The shot I have chosen to analyze is one of documentation. An important distinction between this record and her glossy proper productions is two fold. First of all we are allowed to see the participating audience, which adds a heavy insightful layer rife with connotations. Secondly, though not terribly obvious in this example, the models are in a state of unrest. Both the documentary photographs and the staged fashioned artwork are presented as equals in Beecroft's body of work.

The third Beecroft rule *(an encouragement to allow the females ensembled to analyze the audience), was a departure from Beecroft's earlier work (VB-1 to VB-34) in which she asked her girls to not under any circumstance to participate with the audience. The select viewers (not unlike that of Klein's 'Monotone Symphony') were gathered via invitation for the performance. Through inference, I assume them to be museum donors, the press, and museum staff members. The interaction between these uncommonly sexy young women and the crowd brought about an awkward tension. One can imagine the uncomfortable spot haute couples were put in. Take for example a wealthy museum donor couple dressed to the nines attending a society function at the Guggenheim, in which half of the enjoyment obtained would be in being seen. Imagine the couple then being asked to watch this proceeding for three hours surrounded by other luminaries. What are they looking at? How many members of the audience would wish to be seen by a colleague or spouse leering at a horde of naked women? And if one were so brazen to gaze without eyes shifting quickly away, they were to be confronted by the return gaze of the living nude. Audience members were in a constant state of an awkward shifting of eyes.

The second Beecroft rule (do not move) is an almost impossible request, which the artist herself undermines by requiring the use of her awkward Gucci shoes. This rule was loosely applied in that the models were asked not to leave their positions in the delineated space. They were allowed to lean back and forth or even sit down if need be due to the high heels which made things difficult for the models to sustain their own body weight over extended periods of time. Not seen here in the photograph is a camera crew filming from every angle. Some of the most startling imagery captured was that of the figure being caught in unrest. While viewing footage of the event, it became clear that the artists behind the camera were after abstract sensibilities. Body parts swaying gently back and forth in the foreground bracketed teetering figures slightly out of focus. The over all impression was that of viewing a living abstract Motherwell. Viewers watching in person, and to those participating via video encounter a writhing mass of flesh, fraught with discomfort. Two critics who delved into the evolution and constant shifting of the piece as the models tired remarked upon this aspect. "Her work is something of a planned obsolescence. The artist dictates initial conditions in order to create the formation image, but subsequently she allows the work to crumble and decay.2", "The picture Beecroft sets in motion is one of disintegration. The girls grow tired over the course of the pose, which lasts several hours. The picture begins to droop, fidget, sag, and collapse. The perfect picture quite literally falls apart.3" These are two interesting quotes in that they add to the context of Beecroft's work while describing the temporality of her work.

note the large crowds gathered around in the picture above. Also, a key element of the Beecroft events seems to be the tired models positioned across the scope of the floor.