Photojournalism

Friday, September 25th, 2009 - Nicholas Calcott

Merging Boundaries
Ian Teh/Panos Pictures

We seem to be awash in an ever-present pining for the glory days, when pictures had a moral authority and weight, and when lots and lots and lots of photographers were able to make a living shooting socially concerned black and white documentary work.

Unfortunately, those days are gone.  The economics of journalism in general have fundamentally changed in ways so well documented I won’t bother bringing them up here.  And the moral authority of images has been undermined by what I would consider a good thing: People’s increasing visual sophistication.  The average person is much less likely to look at a newspaper or magazine and expect to know the whole truth from one shocking picture.

Still, though, much photojournalism is caught in a self regarding loop, photographing the same subjects in a style that borrows heavily from Christian art of the renaissance – pietas, madonnas, crucifixions, moral stories of suffering and redemption, the whole deal.

Now none of what I just said is particularly new or original – it pops up again and again, but we seem to be having the same discussions over and over again.  Witness the latest flare-up in what seems to be an annual event – the arguments over World Press Photo.  This year it’s Stephen Mayes, the outgoing WPP Secretary, who’s provoked the firestorm (witness the comments!), as noted over on Colin Pantall‘s blog.

Colin goes through an interesting discussion of why we all photograph the same things.  His general point is that we seem to be photographing similarly because we are trying to shoot for others expectations of the world and not, to use the cliche, being true to our own vision:

If we do that, we might as well go and work in a call centre or flip burgers because there is more passion and feeling and depth in that than replicating someone else’s work and vision, than doing something we have no real involvement with.

The replication is the thing though. Why do we all replicate other people’s work? Perhaps one of the reasons is this is what we are told we should do – by newspapers, magazines, our professors and lecturers (they have to do something to keep their students minds of the fact that 90% of them aren’t going to make a penny from what they have studied for 3 years), the blogosphere and things like portfolio reviews.

I think some of this may be true, but a bigger question for me is why photographers seem to be so backwards looking in general – why does photojournalism seem to be such a redoubt of the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” mentality? Why are art photographers so obsessed with replicating various styles of painting?  Why, as Stephen Mays points out and Colin Pantall widens, does photography “…investigate a very limited series of tropes in a very limited series of visual approaches, becoming a self replicating machine that churns of copies of itself in perpetual motion,” and, more to the point, why is asking Nan Goldin to speak, an artists who last contributed something original to photography 20 years ago, still considered a provocative act?

I dunno.  I’ve been reading about this stuff in a specifically photojournalism context for too long this afternoon.  Start sifting through the following list if you’re feeling like being bewildered…

The World Press Photo winners this year
Stephen Mayes speech excerpts
and full length audio
Foto8 World Press Photo report of the same event
Bromberg and Chanarin’s firestorm from last year and in pdf form. Look at the comments here, too.
Foto8 tries to deal with the criticism of that essay. And again, repetitively.
Tim Hetherington, a WPP winner and excellent photog, takes some of this on. It’s also where the 10-90 ratio comes from.
Concientious’ take in one and two and three parts, last year. I hate that Alec Soth can post his comment and no one else can.
Clearly fault for the current state of photojournalism is widely shared. There are structural problems too, duh.
Yeah, I know it’s not easy. But still.
Check out the discussions section on BURN magazine. Some interesting things there…
Some new directions? Here’s a great list of where to start.

Pieties

Monday, June 15th, 2009 - Nicholas Calcott

Gilbert and George
Gilbert and George, 1974

A propos to the reports coming from Venice and Art Basel, check out this article on the professionalization of art that appeared in Frieze back in March:

Interviewed in Thornton’s book, the former Artforum editor Jack Bankowsky observes that ‘You have to understand the pieties […] Seriousness at Artforum and in the art world in general is a commodity. Certain kinds of gallerists may want the magazine to be serious even if they have no real co-ordinates for distinguishing a serious article from the empty signifier of seriousness abused.’ You have to understand the pieties: the weight of an artist’s monograph or how many times their name crops up on e-flux announcements; someone’s preference for reading October rather than frieze; the internationalism of the contemporary art world – some romantic residue of the idea that, if you travel regularly by plane, you must be high-powered because your business reaches far outside your locality; artist names exchanged as collateral by those jockeying for position in the marketplace of curating or criticism. These are the little curlicues that adorn the edifice of the professional arts establishment.

In many respects I appreciate being firmly wedged in the subculture that is the photo world as you encounter fewer self-important markers of seriousness, though as many people have pointed out, most recently Colin Pantall in his ‘How Not To Photograph‘ series, we have plenty of pieties of our own.

Clichés Of Documentary Photography

Thursday, March 27th, 2008 - Nicholas Calcott

Well, he was bound to get to them. Colin Pantall has begun assembling a list of clich√©s of documentary photography, to complement his earlier clich√©s of art photography. I don’t know whether I should be happy or unhappy about this. Probably both.

Aesthetics And Photojournalism Part 2

Wednesday, March 19th, 2008 - Nicholas Calcott

becherer_blog.jpg
Max Becherer for the NY Times

A quick follow up from around the web of my earlier post on aesthetics and photojournalism:

Colin Pantall writes a post about the danger of exploitation in photographs and how these questions are at least 400 years old.

On The Media, the excellent NPR program, had an episode featuring the novelist Jim Lewis and the difficulty he had in describing violence with a photograph. Transcript available here.

And finally, the NY Times has a quick column about photographer Max Becherer’s memories of covering the past 5 years of the Iraq War. The image above comes from that column.