williams473
Well-known
I realize there are many who frequent this forum from all over the World, but I would like to pose some questions to U.S. photographers in particular, and opinions from all over will be valued as well.
Why does it seem (and it may simply seem to me) that photography no longer leads the charge in social critique and when necessary, social upheaval? Why is it (and I include myself here) that we allow ourselves to be pacified by material comforts, and close our eyes and ears to the fact that the US is continuing down a path of global imperialism that is severely weakening our social fabric? Why does the U.S. have such high murder rates in our major cities? Why are the children in our country so poorly informed about the state of the World at large? Why do we value watching TV more than any other activity? Why is obesity an epidemic in the U.S.?
Of course these are rhetorical questions with a myriad of answers that could be framed in a number of ways, but my larger point is that for those of us out there who like to think of ourselves as social documentarians, why are we not cranking out photo essays and self publishing them in places where people outside our sphere will see it?
We can't count on employed photojournalists to do it - most local shooters are on assignment, covering car crashes, high school football, fires, local government and the like - not that there isn't a need for that. They simply can't have a global perspective because their assignments are local, and they answer to editors. Am I just not looking, or are we not taking advantage of a very fertile country, rife with things that need to be pointed out and looked at with the powerful eye of the photographer? Is it even possible anymore, seeing as most media outlets who could publish on a National level primarily use established freelancers, and heavily edit the images they publish? Is there any room for diversity in expression? Is there any way to do some real down and dirty photo essays that will matter in the least to the American public - to a country that is one of the more depraved in the Western World?
Here's the real question I ask myself every day - if I bust my butt working (outside of my day job,) pound away as a working class artist, produce thousands of photographs, make my points - maybe even some people see the work - does it matter? Are people in this country interested in work that isn't endorsed by one of the major media outlets? Is social photography a complete waste of time if there is no significant audience?
Why does it seem (and it may simply seem to me) that photography no longer leads the charge in social critique and when necessary, social upheaval? Why is it (and I include myself here) that we allow ourselves to be pacified by material comforts, and close our eyes and ears to the fact that the US is continuing down a path of global imperialism that is severely weakening our social fabric? Why does the U.S. have such high murder rates in our major cities? Why are the children in our country so poorly informed about the state of the World at large? Why do we value watching TV more than any other activity? Why is obesity an epidemic in the U.S.?
Of course these are rhetorical questions with a myriad of answers that could be framed in a number of ways, but my larger point is that for those of us out there who like to think of ourselves as social documentarians, why are we not cranking out photo essays and self publishing them in places where people outside our sphere will see it?
We can't count on employed photojournalists to do it - most local shooters are on assignment, covering car crashes, high school football, fires, local government and the like - not that there isn't a need for that. They simply can't have a global perspective because their assignments are local, and they answer to editors. Am I just not looking, or are we not taking advantage of a very fertile country, rife with things that need to be pointed out and looked at with the powerful eye of the photographer? Is it even possible anymore, seeing as most media outlets who could publish on a National level primarily use established freelancers, and heavily edit the images they publish? Is there any room for diversity in expression? Is there any way to do some real down and dirty photo essays that will matter in the least to the American public - to a country that is one of the more depraved in the Western World?
Here's the real question I ask myself every day - if I bust my butt working (outside of my day job,) pound away as a working class artist, produce thousands of photographs, make my points - maybe even some people see the work - does it matter? Are people in this country interested in work that isn't endorsed by one of the major media outlets? Is social photography a complete waste of time if there is no significant audience?
V
varjag
Guest
Did they ever care?
williams473
Well-known
Yes, I suppose that very well may be the case - sad. Maybe our World is toobig? To many choices of media to consume, and to many fun things to do instead of looking at what's wrong?
williams473
Well-known
Take a work like "Tulsa" for example - how did Larry Clark get that made in the 70's, and how do we know about it now? Chance?
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Sitemistic stated exactly what I was going to say. Well said.
remegius
Well-known
sitemistic said:
Bingo! I suppose there was a time, years ago, before TV, before the age of instant information, when photographs had more of an impact on the social conscience. But even then photographs came after the fact. There have been great photographs that have moved us over the years, that were born of cataclysmic events, but I can't think of any that actually created the events, or even changed them. As photographers we'd like to think that our images convey the power to transform in a global sense, but that's just churning butter. The engine that drives most human activities isn't affected by the impact of photographs.
Cheers...
tripod
Well-known
Could it also be that the present socio-political climate oppresses social activism and any questioning of the status quo as un-American?
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
One more factor that comes to mind ... the overabundance of electronic media has probably (though I don't have the numbers) reduced attendance at photo exhibits in galleries and museums. Seeing a really good exhibit installation is quite different, and it need not exclude electronic media.
The current Larry Towell exhibit at Eastman House is stunning, IMO. The impact is different than solitary viewing on a computer screen. Anyone in the Northeast and Southern Ontario who can make it should do so. I'll get you in on my membership.
