Martin Parr

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gp-ak

Member
Local time
5:52 PM
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
24
I was at a bookstore the other day browsing through photo books, two that particularly interest me were No Small Journeys by Robert Adams, photographs of people in parking lots, and Martin Parr's Mexico.

After looking at Adam's work I was struck at how much humanity and tenderness he was able to draw out of ordinary people in a boring, flat place. It made Parr look flat and grouchy, rendering the very real human drama in Mexico just a boring as the plastic placemats he took pictures of. I ended it up putting the book back disgusted. Parr, a man of a well off nation traveled to a struggling and exploited nation specifcally to make everyone look ugly, and profit from it, it struck me. Surely the commercialism that he photographs is an ill, but taking lumpy portraits of Mexicans in harsh flash lighting with a macro lens to make them look even uglier seems exploitative. Leering can only take you so far, and Martin Parr seems unwilling to try anything else.

I'll end with the opening quotation of No Small Journeys


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"If we come upon innocence, beauty, caring, joy, or courage, even in lost places, are we not obliged to acknowledge them in defiance of ironists?"[/FONT]
 
I don't know... both of these guys have their own styles and couldn't be farther away from each other stylistically. I tend to like Martin Parr's stuff generally speaking (even Mexico) as well as Robert Adams. I read about MP's influences recently and the look of his photos made more sense to me. One person's ugly is another person's beautiful.

I tend to like anyone who brings something different to photography... which both of these guys did / do. Not everyone is satisfied with regurgitating calendar / national geographic style photos.
 
gp-ak said:
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"If we come upon innocence, beauty, caring, joy, or courage, even in lost places, are we not obliged to acknowledge them in defiance of ironists?"[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Lovely, indeed. But, if the OP means we are more likely to find those attributes in places like Mexico or other "exploited" nations, I'll have to disagree. People are the same everywhere. We just see other behavior through the filter of our own culture and experiences.
 
Yes, I like both Martin Parr and Robert Adams work. If you only have cloying sentimentalism ("innocence, beauty, caring, joy, or courage") the message very soon becomes meaningless. I mean, its not like some people in Mexico aren't going to fit MP's picture profile, and why should Mexico get off easily, he's been consistent with every other nation he's visited to highlight consumerism and affectations.

Steve
 
gp-ak said:
I was at a bookstore the other day browsing through photo books, two that particularly interest me were No Small Journeys by Robert Adams, photographs of people in parking lots, and Martin Parr's Mexico.

After looking at Adam's work I was struck at how much humanity and tenderness he was able to draw out of ordinary people in a boring, flat place. It made Parr look flat and grouchy, rendering the very real human drama in Mexico just a boring as the plastic placemats he took pictures of. I ended it up putting the book back disgusted. Parr, a man of a well off nation traveled to a struggling and exploited nation specifcally to make everyone look ugly, and profit from it, it struck me. Surely the commercialism that he photographs is an ill, but taking lumpy portraits of Mexicans in harsh flash lighting with a macro lens to make them look even uglier seems exploitative. Leering can only take you so far, and Martin Parr seems unwilling to try anything else.

I'll end with the opening quotation of No Small Journeys

(Edit: I see Andy Kibber beat me to it)


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"If we come upon innocence, beauty, caring, joy, or courage, even in lost places, are we not obliged to acknowledge them in defiance of ironists?"[/FONT]
Click to expand...

As jsrockit says, they're very far apart stylistically. Whether or not Parr's style appeals to you is a matter of personal taste. I can appreciate his style although I'd probably favor Robert Adam's photographs.

That being said, I don't find your moral objection to Parr's work warranted. At least not if you're only relating them to his Mexico series. I don't think poor people have any more or less a right to look good in a picture. If Parrs style offends you, fine, but then it should do so whether he photographs the English middle class, poor Mexicans or the high society.
And I find one line in your post specifically appalling: "taking lumpy portraits of Mexicans in harsh flash lighting with a macro lens to make them look even uglier seems exploitative" (my emphasis). So Mexicans look ugly to begin with??
 
If you only have cloying sentimentalism ("innocence, beauty, caring, joy, or courage")
Click to expand...

Innocence = cloying sentiment?

I understand that a lifetime spent flush to the gunwales in commercial imagery designed expressly to get one to reach reflexively for his wallet when his emotional buttons are pushed could lead one to become skeptical in the face of yet another attempt to conflate genuine human emotion with a cash outlay, but even allowing for that, this statement seems cynical in the extreme.
 
Meh... If you are disgusted, buy Halmark cards and be happy.
Click to expand...

No middle ground, eh? Mock irony or cheap sentiment are the only choices?

The dismissive tone helps explain why the reach of America's art world is increasingly confined to ghettos on the coasts.
 
Don't even waste your time with Parr and his work... His a self-promoting, cynical hack who has no respect for his subjects or photography itself.

I will not say anything else or it will be nasty. Parr brings the worst in a lot of photographers in terms of opinions expressed about his work and his reach to the bubble-head 'creative class' and being their court jester... in fact most Magnum guys won't even discuss him.
 
Last edited:
His work is contemporary and thought provoking. Anyone who seeks beauty and aesthetic ambience from a photograph will not like his work. The fact that he shows the subject matter in a different light. One which can show them as not the uber race we would all like to think we are, does not mean it is not worthy compared to pictures of models, cute kids and couples holding hands on a beach watching the sun set. Martin Parr shows kitch is alive and well and amongst us all.
 
I understand how one can find Parr's work in general exploitative and I agree to a certain extent. However, it's not much more exploitative than other so called "street photography". Whether or not you make them look ugly, when you photograph people who didn't ask to be photographed you're using them for your own gains.

One other problem I have with the kind of criticism put forth in this thread is this huge concern with beauty. Why is it not ok to be ugly? This whole discourse about ugliness always boils down to the cliché that one should find beauty in ugliness, but why? Saying something ugly is beautiful is ultimately just saying that ugliness is unacceptable.
 
Why is it always the Philosophy threads...

If Parr likes ugly for books, I'll expect a call from him.

"Portraits of RFF Moderators"
 
...compared to pictures of models, cute kids and couples holding hands on a beach watching the sun set.
Click to expand...

Again, why the polarizing "either/or" of statements like this? So anyone who doesn't engage with Parr's work must, in your estimation, have framed Anne Geddes or Norman Rockwell prints on the wall?
 
Parr's only genuine contribution to photography has been his implicit message that people can photograph 'anything' and its 'Art'.

But the man is a genius of self-promotion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
blazeicehockey said:
His work is contemporary and thought provoking. Anyone who seeks beauty and aesthetic ambience from a photograph will not like his work.
Click to expand...

I seek (among other qualities) beauty and aesthetic ambience from photographs, and I like Parr's work a great deal.

Not everyone shares the same aesthetic sensibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom