Some seriously incisive thinking and writing about photography here. Thank you Jon Nicholls. As I stood on a pedestrian bridge outside Minneapolis' Walker Art Center yesterday afternoon, photographing ICE protestors and their signs, freezing my butt and fingertips off, I realized that there was no need to photograph faces, because mittens, hats, scarves, and pen-scribbled cardboard were telling the story just fine. Besides, faces are all covered up anyway.
Good post, Jon! Stuff to think about. Does it matter that Susan Sontag recanted after meeting Annie Leibovitz, and started to understand at least AL's photography. She pretty much acknowledged that had she known what she knows now, she would not have written On Photography the way she did. The entire photography world seems to keep wringing its hands over Sontag, when Sontag doesn't even believe Sontag.....? 😃
'On Photography' is wonderful writing and contains so many brilliant ideas and observations. Her range of reference and piercing insight are dizzying. She may have moderated her opinions in later life, motivated by personal entanglements, but much of the work is still highly relevant and packs a punch. I'm certainly glad it exists and I think students should be aware of the arguments, without necessarily feeling dismayed or demotivated by them.
Have you read Susie Linfield, 'The Cruel Radiance: Photography and Political Violence'? It's an excellent response to the miserablism of Sontag and her ilk.
Thank you for this Jon- really thought provoking, and I think you're definitely onto something. The key point to me is that photography is a tool, and as such is (in and of itself) somewhat neutral - like any tool, you have to take account of what it's used for, as much as its inherent qualities. I do also think the the photo education universe (I recently completed an MA in my 50s so have recent experience of this) has become so worried about these power dynamics and concerned about accusations of expropriation etc. that students become almost paralysed when it comes to taking pictures of people, which can lead to quite a narrow, inward looking approach - probably half of my MA peers were making very autobiographical work about their personal mental health or family lives, which I do think risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater and losing sight of what photography has that is unique - that ability to point to the world and show strangers what we see and how we see it. That said, I am also very glad to have been exposed to properly collaborative approaches and the writing of people like Azoulay, and now cringe a bit at the thoughtlessness with which I used to take pictures of random strangers and throw them up on the internet for likes. These ideas of entanglement and mutuality are intriguing and ones I'm trying to work through in my current work, so thanks for bringing them up.
That's very kind James. Thank you. I'm not sure I quite agree with you that photographic technology is "somewhat neutral". The single point perspective of the cyclops does imply a kind of overseer-like visuality. However, I'm certainly not arguing that photographers should avoid taking pictures of people and I agree entirely that the ethics of the photographer make a massive difference. I think it's important that we talk to young photographers about power and ethics whilst also giving them sustenance so that they can maintain a struggle with the medium over the longer term. I find the word "entanglement" and some of the new materialist thinking, about the agency of things, to be really helpful. Congrats on the completion of your MA. It's something I've considered now that I'm semi-retired.
I still agree with Sontag as you wrote here "Sontag was right to be suspicious. The acquisitive, possessive, extractive mode she describes is real, and it’s probably the dominant mode in a culture saturated with images taken without thought and consumed without attention." As you know, my approach to photography is far from photojournalism, and yet, I feel how I am constantly intruding in the lives of others (remember the wonderful Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck film?), without intention or prejudice. But it's a fact. That said, I like the last photo very much. Have a great journey!
It's the main reason why I try to avoid photographing people, even with their permission. I so admire photographers, like you, who can do it with huge empathy and compassion. When it comes to teaching photography, I prefer to believe that the camera is a tool for connecting us to the world and receiving the world's resistance, rather than simply being an extraction machine.
it's hands down one of (if not THE) most favorite films about life behind the Iron Curtain - I've lived then in my teen years and I find it incredibly well done.
Your post was forwarded to me by a subscriber whose book is entitled Framing the World, a collection of 50 photographs with internal frames, sometimes frames within frames within frames. Photos such as these seem to minimize the Sontag brutalism, for the viewer, if perceptive, sees them as about themselves and as occasions for viewers to think about framing in all the meanings of the word in the world. Such photographs admit their own limitations as documents while also advancing their accomplishments as art.
