charjohncarter
Veteran
Thanks Bob, here is the Stanford University history of race. It seems to me that there isn't such a thing as Biological race (modern 'science race' was thought up by fatuous irreflective 19th century nitwits), they basically assumed wrongly it is only ethnic, cultural, and geographical, but tried to make it science (after measuring heads and noses, etc). It really might be better to forget about it, and enjoy. AND it isn't a topic (that should be discussed) on our forum.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/
DHK
-
I respectfully disagree. I think it’s an acceptable place to discuss the wrongs of the past in an effort to right society and culture. I can’t imagine Mr. Frank recommending to not discuss the purpose and essence of his masterpiece. A rangefinder made that photo, it empowered a foreigner to show the world what America was like in his eyes.
I have the book American Witness and have yet to read it. This discussion has pushed me to start it. I think it was in Sarah Greenough’s Looking In where a story that he was harassed by the police for being a foreigner while on his trek. I naively thought that sort of intimidation was a problem of the past, or few and far between. I can’t wait to reread The Americans again tomorrow with a little more empathy.
Edit: It’s art- everyone has their interpretation and that can also change over time.
Freakscene
Obscure member
I met Robert Frank twice, once in Canada and once in Switzerland, by the simple method I have used to seek out all the people who interest me - I use publicly available information to find out where they live and go there and knock. It has only failed once (with the mathematician Grigori Perelman) and I have only been told to go away once (by a relatively obscure musician who I won't name).
When Robert described or discussed The Americans with me, he spoke slowly, almost like he was tired, but very, very directly. He may not have said things obviously, but he really knew how to communicate his views. He could remember all the photos in The Americans not just as photos but as the situations in which he took them, and how the situation and the photo made him feel. His face was like a landscape with clouds in wind, it changed quickly, particularly his eyes. He was very interested in the way that a normal day could produce a photo that said a lot.
Every photo in The Americans was looked over by Frank not tens, but hundreds, in some cases thousands of times before it went into the final edit, and then the order was sorted through over and over to arrive at the final book order.
I didn't discuss this photo with him specifically, but Frank's messages were obvious but conveyed obliquely. The thing that is so complex and engaging for me about The Americans is that it doesn't say anything directly. All the photos are complex views of what Frank saw that indirectly point to what he thought of the USA at the time.
Frank would never have used anything so obvious. Erwitt's photo shows the simple absurdity of racism, which is one thing that has always bothered me most about racism as a principle or attitude, and makes it into a sort-of Erwitt joke, which occur in lots of his photos. But looking at The Americans, if you see:
but don't understand that Frank found American racism nonsensical, stupid and unpleasant, you don't see what he was trying to say. He told me that The Americans was his depiction "of a country founded on the principle of 'every man for himself' and allowed to run an unnaturally long and uninterrupted course". His view was that racism was a central part of American life at the time, driven by the biased way certain types of people band together with the need for an 'other' to look down on, and to use economically but also socially as a point from which to congratulate themselves.
Marty
When Robert described or discussed The Americans with me, he spoke slowly, almost like he was tired, but very, very directly. He may not have said things obviously, but he really knew how to communicate his views. He could remember all the photos in The Americans not just as photos but as the situations in which he took them, and how the situation and the photo made him feel. His face was like a landscape with clouds in wind, it changed quickly, particularly his eyes. He was very interested in the way that a normal day could produce a photo that said a lot.
Every photo in The Americans was looked over by Frank not tens, but hundreds, in some cases thousands of times before it went into the final edit, and then the order was sorted through over and over to arrive at the final book order.
I didn't discuss this photo with him specifically, but Frank's messages were obvious but conveyed obliquely. The thing that is so complex and engaging for me about The Americans is that it doesn't say anything directly. All the photos are complex views of what Frank saw that indirectly point to what he thought of the USA at the time.
Frank would never have used anything so obvious. Erwitt's photo shows the simple absurdity of racism, which is one thing that has always bothered me most about racism as a principle or attitude, and makes it into a sort-of Erwitt joke, which occur in lots of his photos. But looking at The Americans, if you see:
but don't understand that Frank found American racism nonsensical, stupid and unpleasant, you don't see what he was trying to say. He told me that The Americans was his depiction "of a country founded on the principle of 'every man for himself' and allowed to run an unnaturally long and uninterrupted course". His view was that racism was a central part of American life at the time, driven by the biased way certain types of people band together with the need for an 'other' to look down on, and to use economically but also socially as a point from which to congratulate themselves.
Marty
It was discussed back in my art school in the 90s as such...
telenous
Well-known
Thanks for sharing this. I admire the forthrightness with which you sought contact. The impression I have of Robert Frank (obtained merely from reading about him) is that he was a simple person in some ways but also complicated in other. His art seems to me the result of both. What a great privilege to have spoken with him about photography and "The Americans" in particular.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
John, very interesting. I did not know people discussed segregated seating on buses as a key racial issue at that time.
I do believe anyone who talked about bus segregated seating missed a huge forest because they were too focused on some small trees. That was about the most most innocent form of discrimination. Living in the deep south during those times, I have become aware of much more egregious forms of racial discrimination such as education, voting rights, employment, housing and others. Back then, Negro communities got bus service only when the white community needed a way for the Negroes to come to work. That is why I question Robert Frank's use of segregated bus seating to illustrate a racial divide.
There was no bus service in South Apopka back in the 50's. Negroes either worked locally at the crate mill or waited for the farms to send a labor bus into town to recruit field workers when needed. There were no school buses. Kids walked to the local black elementary school. The nearest black high school was about 10 miles away so the few that attended had to be responsible for their own transportation. Locals would have been thrilled to sit in the back of the bus if only there was one.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
This thread piqued my interest in Robert Frank. I was familiar with "The Americans," but not much of the background. By chance I happened across a copy of RJ Smith's "American Witness: The Art & Life of Robert Frank." Given Frank's reluctance to be interviewed, I thought Smith did a great deal of sleuthing and filled in lots of background. It's a good read considering you can find copies for under $5.