It is inconceivable that Annie Leibovitz was taken aback by the outraged response to her shoot of a half-naked, smudge-lipsticked, knowing-eyed 15-year-old Miley Cyrus. Leibovitz is an exceptionally calculated image-maker, who said recently she uses nudity to “create an instant intimacy” between subject and viewer.
One can believe Cyrus’s description of Leibovitz’s persuasive powers in the studio, pushing the young actress – fame-hungry and flattered to pose for the world’s most famous photographer for a magazine such as Vanity Fair – into ever more risqué poses. “You can’t say no to Annie,” Miley said. “She’s so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look, and you’re like, OK.”
Indeed, Leibovitz used the trick dirty-old-men artists have employed to seduce vulnerable girls through the ages: she persuaded Miley that the pictures were “artistic”. But this is no celebration of young beauty. It is a blatant bedroom shot. Leibovitz saw the shock potential, the lip-smacking titillation, in posing a star known for her wholesome, girlish role in Disney’s Hannah Montana as if photographed by her deflowering first boyfriend.
What is more cynical is the decision by Vanity Fair’s supposed high-moralist Graydon Carter to publish the pictures. He saw their potential in selling his magazine’s special teen issue, since the chief excitement surrounding girl-women such as Cyrus concerns their entry on to the sexual marketplace. Years ago a website even ticked off the days and hours until the moment Britney Spears was “legal”.
It is the madness of Britney, and the drug problems and food disorders of Lindsay Lohan – both were also preteen Disney stars – that should prey upon the consciences of Leibovitz, Carter and Miley’s parents, who attended the shoot. Miley should be guided with care and respect into the adult stage of her career (if that’s what she wants), bypassing the money and headline-making phase of ravaged Lolita.