Thanks for your comment Tom. I must check out that book! I suppose it could be argued that the Pictures Generation attempted to overcome some of the ethical issues of documentary photography through deliberate staging, composites and tableaux, embracing the conceptual and literary qualities of the photographic image. Some documentary photographers switched from 35mm to large format. The 35mm documentary tradition was maintained by intelligent practitioners like Friedlander, whose interest in signs and complex framing devices seems to bridge these tendencies - a kind of self-conscious picture-making that acknowledges documentary uncertainty. I see no reason to rubbish Sontag. The questions she asked are still relevant and provocative, for me. I'm slightly troubled by the number of posts on Substack that are hostile to Sontag, Barthes, Berger et al. Anti-theory. There's no doubt that photography has a tendency to hate itself. But I think it's still worth keeping these ideas in play and to resist playing the get out of jail card.
Correspondence is a good word. It suggests both giving and taking — a dialogue with the world and with others trying to make sense of it. We can engage in such a correspondence through photography, dance, music, and poetry, as well as through academic text or casual conversation. As you say, “What matters is the disposition we bring.”
Thanks for your comment Ergun. I can't agree with your characterisation of Sontag's writing on photography. I think lots of her observations are still relevant and provocative. I don't agree with everything she writes but I admire her ability to pose challenging and perceptive questions. I think it's fairly undeniable that photography has reflected some pretty unethical and harmful attitudes, precisely because it is so good at objectifying others. I think her observation about photography's innate surrealism is really perceptive. I think students should be aware of her writing and take her views seriously, deciding for themselves how much they agree with them.
I get your points Jon and I respect your point of view. But let’s agree to disagree. I don’t want to derail your post. I like your photography (just subscribed). Thanks for having me.
Some seriously incisive thinking and writing about photography here. Thank you Jon Nicholls. As I stood on a pedestrian bridge outside Minneapolis' Walker Art Center yesterday afternoon, photographing ICE protestors and their signs, freezing my butt and fingertips off, I realized that there was no need to photograph faces, because mittens, hats, scarves, and pen-scribbled cardboard were telling the story just fine. Besides, faces are all covered up anyway.
Thanks George. I do love a hand-made sign.
Good post, Jon! Stuff to think about. Does it matter that Susan Sontag recanted after meeting Annie Leibovitz, and started to understand at least AL's photography. She pretty much acknowledged that had she known what she knows now, she would not have written On Photography the way she did. The entire photography world seems to keep wringing its hands over Sontag, when Sontag doesn't even believe Sontag.....? 😃
'On Photography' is wonderful writing and contains so many brilliant ideas and observations. Her range of reference and piercing insight are dizzying. She may have moderated her opinions in later life, motivated by personal entanglements, but much of the work is still highly relevant and packs a punch. I'm certainly glad it exists and I think students should be aware of the arguments, without necessarily feeling dismayed or demotivated by them.
Hi Jon, let me know if you need an extra copy. It is in the bookcase, but not under photography.
Is that because it's On Photography? ;-)
Nice. I don’t believe in hand wringing.
Have you read Susie Linfield, 'The Cruel Radiance: Photography and Political Violence'? It's an excellent response to the miserablism of Sontag and her ilk.
Thanks Olli, I haven't. One to add to the reading list!
Linfield’s book is far more insightful and erudite than anything Sontag, Berger, or Barthes ever wrote about photography.
Thank you for this Jon- really thought provoking, and I think you're definitely onto something. The key point to me is that photography is a tool, and as such is (in and of itself) somewhat neutral - like any tool, you have to take account of what it's used for, as much as its inherent qualities. I do also think the the photo education universe (I recently completed an MA in my 50s so have recent experience of this) has become so worried about these power dynamics and concerned about accusations of expropriation etc. that students become almost paralysed when it comes to taking pictures of people, which can lead to quite a narrow, inward looking approach - probably half of my MA peers were making very autobiographical work about their personal mental health or family lives, which I do think risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater and losing sight of what photography has that is unique - that ability to point to the world and show strangers what we see and how we see it. That said, I am also very glad to have been exposed to properly collaborative approaches and the writing of people like Azoulay, and now cringe a bit at the thoughtlessness with which I used to take pictures of random strangers and throw them up on the internet for likes. These ideas of entanglement and mutuality are intriguing and ones I'm trying to work through in my current work, so thanks for bringing them up.
