Against the odds

R

RML

Guest
We've had a thread on women RFF members and it seems pretty clear RFF is seriously underprivileged. Some of the members here have women photographer friends but many don't. It seems either women are just not interested in discussing cameras and photography, or there are just very few women photographers. I leave the conclusions to each and everyone of you.

I believe coincidences don't exist so I wasn't too surprised to read that thread while I was reading the book Against the odds: women pioneers in the first hundred years of photography by Martin W. Sandler.

The book's title grabbed my attention in the shop and made me buy it. It was a good buy. The book is devided into eight chapters , covering the early beginnings of photography, portraiture, photography as art, documentary, the native Americans in photography, landscape and nature, photogrpahy for the printed media, and experimental and innovations in photography. Each of these chapters tells how women photographers played significant rolls in each field.

Well-known women photographers like Dorothea lange, Berenice Abbott, Helen Levitt, Imogen Cunningham and Margaret Bourke-White have, of course, a place in this book as do largely unkmown women like Frances Benjamin Johnston, Evelyn Cameron, Elizabeth Ellen Roberts, Lotte Jacobi, Getrude Käsebier, Doris Ulmann, Consuelo Kanaga, Alice Austin, Amelia C van Buren, Jane Reece, Toni Frissell, Lisette Model, Marion Post Wolcott, Marion Palfi, Laura Gilpin, Florence Randall, Lily White, Virna Haffer, Ruth Bernard, Esther Bubley, Charlotte Corpron, Barbara Morgan, Sonya Noskowiak, and many many others.

This book truly is an ode to all women photographers, famous or unknown, past or present. The biographies are necessarily limited in length and scope, and the number of photos by each named woman is usually limited to one, or two at the most. These limitations are perhaps one of the strong points of this book: it makes you want to know more about these women and their work.

The book is also solely concerned with women from the United States; no mentioning of women from the rest of the American continents, Europe, Africa or Asia. This limited scope is quite useful for the book: it gives a clear starting point for a thread that runs through a single nation's history, from the frontier days of the 19th century till about the 1950s. It leaves, however, the reader wishing to know more about photographers in genreal, and women photographers specifically, from other countries, cultures and continents.

The book is well written and seemingly well-researched without becoming too academic or high brow. In my opinion, this is one of the nicest photography books I've read in a long time, and it definitely deserves its place on my book shelf.
 
One American woman that had a powerful vision was Diane Arbus (sp?). While her time was short, she dared to do evocative work that many still call "strange" but is undeniably moving.
I hope someone (hopefully female) takes up the challenge of making a world-wide version of women photographers.
 
Just want to mention two more that I like: Mary Ellen Mark; Inge Morath.

Roman
 
Marion Post Wolcott indeed has a plce in the book. Looking at her photos posted in the book she truly is one of the least recognised photogs of the FSA period. I already have a very good on Dorothea Lange (Bullfinch press), whose work is great (and the Against the odds book also shows photos from an earlier-than-FSA period of her!), and I want to have a book on MPW as well.

Another fav of mine from the AtO book is Consuelo Kanaga. I've never heard of hear, let alone seen work of her or a book on her, but I'm determined to find out more about her.
 
I recently read Karen Copaken Kagan's autobiography, 'Shutterbabe'. Great read, and she has a great eye. Dunno if she still shoots except for herself, now.

Cheers,
Steve
 
st3ph3nm said:
I recently read Karen Copaken Kagan's autobiography, 'Shutterbabe'. Great read, and she has a great eye. Dunno if she still shoots except for herself, now.

Cheers,
Steve

Steve

I've always wondered about that book. So it's aworthy read?

Russ
 
Definitely a worthy read. She's writes as well as she photographs, and it's at times harrowing and at times very funny. Her comments on how to pick a photojournalist's nationanality by their boots are great, and her comments on pro photographers and their toys are hilarious - esp. regarding Leicas etc. Good read, great photos. Her shots taken in a Romanian (IIRC) orphanage are especially moving, even more so when you read about how she came across them and the conditions they experienced.

Cheers,
Steve
 
Deborah Kogan....who's she???

Deborah Kogan....who's she???

Hey if your thinking about reading "Shutterbabe" by Debroah Kogan you just might want to read this letter of reply posted on The Digital Journalist (www.digitaljournalist.org) by James Nachtwey.

Here is the direct link:

www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0303/nachtwey.html

He disputes many of her claims in "Shutterbabe" and states quite clearly that he does not know her from a bar of soap and denies her claim that she "gave" him the story (address/contacts etc) for the Romanian Orphanage story.

Nachtwey says,"However, to say that she handed me the story is totally false. As I said, I had already been working on it for some time. She might have told me about one particular orphanage that she had visited, but I had already been to many. In looking at the chapter on Romania in my book Inferno, I don't see a single image from the institution Copaken Kogan claims she told me about. That she might have shared information about an interesting location with a colleague is not unusual in our profession, and it is something that I always appreciate when it happens. But that is a long stretch from her claim that she told me about the whole story, and therefore, by implication, when I presented the story to editors, I was underhandedly taking credit for another photographer's research. Before her book was published she sent me a manuscript to read for accuracy. I pointed out that this inaccuracy and asked her to correct it before publication. She agreed she would, but when the book was published, there it was. Not only is the story untrue, but also in effect it gives her credit for the journalistic work I had done totally independently, and it implies that I clandestinely took credit for her work. That is a damaging statement, and it is untrue. I don't know why would she make such a claim unless it was to make herself appear important at the expense of both a colleague's reputation and the truth. The fact is that the orphanages in Romania had to be revealed to the world. It didn't really matter who did it. In the end many journalists, from all branches of the press and from many countries, contributed to our greater awareness of that atrocity, and out of that awareness came change. I made my own small contribution, and according to Copaken Kogan, she made her own. That's what matters. "
 
Thanks for that. Very interesting. I have to say, when I read that section, and in particular her reference to Nachtwey, it didn't seem to me to ring "true", if you know what I mean. Or rather, it seemed, on reading, a particularly subjective view of what happened. Which you'd expect from an autobiography, obviously, but that particular section seemed more so, if that makes sense. Great read nontheless.

Cheers,
Steve
 
Back
Top Bottom