The Fanning Sisters: Hannah and Mary…

They were actually registered at birth as Hannah Dakota (1994) and Mary Elle (1998) in Conyers, Georgia.

I really don’t want to go into their movie careers: but I’ve been aware for some time how many of their portraits and images in general get reposted (they both work as models as well as actresses), and then I came across these really beautiful portraits of Elle that I hadn’t seen before:

______________________________________________________________________________________b4a9436047faa60cddee67df5a062f7c

299858

…..they almost have a Loretta Lux quality – a slightly disturbing hyper-reality and disquieting sense of suppressed  emotion. They only run to a couple of Google image-search pages, a number of the sites carrying them being also in Russian, Ukrainian, Japanese and Chinese – so I don’t have an origin.

Their most charming images are from when they were very young, clearly delighting in having a sister to fool around with. One session featured balls of wool:

060914125708_7azn1sgkol

161580396ab538e7f05f49543951aded

ojsi554

wrcj308

92242540

45b3058a1e9206c5b05e80db1dd520b1

kinopoisk.ru

zer9mx75

….and another one had them romping on the bed again, before calming down:

264e983f8dc6cfcc8ed5f0d642fc83ed

b36fb78cd5ef9378bc5934e21b63d42d

d08ef8788c990ddc1b3a17c8a8389d09

….the last one probably being most people’s favourite….

As I said, they have a number of iconic “pretty girl” portraits that often get reposted, even when the reposter doesn’t know it’s a Fanning:

2ec80f84ec17f12f8b5492c5dd55cb8d

13

356

Elle Fanning

299881

….even one of Dakota by Annie Leibowitz:

3467db5a482a05bd2ac4e940bb4a2b07

….and naturally a controversy – when Dakota (aged seventeen) did a perfume ad for Marc Jacobs in 2011:

lola

The strange thing is that tho’ it was criticised (obviously) for “sexualising” the model (is there a perfume ad that doesn’t rely on an erotic association: perfume has always been used for sexual attraction) and the British Standards Authority said that they “considered the ad could be seen to sexualise a child” – nobody seemed to get the fact that the perfume was specifically called “Oh, Lola!” (Humbert Humbert’s pet name for Lolita being Lola), and that Marc Jacobs said that he had chosen Dakota because “she could be a contemporary Lolita”. Also the bottle was said to be “phallic” in its shape, and the flower-like top represented the popular name for the vagina (people still having problems differentiating between the vagina and the vulva) – to me it looks far more like a vibrator, if you are desperate for possible sexual uses for a perfume bottle: but more importantly she’s seventeen: and looks about twenty-five in the not-very-flattering photo. She’s long past puberty, is probably onto her third-fourth boyfriend and has a number of vibrators in her bed-side cabinet. Please…stop trying to control other people’s sexuality….

I’ll end with a small gallery:

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s