Books on the Philosophy of Photography

[anu L ogy]

I always find these debates amusing. One time I was watching a movie and someone asked William Eggleston "Do you think photographs are permenant while reality remains elusive?"

Philosophical questions like this have never really interested me.

Eggleston's response: "The trouble is -- whatever it is about pictures, photographs, its just about impossible to follow up with words. They dont have anything to do with each other."

So why bother?

 

[Andy Kibber]

I always find these debates amusing. One time I was watching a movie and someone asked William Eggleston "Do you think photographs are permenant while reality remains elusive?"

Philosophical questions like this have never really interested me.

Eggleston's response: "The trouble is -- whatever it is about pictures, photographs, its just about impossible to follow up with words. They dont have anything to do with each other."

So why bother?

Some folks enjoy writing about art and others enjoy reading about it. Seems like reason enough to bother.

Have you ever read John Szarkowski, Gerry Badger or Peter Schjeldahl? Not as philosphy-ish as Sontag and Barthes and they've produced some very interesting writing about photography.

 

[anu L ogy]

I have read some Szarknowski. I respect his contributions to the world of photography, but I do not connect with his writings for some reason.

 

[lawrence]

I have read some Szarknowski. I respect his contributions to the world of photography, but I do not connect with his writings for some reason.

His writings are among the few that I do connect with.

 

[Andy Kibber]

I have read some Szarknowski. I respect his contributions to the world of photography, but I do not connect with his writings for some reason.

Which essays have you read? His introduction to William Eggleston's Guide is excellent and Looking at Photographs is probably my favorite piece of writing about photography.

 

[anu L ogy]

Andy,

I have read the into to Eggleston's guide, but not the second essay that you mentioned. I will have to pick up the second one some time and give it a shot. I think my primary complaint about the intro to Eggleston's Guide was that it was too wordy. I read it about two years ago so perhaps I will give that another chance.

Jim

 

[Saganich]

The question posed to Eggleston isn't a philosophical question as much as an abuse of language. His response is in the right direction, that these issues which surround photography, images, etc. push the limits of language. I would say that it is an interesting question to pose, whether images and language have anything to do with one another. I wouldn't take it for granted that is a correct statement however. Szarkowski brings photographs, as objects, into the realm of language in a concise and eloquent manner which is a good starting point for philosophical investigation into the nature of photography.

 

[Chris101]

His writings are among the few that I do connect with.

I love his simple description critical style. Looking ... is one of my favorite photo books - no, one of my favorite books of all time.

 

[ramosa]

i read--er, tried to read--camera lucida. it wasn't engaging, nor "lucida," enough for me 😉

 

[Andy Kibber]

What I like about Szarkowski, Badger and Schjeldahl -- and Parr too -- is that they don't write for academics or others engaged in critical theory. They're much more readable and engaging than Sontag and the gang.

 

[Mark A. Fisher]

Three more to check out:

The Decisive Moment, by Henri Cartier-Bresson
The Ongoing Moment, by Geoff Dyer
At the Edge of the Light, by David Travis

Happy Reading!

Mark

 

[Vilk]

She followed up...

http://books.google.ca/books?id=Msv...ook_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAA

For the only-photographer-can-say-anything folks, Depardon's Errance is a thoughtful, pleasant, low-key read, focusing on a very special kind of photography. The answers are personal; the questions are good.

 

[NickTrop]

No need to read any books on this subject. Photography is Zen. The here. The now. The spontaneous. Just let it happen. Would you read a book on "The Philosophy of Sex"? Reading such a book and trying to think to incorporate whatever nonsense it prescribes during the decisive moment would be disastrous. Photography, like sex, is one of those "just let it happen" things. Just read books on technique. (...on either).

^ And that's all the "philosophy" you need to know about the subject. Now run along.

 

[cz23]

...Bill Jay wrote "Negative/positive: a philosophy of photography," but I have not read it....

LensWork published an excerpt from Jay's essay. Well worth a look. See page 31: http://www.lenswork.com/lw31e.pdf

John

 

[Roger Hicks]

No need to read any books on this subject. Photography is Zen. The here. The now. The spontaneous. Just let it happen. Would you read a book on "The Philosophy of Sex"? Reading such a book and trying to think to incorporate whatever nonsense it prescribes during the decisive moment would be disastrous. Photography, like sex, is one of those "just let it happen" things. Just read books on technique. (...on either).

^ And that's all the "philosophy" you need to know about the subject. Now run along.

You never read The Kama Sutra, The Koka Shastra or The Perfumed Garden in your teens?

Technique, sure. But aso philosophy.

Cheers,

R.

 

[NickTrop]

You never read The Kama Sutra, The Koka Shastra or The Perfumed Garden in your teens?

Technique, sure. But aso philosophy.

Cheers,

R.

Did read Karma Sutra (the video is better). Hmmmm. Good point you made thar, Mr Picket. I'm still 100% correct, mind you (I will never concede - NEVAH!), but good point none the less... 🙂 Cheers.

 

[mastaliu]

Memories of a Dog by Daido Moriyama

 

[JohnL]

I first read Sontag about 30 years ago, whenever it was that it first came out. I found it pretty dull and irrelevant to me. I read it again a couple of years ago and rather enjoyed it.

I can't stand Barthes, because he does not seem to be able to express his thinking clearly and simply. This sort of writing makes me suspect that the author does not really have a clear grasp of what he's trying to say. Of course, I do realise that he probably does, but he just hasn't made the effort necessary to get it across effectively.

It reminds me of an important physicist many years ago (I think it was Rutherford) who, whenever approached by one of his students with some breakthrough idea, would tell him to go down to his favourite pub, and tell it all to the barmaid, and to come back when he (the student) could see a glimmer of understanding in her eyes. I believe that Rutherford (if it was he) was on the right track.

On the whole, though, good or bad, I don't think these books help much to make us better photographers. Books on technique for starters, then books on composition (I'd suggest just about anything by Freeman Patterson), then look at lots of books of work by well-known photographers, then take lots of photos. Then do it all again.

Just my $0.02.

 

[Andy Kibber]

On the whole, though, good or bad, I don't think these books help much to make us better photographers.

I agree but the good ones are still fun to read. 🙂