The current Larry Towell exhibit at Eastman House is stunning, IMO. The impact is different than solitary viewing on a computer screen. Anyone in the Northeast and Southern Ontario who can make it should do so. I'll get you in on my membership.
robertdfeinman
Robert Feinman
Exposure
Exposure
Before the internet an individual had essentially no way of getting their work before the public. Every spread that Eugene Smith managed to get published was the result of hard fought battles with "Life" management.
Now you can just set up a web site and publish whatever you wish. I do it both with my photos as well as a section that I devote to essays (words, not pictures) on social issues of the day.
There is no point in complaining that people don't care or won't pay attention, when you have, for the first time, the ability to do something about it without worrying about a gatekeeper.
So. if you have something to say, say it. If it strikes a chord, and if you take the time to promote your work, you will attract an audience. It won't rival Life magazine in circulation, but it's better than what you might have achieved in the "good old days".
Exposure
Before the internet an individual had essentially no way of getting their work before the public. Every spread that Eugene Smith managed to get published was the result of hard fought battles with "Life" management.
Now you can just set up a web site and publish whatever you wish. I do it both with my photos as well as a section that I devote to essays (words, not pictures) on social issues of the day.
There is no point in complaining that people don't care or won't pay attention, when you have, for the first time, the ability to do something about it without worrying about a gatekeeper.
So. if you have something to say, say it. If it strikes a chord, and if you take the time to promote your work, you will attract an audience. It won't rival Life magazine in circulation, but it's better than what you might have achieved in the "good old days".
williams473
Well-known
Posting in blue now, so people who read white on black can see it - sorry!
Yes, I agree to a certain degree my own apathy probably robs me of the satisfaction of ditributing on a smaller scale.
Thanks for the heads up on the Larry Towell show. My mentor, Benita Keller is one of Larry's disciples, so I like to follow his work (and Benita's for that matter) as much as I can. He is a great artist indeed.
Yes, I agree to a certain degree my own apathy probably robs me of the satisfaction of ditributing on a smaller scale.
Thanks for the heads up on the Larry Towell show. My mentor, Benita Keller is one of Larry's disciples, so I like to follow his work (and Benita's for that matter) as much as I can. He is a great artist indeed.
Ducky
Well-known
Maybe it's photography, not just film, that is dieing? Oversaturation, cell phones, TV news asking cell phone users to e-mail news, boredom with the whole thing and and a digi in every pocket.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Photography is simply going through a transitional phase.
The "problem" for me with self-publishing via the web is that I don't fancy building and promoting a website; I'm a photographer. But if that is the reality, then it has to be dealt with.
The "problem" for me with self-publishing via the web is that I don't fancy building and promoting a website; I'm a photographer. But if that is the reality, then it has to be dealt with.
charjohncarter
Veteran
tripod, have you ever been to Berkeley, CA? I don't think oppression is alive and well.
migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
sitemistic said:
Is not just the Americans, it is global. I call it "Background Noise".
The "Noise" is so much that we just can not hear or see... the brain for is own protection just "firewall it"... One really need to make an effort to focus and see.. but is just a glimpse.. "Noise" keeps coming...
Bas
Dough!
I certainly think that the proliferation of images everywhere had an effect on the role of photography as a vehicle of social "complain", for a lack of a better word. If we look at the time period where photography was not only the only vehicle for truth, but also almost of unquestionable veracity, we can see a big shift of circumstances surrounding photography today.
When Capa took his pictures, photograpry was the only way to let people know about distant fact. And photography was, as french scholars said, iconic and indicial (err... my poor english skills make for a big probability that the word "indicial" doesn't exist at all
). What was in the image was true, without discussion. And images were few and far between, photography was not a major part of the everyday landscape.
Now, images are not only everywhere, but also its veracity is questionable. The flood with imaging is so important that I don't know if today an image as the Tian An Men event -the student in front of the row of tanks- would have such an impact (it would have an impact of course, but I doubt that it would become the icon that it became if that image would be recorded today).
Most of us photographers, professionals or hobbysts like myself, lived this as part of a seamless process, and probably without noticing, "quit" thinking of photography as a social critique media -though I believe it is a perfect vehicle, it's just that the circumstances don't allow for this-.
It's sad indeed, I think, when we look at the hard work of documentary photographers, look at the fruits of their work -I'm thinking about those first photo documents of Hiroshima and nagasaki yearas after the nuclear bombs, for example-, and realize that today photography has no place to achieve the same results not for a fault in photography's nature, but because of a change in surrounding factors...
Heck, makes me sad indeed.
Cheers.
When Capa took his pictures, photograpry was the only way to let people know about distant fact. And photography was, as french scholars said, iconic and indicial (err... my poor english skills make for a big probability that the word "indicial" doesn't exist at all
). What was in the image was true, without discussion. And images were few and far between, photography was not a major part of the everyday landscape.Now, images are not only everywhere, but also its veracity is questionable. The flood with imaging is so important that I don't know if today an image as the Tian An Men event -the student in front of the row of tanks- would have such an impact (it would have an impact of course, but I doubt that it would become the icon that it became if that image would be recorded today).