That's very kind James. Thank you. I'm not sure I quite agree with you that photographic technology is "somewhat neutral". The single point perspective of the cyclops does imply a kind of overseer-like visuality. However, I'm certainly not arguing that photographers should avoid taking pictures of people and I agree entirely that the ethics of the photographer make a massive difference. I think it's important that we talk to young photographers about power and ethics whilst also giving them sustenance so that they can maintain a struggle with the medium over the longer term. I find the word "entanglement" and some of the new materialist thinking, about the agency of things, to be really helpful. Congrats on the completion of your MA. It's something I've considered now that I'm semi-retired.
I still agree with Sontag as you wrote here "Sontag was right to be suspicious. The acquisitive, possessive, extractive mode she describes is real, and it’s probably the dominant mode in a culture saturated with images taken without thought and consumed without attention." As you know, my approach to photography is far from photojournalism, and yet, I feel how I am constantly intruding in the lives of others (remember the wonderful Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck film?), without intention or prejudice. But it's a fact. That said, I like the last photo very much. Have a great journey!
It's the main reason why I try to avoid photographing people, even with their permission. I so admire photographers, like you, who can do it with huge empathy and compassion. When it comes to teaching photography, I prefer to believe that the camera is a tool for connecting us to the world and receiving the world's resistance, rather than simply being an extraction machine.
Have to look up that film, Crina.
The Lives of Others
Original title: Das Leben der Anderen
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405094
It's in my top 5 favourite films of all time!
Great minds😊
Found it to rent on YouTube. $4. I have a month to watch it. Should be enough time...
It's pretty fast paced, emotionally. I think you're going to like it.
Great! I haven't watched many movies the last couple of years.
Thanks!
it's hands down one of (if not THE) most favorite films about life behind the Iron Curtain - I've lived then in my teen years and I find it incredibly well done.
Your post was forwarded to me by a subscriber whose book is entitled Framing the World, a collection of 50 photographs with internal frames, sometimes frames within frames within frames. Photos such as these seem to minimize the Sontag brutalism, for the viewer, if perceptive, sees them as about themselves and as occasions for viewers to think about framing in all the meanings of the word in the world. Such photographs admit their own limitations as documents while also advancing their accomplishments as art.
Thanks for your comment Tom. I must check out that book! I suppose it could be argued that the Pictures Generation attempted to overcome some of the ethical issues of documentary photography through deliberate staging, composites and tableaux, embracing the conceptual and literary qualities of the photographic image. Some documentary photographers switched from 35mm to large format. The 35mm documentary tradition was maintained by intelligent practitioners like Friedlander, whose interest in signs and complex framing devices seems to bridge these tendencies - a kind of self-conscious picture-making that acknowledges documentary uncertainty. I see no reason to rubbish Sontag. The questions she asked are still relevant and provocative, for me. I'm slightly troubled by the number of posts on Substack that are hostile to Sontag, Barthes, Berger et al. Anti-theory. There's no doubt that photography has a tendency to hate itself. But I think it's still worth keeping these ideas in play and to resist playing the get out of jail card.
Lots to think about out here.
Correspondence is a good word. It suggests both giving and taking — a dialogue with the world and with others trying to make sense of it. We can engage in such a correspondence through photography, dance, music, and poetry, as well as through academic text or casual conversation. As you say, “What matters is the disposition we bring.”
Very much enjoyed this article.
Thanks Angela.
Thanks for your comment Ergun. I can't agree with your characterisation of Sontag's writing on photography. I think lots of her observations are still relevant and provocative. I don't agree with everything she writes but I admire her ability to pose challenging and perceptive questions. I think it's fairly undeniable that photography has reflected some pretty unethical and harmful attitudes, precisely because it is so good at objectifying others. I think her observation about photography's innate surrealism is really perceptive. I think students should be aware of her writing and take her views seriously, deciding for themselves how much they agree with them.
I get your points Jon and I respect your point of view. But let’s agree to disagree. I don’t want to derail your post. I like your photography (just subscribed). Thanks for having me.