Sebastiao Salgado

I am glad that this work doesn’t show the extreme and unpleasant manipulated tonality from the Genesis work.

It is extremely important to show this, but it is also very difficult to document these people without turning them into a human zoo. I look forward to seeing the whole series, but am also wary of how I will perceive it and it will make me feel.

Marty
 
Thanks for all of these links. I have the utmost respect for Salgado for all aspects of his photography and his conservation work but have to admit that I did not love the results of the Genesis project.

Marty...the phrase "human zoo" is a good description of much of the work that's out there.
 
Thank you for the links. For me I've mixed feelings for that kind of work and I also think human zoo are a kind of feeling I get. My first thought is that we should leave this people alone and don't interfere with their lives at all, but if they are in danger maybe it's necessary to enlighten them. Salgado should left without the studio shooting. Just my thinking.
 
Freakscene said:
I am glad that this work doesn’t show the extreme and unpleasant manipulated tonality from the Genesis work.

It is extremely important to show this, but it is also very difficult to document these people without turning them into a human zoo. I look forward to seeing the whole series, but am also wary of how I will perceive it and it will make me feel.

Marty
Click to expand...

The subject matter and compositions are superb. But an awful lot of them still have that HDR look to them.
I actually would have liked to see the colour originals.
 
I agree about the overprocessing and HDR look, don't like it. What I like about Salgado's work with brazilian indigenous peoples is that he tries to show them in their self-esteem and identity, as people who are intelligent, knowledgeable and proud of who they are. Because that is how we should look at them.
 
There is a very impressive documentary about Salgado, directed by Wim Wenders:

"The Salt of the Earth"

It's actually astonishing what cruelty, massakers, death, crimes against humanity Salgado has seen, witnessed and photographed. And it's a miracle that he didn't kill himself afterwards ... but he was very close to and turning away from it all and to nature, mostly be recultivating barren land of his family property gave him a reason to live.

And yeah I also agree about the HDR look of his Genesis series, not my preference either. But in my book this man can do what ever he likes.
 
Freakscene said:
...It is extremely important to show this, but it is also very difficult to document these people without turning them into a human zoo. I look forward to seeing the whole series, but am also wary of how I will perceive it and it will make me feel.

Marty
Click to expand...

I am not clear what you mean by a 'human zoo.' These are the conditions most of the people in the world are living in. And these are our fellow human beings. Salgado has the courage to confront this. Can we do any less?
 
darya151 said:
I am not clear what you mean by a 'human zoo.' These are the conditions most of the people in the world are living in. And these are our fellow human beings. Salgado has the courage to confront this. Can we do any less?
Click to expand...

I need to preface this by saying that I have worked with indigenous people for 20+ years in Australia and Papua New Guinea and have a reasonable understanding of the effect of media in developed places that depict indigenous people. I do not pretend to have answers to the paradox and balance between preservation and development. I know that no indigenous people living anywhere on the planet today is safe from destruction of their way of life by external influence.

I do not have a good window into any particular indigenous culture, but anyone who lives in the developed world and has never visited, lived with and understood indigenous cultures has a very poor grasp of even the basic issues these people face.

The 'confront[ation]' you mention is the problem. The confrontation is contrived, built from a clear sense of conflict between "us" and "them". The answer is simple - provide rights to land and protection for indigenous people who wish to continue to live the way they do, and avenues for entry to the broader world for those who want to change how they live.

Ultimately Salgado will profit from this, even if it is only reputational profit. It's modern colonialism, presented as assistance.

The photos of these people in their environment show how they live. The photos in Salgado's 'studio' look like 19th century depictions of indigenous people. This is my reference to the "human zoo". Abstracting these people presents them as an "other" and a "problem" for developed society/ies.

The conflict and the problem here is "ours" as developers, not "theirs" as people living the way they have for thousands of years. These photos imperil the subjects more because superficially they portray them positively but at the same time they make them tourist attractions. In Salgado's words and the associated text, when these people interact with contemporary society they are "threatening", while at the same time they are "threatened" and "need our protection". If someone comes onto my land I can call the police and have them removed. But because we see these people somehow as "others" who occupy land that is "wild" and therefore "vacant" and which can be developed and therefore become "ours" they are a problem, but, paradoxically, need "help". They have occupied their lands for a very long time, but paradoxically, they do not 'own' them. All these people need is for the same respect and rights developed societies offer their own citizens with regard to property, rights, health and existence.

Make what you will of what I've written, I'm going to leave it there.

img258a.jpg


Marty
 
Last edited:
I watched this a few months back intending to get some pointers on photography. It was the only thing I've ever seen on any screen that caused me to pause it and go outside for 15 min or so to collect myself and process what I was seeing. It was utterly astonishing that one single human being has witnessed, and in some ways been a part of so much. That combined with his humanity and talent....is remarkable. I ended it thinking "what the hell am I doing with my life?" I still think about it and will rewatch it tomorrow now.

icebear said:
There is a very impressive documentary about Salgado, directed by Wim Wenders:

"The Salt of the Earth"

It's actually astonishing what cruelty, massakers, death, crimes against humanity Salgado has seen, witnessed and photographed. And it's a miracle that he didn't kill himself afterwards ... but he was very close to and turning away from it all and to nature, mostly be recultivating barren land of his family property gave him a reason to live.

