Though Sherman remained hesitant to link her work with a feminist theory works from her later series read differently to her previous Untitled Film Stills. It has been commented on that the work does in fact mimic the male gaze intentionally; probing men and women alike to view a commodified version of the artist. In a piece named Untitled #93 (Fig.2), Sherman is posed tearfully in bedsheets. Eva Respini co-wrote Cindy Sherman (2012) with Johanna Burton and John Waters, published by the Museum Of Modern Art, New York. And in It, the works of Sherman is rigorously critiqued; including the critique of never seen before works across the thirty- five years of the artists career. Respini has written and spoken about the victimisation of women particularly in the work of Untitled #93.
“…A blonde woman, sweaty, clutching at her sheets was described by some critics as a woman who looked as if she had been abused. In fact, this was not at all the intention of the artist, these photographs are all untitled for a very good reason and Sherman refuses to give titles to her works because she doesn’t want to lay on a narrative. Sherman has made the viewers complicit in the idea of looking and the idea of photographing, they’ve come upon this very intimate moment where these women are alone, and since they seem to be in these vulnerable positions it really makes us aware that we’re being voyeurs.”
– Ava Respini, Audio MoMa (2012)
Though Respini is clearly a fan of Sherman’s; being quick to defend the plausible idea that Sherman is posed as an abuse victim. As the curator for the 2012 MoMa Sherman exhibition, Respini unrequitedly opened up a loophole in sherman’s non-narrative intentions. Presuming that all of the comments Sherman has made about her stance on feminism are true, there lies an interesting dynamic for what her work intends to provoke. If the work was not meant to add a commentary on the political atmosphere of the early eighties- then why was it so imperative that the work would be read not to supress women?