Photographic conventions – Transference of Compassion?

I came across (Notes on) Politics, Theory & Photography, through Conscientious today… a great link to Jim Johnson’s post regarding “Vividness”… See his preliminary e-paper here, and this post Photographic Conventions & Their Vicissitudes: The Irony of “Vividness” .
For me, the notion of the negative potential of “othering” that I’ve been thinking about – and “visual oblivion” that has been rattling around in my brain is articulated quite interesting in Jim Johnson’s post.

Still gnawing at me …

Photographic conventions – Transference of Compassion
Training viewer’s to see / Indoctrination / Perceptual Sensitivity…
“visual oblivion”
“othering”
and now “Vividness”…

Learning from the visual cultural landscape… Somewhere in this a parallel to the problems of empty (draining off) symbolism in the architectural debate contained with in the book “Learning from Las Vegas” … but yet still wanting to embrace “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture”… by Robert Venturi.

…examining the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

Unconscious Stream of Ugliness, Oblivion and Othering…

Reflections upon a photograph to remember or forget?

“He knows that everything he writes [or photographs*] is consigned to posterity (oblivion’s other, seemingly more benign, face)” Joyce Carol Oates 

 

* There is something gnawing at me about the notion of “othering” that was discussed by Amanda Koster during her recent visit to the Newspace Center for Photography.

Two kinds of photographs:

Photo by Renee C. Byer
In an effort to get Derek outside, Cyndie wheels him through the front door passing by artwork and cards given to her son by classmates at Bridgeway Island Elementary School. “Just like a newborn, he needs to get out and get some air,” she says. It was his last trip outdoors.

from 2007 Pulitzer Prize winner Renee C Byer, for Feature Photography.

And,

the image below (previous post)- of Caxton – by Amanda Koster

I began thinking about this briefly in a previous post, and now with a little more reflection, I think my opinion is becoming more obvious to me; that it has to do with acknowledging a particularly powerful characteristic of still photography which is the effect of a condensed objectification of experience.

My opinion: the emotional content and symbolism in the “prize receipent” feature work by Byer – is initially gripping (emotionally), but quickly I become oblivious and hopeless. “Going towards the light” for the last time only leads me assume the predictable end – I have to have the last image in the feature series in order to close out my emotional state – it completes and releases me emotionally. I am powerless and helpless.

For me, the moment when a photograph (or series of photographs) resists this condensed experience, it changes from story telling to something more nuanced and akin to allusion. There is more depth to an image that orchestrates the voyeuristic quality of photography; to contain both intimacy and distance. It’s like a peculiar detail in a written story that sticks out – that you stub your toe on – something that allows you to project a personal connection…makes it real to you.

I particularly like the fact that the microphone from the interview with Caxton is left in the picture from “Aids is Knocking”, a reminder of opportunity for “dialogue” – along with the particular detail of the “CAT” logo on the tee-shirt. The image alludes to interaction and connection – blending symbolism and realism.

In the context of image fatigue in our visual culture, so much of what we see published invites us to enter a state of visual oblivion – a state of being disregarded or forgotten. I think partly this oblivion is from a lack of attention span coupled with some perverted need to see the ugliness that is potentially all around us. Perhaps this need to see ugliness, reassures that our own lives are relatively untouched and thereby we remain blissfully ignorant? Or, we have a visual dipstick on normalcy. Either way, this stream of ugliness is happening to others, it helps us to somehow manage to get up and get through the day – because thankfully, we are not confronted with the situation at hand. So that is the idea of photography’s negative “othering” potential… to help us live with oblivion.

It has me on the lookout for images that are powerful enough to sustain attention, to promote compassion, to get us to snap out of the hypnotic state of oblivion?

Thanks to a post by Alec Soth on his blog… “Quiz” got me to thinking…

…examining the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

Prize Recipient…??

Sometimes, possibly maybe, it is possible to live within the oblivion.

2007 Pulitzer Prize recipient for feature photography: Renée C. Byer

Awarded to Renée C. Byer of The Sacramento Bee for her intimate portrayal of a single mother and her young son as he loses his battle with cancer.

More from NYT…

“When someone says, ‘My child has cancer,’ it’s almost overwhelming for people, so they turn away rather than becoming more compassionate, and if this can bring some compassion, I think that’s very important,” she said, adding that she had stayed in touch with Ms. French.

…examing the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

[update] Go see this… Amanda Koster

“I would study hard so that some day I too would be seen as someone who had succeeded.”

In March and April of 2004 Amanda Koster traveled to Rabuor, Kenya for Rabuor Village Project (RVP) to document through photos, video and stories what 12 million AIDS orphans and widows really look like. Amanda decided that instead of a smattering of photos and statistics she wanted to take more of “a day in the life” of Rabuor hoping this would offer better insight into the HIV/AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa.

Newspace Center for Photography
1632 SE 10th Ave., Portland, OR 97214

Saturday April 14th 6:30-8:30pm FREE
Amanda Koster slide presentation & lecture with Susan Anstine

UPDATE:

I went.

