On Great and Mediocre (S)Hooters

Got this picture from The Lost Nomad, taken from the newly-opened Hooters – ho hum – here in Seoul.

I'm going to spare you, my dear readers, the expected diatribe about women's place in society besides making the singular comment here that points out the perfectly obvious fact that the appeal of the "wild" concept of "hooters" with drinks and over-priced celery sticks should be expected to be completely lost on a country in which you can get a lot more than just perky service and sexual innuendo in any number of "bikini" or "sexy bars" and similar establishments, except with anju and hard liquor.

Hooters seems much more the product of an American culture in which socially accepted consumption of value-added sexual services essentially doesn't exist in public culture, besides the heavily-regulated strip club that is another mainstay of American culture, which is also notably absent, and apparently unmissed, in Korean society.

My point is simply that the low or no-contact nature of American-style sexual services seems out of place in the Korean context, where anything goes – direct, unregulated sexual content can be had in all types of Korean establishments, possibly for not too much more than the tab at an overpriced American chain.

That being said, given the highly gendered nature of almost all the American chain restaurants here in Seoul – go to your average TGI Friday's, Outback, Sizzler, or any other such space and you'll see primarily only groups of women or men with women who are obviously the main reason they are there – Hooters may be a good move, in that there aren't really many places that Korean men can go to as a venue for the conspicuous consumption of American-style "sports bar/family restaurant" culture. And I think that even the more conservative group of Korean salarymen might sick of the large-style "hof" with surly wait staff that are the general norm for Korean places.

So, Hooters seems to be a savvy move to one who might have observed the potential market for American-style, super-saccarine service with a smile and a standardized experience. After all, Korean women have been enjoying that for years, as a place where you "know what you're getting," with the hot bread, Bloomin' Onion, or chicken quesadillas that come consistently and conveniently with a smile. And from a Korean point of view, it's a welcome departure from 골뱅이 or dried squid and nuts. It's a standardized experience that's simply a bit "brighter."

If that's the plan, if that was the marketing strategy, I'd say it might work. Without trying to reproduce the litany of comments made in the mostly-male Korean blogosphere about the seeming inherent contradiction of opening a mammocentric enterprise of large proportions in a country not known to be generally, genetically thusly predisposed, I'll just say that such a niche is certainly open.

But the "hooters" here, given the very different context within which they will find literal exposure, has to offer something pretty particular so as to distinguish itself from the background din of more scantily-clad women working in etablishments with far dimmer lighting catering to darker pleasures.

Which brings me to the politics of this picture, which is my whole point for posting, actually. I don't usually have a lot to say about other people's pictures, but this picture – which I understand to be from the Chosun Ilbo's website, the story link to which is inexplicably down – strikes me as particularly unprofessional and generally poor.

If this is the standard "newspaper shot" of cute ladies that dominates most puff pieces on new establishments, stores, or trends in Korean newspapers, it is a pretty poor one. All the women are looking at another camera, the woman on the far left closed her eyes on the shot, and the facial expressions looked forced even given the inherently forced feeling of their obviously prepped and practiced pose with samples of available menu items.

It looks like a shot from the B-roll, or the shots gleaned from the last seconds of someone else's request for photos. If I were the photo editor at the Chosun, I'd be plenty pissed. It feels to me like someone got to the game late, and either didn't know that this, their best shot, was extremely lame, or were too pressed to get to their complimentary wings to ask the girls to repose, refocus their energies, and "give up just one more smile for the Chosun Ilbo."

Yeah, it's gets progressively harder to get everyone with their eyes open the more people you add to the picture, but come on – it's not that hard if you have wait staff who are making a point to pose for publicity shots. And you can at least have them look at your camera. Shoddy, shoddy photo work, I say.

But as a blog picture done by a non-paid blogger, the shot's fine. I just assume that it came from the Chosun (no photo credit is given) because of its proximity to the link in question and characteristic publicity shot style. It also looks like it was taken with a 28mm lens, which suggests higher-end equipment than your standard point-and-shoot, although the lines between pro and low-end have blurred in recent years. Anyway, if this appeared in the newspaper, it strikes me as a pretty lame shot.

That's what I wanted to say, actually. Damn, I be long-winded.

Here are some photos, taken by Chung Sung-jun/Getty Images, and published in the Orlando Sentinel, of the girls being trained by their American founders. Definitely better photo work there, and definitely working with a 20-24mm lens length.

Obviously made in a single trip, it's not the best work in the world, but it does the job – professionally. And as a photographer, you can't always get the perfect shots within the restraints of the time schedule and the time the company wants to allow you free reign to shoot, but you can at least get the women in the publicity shot to look at your own camera for a shot or five.

Here's the Korea Times' contribution, photo credit to Shim Hyun-chul. Ho-hum. Lots of generally non-distinct, out-of-focus action in the background and, "Oh, look! A white chick!" Pretty sub-standard fare.

Which goes to show you that the best photographers tend to be the ones that are part of groups of good photographers (e.g. Getty, Magnum). It also goes to show that the old adage, "You get what you pay for" is true. Good shots from Getty – pricier than sending a single reporter with a "dica" to grab the amatuerish-looking shot that led off this blog post. Which is why the Orlando Sentinel got better shots than Korean domestic photographers.

All the photographers were Korean; it's just that the good one was sending his pictures to an international picture agency.

As always, the Korea Herald won't allow access to anyone other than "Premium Service" subscribers. Well, in the age of Web 2.0, with blogs and deep linking being the way a lot of content gets passed around, this 1997-era idea that anyone actually cares enough to pay to read old news stories online – unless you're the New York Times and it might actually be lengthy, well-researched, and worth reading – that's a pretty stupid idea.

The Korea Herald gets the real booby prize today for worst (by it being unaccessible and hence, to me, non-existent) picture of them all.

Pun intended.