Most of us photographers, professionals or hobbysts like myself, lived this as part of a seamless process, and probably without noticing, "quit" thinking of photography as a social critique media -though I believe it is a perfect vehicle, it's just that the circumstances don't allow for this-.
It's sad indeed, I think, when we look at the hard work of documentary photographers, look at the fruits of their work -I'm thinking about those first photo documents of Hiroshima and nagasaki yearas after the nuclear bombs, for example-, and realize that today photography has no place to achieve the same results not for a fault in photography's nature, but because of a change in surrounding factors...
Heck, makes me sad indeed.
Cheers.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Angry Young Man ~~ Billy Joel
I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage
I found that just surviving was a noble fight.
I once believed in causes too,
I had my pointless point of view,
And life went on no matter who was wrong or right.
I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage
I found that just surviving was a noble fight.
I once believed in causes too,
I had my pointless point of view,
And life went on no matter who was wrong or right.
FPjohn
Well-known
Hello:
I suspect we have, at least in the West, lost the habit of attention. The photographs are still taken but the communal audience is gone.
Think of the contrast between the awareness of the work of Mary Ellen Mark and Annie Leiboweitz.
The larger spirit of the age has also seemingly shifted to approval of the Pharisee and a discomfort for the Samaritan. Below a certain age the best are antinomian and the rest unaware.
yours
FPJ
I suspect we have, at least in the West, lost the habit of attention. The photographs are still taken but the communal audience is gone.
Think of the contrast between the awareness of the work of Mary Ellen Mark and Annie Leiboweitz.
The larger spirit of the age has also seemingly shifted to approval of the Pharisee and a discomfort for the Samaritan. Below a certain age the best are antinomian and the rest unaware.
yours
FPJ
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Robert,robertdfeinman said:
Seconded. With multinational, bland, snivelling-coward publishers, getting hard-hitting images published in print is ever more difficult; the internet is good news here (except when international companies cave in to censorship, especially from China).
Cheers,
R.
keithwms
Established
Matt I am not quite sure I see it your way. What I see now is waaaay more overlap between social issues and photography and video. Now we have the 'net... everybody and his trained pet has a blog and is posting info on it. The influence of the mainstream media has never been weaker.
I can remember when, in the US, there was ABC, CBS, and NBC, and that was it. Now there are far more sources of news and info... yes, some questionable ones too...but overall the media is a far larger entity now with far fewer constraints on information and more choices. People expect instantaneous firsthand footage and, by and large, they get it.
As for advocacy via photography, again I don't see what you're getting at. You can type any social issue from drugs to global warming into your browser and get thousands of pages of firsthand content, including photos. Streaming content even. All major media outlets now openly solicit contributions in the form of photos and videos. Overall they have far more content now, visual, audio and text, than they have ever had. By a long shot. Now the issue isn't getting the content, it's how to sift through all the stuff you get.
Bottom line the way I see it: if you are an amateur journalist and you have an issue and a half decent camera, then there is a far greater chance that your content will be on the evening news than here was, say, a decade ago.
[political / generational aside: as for the insinuation in the thread that younger Americans are somehow less socially conscious: bunk. The most self-absorbed, wasteful, socially-unconscious, "me" generation of Americans is now being shown the exit door from American politics. Replacing them is a far more internationalized, social conscious, open-minded, multilingual, multicultural, tolerant and educated younger generation. A lot of baby boomers are squirming right about now and I frankly am enjoying it.]
I can remember when, in the US, there was ABC, CBS, and NBC, and that was it. Now there are far more sources of news and info... yes, some questionable ones too...but overall the media is a far larger entity now with far fewer constraints on information and more choices. People expect instantaneous firsthand footage and, by and large, they get it.
As for advocacy via photography, again I don't see what you're getting at. You can type any social issue from drugs to global warming into your browser and get thousands of pages of firsthand content, including photos. Streaming content even. All major media outlets now openly solicit contributions in the form of photos and videos. Overall they have far more content now, visual, audio and text, than they have ever had. By a long shot. Now the issue isn't getting the content, it's how to sift through all the stuff you get.
Bottom line the way I see it: if you are an amateur journalist and you have an issue and a half decent camera, then there is a far greater chance that your content will be on the evening news than here was, say, a decade ago.
[political / generational aside: as for the insinuation in the thread that younger Americans are somehow less socially conscious: bunk. The most self-absorbed, wasteful, socially-unconscious, "me" generation of Americans is now being shown the exit door from American politics. Replacing them is a far more internationalized, social conscious, open-minded, multilingual, multicultural, tolerant and educated younger generation. A lot of baby boomers are squirming right about now and I frankly am enjoying it.]
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Sounds a lot like we're blaming the audience instead of the performers.
If I produce what I think is art, or compelling social comentary, and no one notices/buys/buys in, perhaps the problem is that I haven't actually hit on a truth as perceived by the audience.
I know that the ignorant swine of the world have yet to discover my genius...but I'm learning to live with that.
If I produce what I think is art, or compelling social comentary, and no one notices/buys/buys in, perhaps the problem is that I haven't actually hit on a truth as perceived by the audience.
I know that the ignorant swine of the world have yet to discover my genius...but I'm learning to live with that.