The pictures are full of dignity and pride and hope given a desperate human crisis situation. It is a little against the grain from what one might expect where it would be more likely to see the devastation / disaster and despair.

A lesson for all the “Post Katrina” photo work out there.

Koster described the pictures as being “a day in the life of…” with an attitude of trying to minimize the “othering” of these people and their problems so that we can approach them not as “those poor pitiful people” but as “people just like us” trying to solve a problem… I think that comes across pretty nicely in the photos.

A couple of rambling thoughts stick with me upon a little reflection:

A question put to Koster regarding comparisons of “Fine Art” VS “Documentary” in defining a body of work – is no doubt a tough question to consider but it yielded some insight to Koster’s thinking. I’m not sure it is a good question after all as I feel the definitions for either label have a lot of overlap.

I came away with Koster’s point of view as something about “Fine Art” an “aesthetic moment” and that is of course a moving grey range of criteria – depends upon the viewer, circumstance and context…. But in a basic way it is about beauty – a beautiful moment made visual. Perhaps it is more broadly a moment when the artist / photographer begins to get into a photograph with a series of decisions to set up the circumstances of the photograph. Whereas – documentary might be less about finding or portraying an aesthetic experience and more about the recording of visual material “as-is”.

The question is pretty messy either way… And I’m not sure it is all that useful…

A better comparison was discussed that made more sense to me as to the differences between photojournalism where the photographer is supposed to be “invisible” to the scene and not insert his/herself into the moment. “Pure record”.

That said though, isn’t there almost always some fine art component depending on the selection of the particular moment that is portrayed?

…examing the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

Sol LeWitt – “Make an unstraight line…”

Just learned of the passing of Sol LeWitt: perhaps, not unlike his view on conceptual art:

“He also liked the inherent impermanence of Conceptual art, maybe because it dovetailed with his lack of pretense: having started to make wall drawings for exhibitions in the 1960s, he embraced the fact that these could be painted over after the shows. (Walls, unlike canvases or pieces of paper, kept the drawings two-dimensional, he also thought.) He wasn’t making precious one-of-a-kind objects for posterity, he said. Objects are perishable. But ideas need not be. ”

from NYT -story 9 April 2007 – Kimmelman.

LeWitt – has managed to extend what matters beyond his physical presence…

And this from Portland Art + News….

a bit from local artist J. Hayward whose life was changed while working on a
LeWitt project:

“Many young artists were changed. This drawing was to be made of “unstraight” lines. As a highschooler, I felt I needed a little more direction and asked the artist to clarify what kind of “unstraight” line he had in mind. Was he thinking wildly frenetic or just plane wobbly? ”

The perfect characteristics of a narrator – to let the story be it’s own narration and to find out what the story will say…

…examining the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

783 sheets (and counting) – Richter’s Atlas

I’ve finally had a chance to look through some of Richter’s Atlas (published by d.a.p.)- and with so much imagery – so many photos, sketches, models, I am amazed at the sheer volume – 783 sheets so far. It is a wonderful book – a glimpse into the images about / around / behind /before / after the painted works…

One of my favorites is at the Des Moines Art Center…

But, I wonder what is the atlas really collecting and what’s the purpose of publishing it as a body of work ? Memories and reasons for paintings?

Some of the photographs are so well composed, I have to wonder if the desired image was already formed in the mind and the photograph is a way of testing it out – before it is transformed into a painting.

I find it interesting where the impulse to finally paint an image comes from – the creative tipping point. Photographs are like rough drafts. A collection of image models. Or, as the introduction suggests, a way of filtering all the possible images to locate the “right image”.

Of interest are the photographic experiments – double exposures and self portraits – sometimes labeled “for prints”.

I don’t know that there are any Richter photographs that are themselves catalogued as finished work. It would be interesting if there were – would they look like Richter’s paintings or be something else?

Where a painting is a “one of a kind” object – existing as its own image – Photography is always of something – and can never seem to escape that … Both involve the hand of the artist – decisions, exclusions, technique, product are all employed to produce – to create “the image”.

“One only makes a photo to make a photo, and if you’re lucky, you will discover it later for a painting. – Gerhard Richter”

…examining the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….

Things To Remember By

Reading the Accidental Masterpiece today and a passage stuck with me, a passage considering Sol LeWitt, the conceptual proposition for images only found in translation by other people into drawings or sculptures, and “The Art of Making Art Without Lifting A Finger”… Kimmelman writes of LeWitt:

“He didn’t care about making precious one-of-a-kind objects for posterity. Objects are perishable, he realized. Ideas need not be.”

It made me think about the way that technology / technique / product /presentation and reproduction all effect the “modern” photograph. In the end – to aim for a lasting impression – to make a photograph able to form an after-image held in the mind when you close your eyes. Perhaps the best way to show modern photography is to project it on the wall – to have it exist only for the duration of the moment of looking? And test whether an after-image lingers…

Do we need prints only to remind ourselves ?

…examining the threshold at which ordinary visibility ends and perception begins ….