And yeah I also agree about the HDR look of his Genesis series, not my preference either. But in my book this man can do what ever he likes.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the link and thanks to Marty for the insight. At first I thought there's nothing wrong with these photos, the are beautiful and depict their subjects with dignity. But thinking about it a little more, I'm unsure what Salgado is doing here. While the text talks about the issues these people face, the photos are an extension of his "Genesis" work in that he attempts to show the beauty only. They don't give the least hint to the problems with introduders, violence and disease. Why leave that part to the writing? Weird to say the least.
 
Dear Marty,

I agree wholeheartedly with your analysis. While I am sure that Salgado's heart is in the right place, I am not so convinced that artfully composed photos of indigenous people are the best way of drawing attention to the threats to their lives and future. That being said, my professional life as a scientist researching the improvement of crops to benefit the sustainable livelihoods of resource-poor farmers in tropical countries has led me to conclude that there is no ideal unique solution to peoples problems. We can learn from the poor, the exploited and the dispossessed, stand up and be counted, but can do little to change the infernal machine that grinds them down.

John
 
It's good to see that Salgado continues his quest to save the planet. Why he has chosen tableaux vivants is not entirely clear to me.
 
Freakscene said:
I need to preface this by saying that I have worked with indigenous people for 20+ years in Australia and Papua New Guinea and have a reasonable understanding of the effect of media in developed places that depict indigenous people. I do not pretend to have answers to the paradox and balance between preservation and development. I know that no indigenous people living anywhere on the planet today is safe from destruction of their way of life by external influence.

I do not have a good window into any particular indigenous culture, but anyone who lives in the developed world and has never visited, lived with and understood indigenous cultures has a very poor grasp of even the basic issues these people face.

The 'confront[ation]' you mention is the problem. The confrontation is contrived, built from a clear sense of conflict between "us" and "them". The answer is simple - provide rights to land and protection for indigenous people who wish to continue to live the way they do, and avenues for entry to the broader world for those who want to change how they live.

Ultimately Salgado will profit from this, even if it is only reputational profit. It's modern colonialism, presented as assistance.

The photos of these people in their environment show how they live. The photos in Salgado's 'studio' look like 19th century depictions of indigenous people. This is my reference to the "human zoo". Abstracting these people presents them as an "other" and a "problem" for developed society/ies.

The conflict and the problem here is "ours" as developers, not "theirs" as people living the way they have for thousands of years. These photos imperil the subjects more because superficially they portray them positively but at the same time they make them tourist attractions. In Salgado's words and the associated text, when these people interact with contemporary society they are "threatening", while at the same time they are "threatened" and "need our protection". All they need is for the same respect and rights developed societies offer their own citizens with regard to property, rights, health and existence. If someone comes onto my land I can call the police and have them removed. But because we see these people somehow as "others" who occupy land that is "wild" and therefore "vacant" and which can be developed and therefore become "ours" they are a problem, but, paradoxically, need "help".

Make what you will of what I've written, I'm going to leave it there.

Marty
Click to expand...

Thank you Marty.
 
Freakscene said:
I need to preface this by saying that I have worked with indigenous people for 20+ years in Australia and Papua New Guinea and have a reasonable understanding of the effect of media in developed places that depict indigenous people. I do not pretend to have answers to the paradox and balance between preservation and development. I know that no indigenous people living anywhere on the planet today is safe from destruction of their way of life by external influence.

I do not have a good window into any particular indigenous culture, but anyone who lives in the developed world and has never visited, lived with and understood indigenous cultures has a very poor grasp of even the basic issues these people face.

The 'confront[ation]' you mention is the problem. The confrontation is contrived, built from a clear sense of conflict between "us" and "them". The answer is simple - provide rights to land and protection for indigenous people who wish to continue to live the way they do, and avenues for entry to the broader world for those who want to change how they live.

Ultimately Salgado will profit from this, even if it is only reputational profit. It's modern colonialism, presented as assistance.

The photos of these people in their environment show how they live. The photos in Salgado's 'studio' look like 19th century depictions of indigenous people. This is my reference to the "human zoo". Abstracting these people presents them as an "other" and a "problem" for developed society/ies.

The conflict and the problem here is "ours" as developers, not "theirs" as people living the way they have for thousands of years. These photos imperil the subjects more because superficially they portray them positively but at the same time they make them tourist attractions. In Salgado's words and the associated text, when these people interact with contemporary society they are "threatening", while at the same time they are "threatened" and "need our protection". All they need is for the same respect and rights developed societies offer their own citizens with regard to property, rights, health and existence. If someone comes onto my land I can call the police and have them removed. But because we see these people somehow as "others" who occupy land that is "wild" and therefore "vacant" and which can be developed and therefore become "ours" they are a problem, but, paradoxically, need "help".

Make what you will of what I've written, I'm going to leave it there.

Marty
Click to expand...

Thank you my thoughts exactly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom