Why did some critics describe the photographs in New Documents as voyeuristic or exploitative?

The 1967 exhibition New Documents, curated by John Szarkowski at the Museum of Modern Art, featured the work of Diane Arbus, Lee Friedlander, and Garry Winogrand. While the exhibition was pivotal in defining a new, subjective form of documentary photography, some critics labeled the work as voyeuristic or exploitative.1

This criticism stemmed from the photographers' unflinching focus on their subjects, particularly in the case of Arbus, who frequently photographed individuals living on the margins of society, such as people with disabilities or those outside traditional norms of "normalcy". Critics who viewed the work as voyeuristic felt that the photographers were taking pleasure in observing the private or "sordid" lives of others from a distance, effectively turning the disadvantaged into objects of spectacle.123

Conversely, others argued that the photographers were revealing the humanity of figures often ignored in daily life. Ultimately, the exhibition shifted the perception of the photographer from a neutral recorder of facts to an artist with a distinct, personal point of view.1