12 October 2006

on photography

I've been thinking a bit about photography recently. Mostly because I've been reading an excellent book by Susan Sontag titled "On Photography". Susan Sontag is one of my favourite authors, she writes fiction, and non-fiction on a whole range of topics. I find her thoughts really insightful. Her book "On Photography" explores a number of different ideas about why we take photographs and what this signifies.

She ponders why it is that we find beauty in everyday items, the'everyday beautiful' as Nick and Jonno call it. The mundane, or the everyday has for many years been a major focus of photography: "bleak factory buildings and billboard-cluttered avenues look beautiful, through the camera's eye". Relating this to a surrealist asethetic she notes that "the Surrealist ragpicker's acuity was directed to finding beautiful what other people found ugly or without interest and relevance - bric-a-brac, naive or pop objects, urban debris". And she notes how in contrast to paintings which look worse over time, that photographs, "when they get scrofulous, tarnished, stained, cracked, faded still look good; do often look better". And she says that photography in this way is like architecture whose works are subject to the "same inexorable promotion through the passage of time" arguing that the Parthenon for example probably looks better as ruins. It is true that overtime, all photos become artistic, beautiful, unique - because of their reference to the past. Check out Found magazine to see our fascination of old photos and found scraps of things... my favourite from that site, is a note, that simply says, "Crossing the Delaware... snakes, wolves, space, the Century..." - cryptic, but equally fascinating!

Sontag also explores many other motivations for, and symbolism in photography. There is obviously the widely known concept of the photographer as voyeur - which is at its most strangest in photos of war victims - where the photographer has made a choice to photograph rather than assist the victim. Strange. She talks about boredom (an interesting concept for me) - she says that "boredom is just the reverse side of fascination" - both depend on being outside rather than inside a situation, and one leads to the other. In fact, the Chinese have a theory that you pass through boredom into fascination. Sontag notes that many photographers are outsiders who do not relate to the images they take (they are removed, distanced through the lens) - not intervening in their subjects' lives - just visiting.

One other obvious connotation with photographs - is death and the past. Photographs are a reminder of death and "an invitation to sentimentality. Photographs turn the past into an object of tender regard, scrambling moral distinctions and disarming historical judgements by the generalised pathos of looking at the past". I like this quote: "photography is the inventory of mortality". Commenting on observing photos of Polish Jews in WW2 - days, weeks, or months before they would die, Sontag says, "photographs state the innocence, the vulnerability of lives heading toward their own destruction, and this link between photography and death haunts all photographs of people".

8 comments:

Wurly said...

Well, this post is quite big, so I'd thought I'd finish a few other thoughts here.

Sontag notes how "nobody ever discovered ugliness through photographs. But many, through photographs, have discovered beauty". Further, that people are motivated to take photos in order to find something beautiful: "Nobody exclaims, 'isn't that ugly! I must take a photograph of it' Even if someone did say that, all it would mean is: 'I find that ugly thing... beautiful"

And its is common for those "who have glimpsed something beautiful to express regret at not having been able to photograph it. So succesful has been the camera's role in beautifying the world that photographs, rather than the world, have become the standard of the beautiful."

It's so true - I myself have high standards or expectations with my photos - many I disregard as ugly and delete them or don't show them to anyone... it seems a search for beauty drives us. These thoughts almost make me want to stop photographing at all, so that I can just enjoy things as they are and only rely on my own memory to satisfy me of how things were or how they looked - ie not to have photographs create my memory for me...

cyberpainter said...

That's very interesting andrew. A couple things I thought of... I know that when I'm on a trip or something, it's annoying to me to be constantly videotaped by my mate. It's like I'm just there to preserve the memory for the future. It takes away from being present in the moment. Also, I've seen quite a bit of modern photography that just seems to exist for the shock value. It got so I didn't want to go to the photography floor at the SF Museum because of what I might see there. However I have a great appreciation for found object art, and creating something new from ordinary things. And I love the beauty in textures of old things.

Wurly said...

Yeah - hey! Good to hear from you. I guess you saw my few recent posts on the Green Screen? What's been happening over there? any gossip?

I can relate to your experience about the friend always trying to capture photos of each place, and I think I've probably been that person at times.

Something else that either occurred to me while reading this book or by talking to someone is about the abundance of sunset photos. We've all taken them before (and I probably will continue to) so I don't mean to judge others for taking these photos, but they have become so ubiquitous that it must now impact on our thoughts when we see a sunset. The first is usually, where's my camera?

cyberpainter said...

Hey there Andrew. Hmm can't think of any gossip. But I'm headed down to the city soon to see a friend and my sister, and may catch up with a couple gs-ers while I'm there. A mini gs meetup!

I have to admit getting obsessed by all the nice foliage around here in upstate NY this fall. I'm not used to it so much anymore living out in CA for so long. So I have taken way too many pics of that cliché theme. Also some halfway decent Monarch butterfly pics while they were stopping on their migration. If you want to check them out, such as they are, just add butterfly1.jpg (1-6) to the end of my website address. I took really close up ones later that you can see the scales on the wings. Some things you can't help being in awe of, like centuries of people before you.

jnxyz said...

maybe we should start a mundane game photo group - post the ones youwould normally just delete etc!

Mind if I post your musings to the EB group forum?

Anonymous said...

yeah, go ahead...

Anonymous said...

I found this interesting article on photography and thought I'd share...
"The main problem with tourists is that they don't take enough time to create a photo," says Antonio Boccaccio, the guide on my photography tour of the city. "They take pictures - whereas photographers make images." Antonio knows a thing or two about making images, having spent 20 years as a National Geographic photographer.

http://travel.guardian.co.uk/cities/story/1,,1929480,00.html

Wurly said...

but then that smacks of arrogance - anyone can take a good photo whether it be by good luck, or bad judgement it can still turn out quite amazing...

This brings photography back to the whole high art vs low art debate.

Sure, 'tourists' (as a generic term for photo takers on holiday) take average photos - but of course, their photos have other purposes, such as documenting...