-charges-experts-say-its-part-of-a-larger-trend-to-mitigate-theft-across-retail/
Had no idea about that band's music video. So cool and such an interesting point. People wanting to appear to be surveilled against almost as an air of legitimacy.