[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

images made during this important time of his life, but stands alone as a
potent, and famous, reminder of his still-life period.
2. The single photograph is often a powerful symbol of a social or cul-
tural climate.
Instead of reminding us of the photographer s body of work these sym-
bols remind us of a time in history. No one can predict when such sym-
bols will arise, or even the factors which govern such a selection of a
symbol in the collective minds of the public. They just happen, seemingly
without warning and often with no reference to the photographer s other
work. A vivid example is the extraordinary news photograph of the burn-
ing of the airship Hindenburg in 1937. This photograph has become a
classic and is used in practically all books of journalism; it is even repro-
duced in the major history of photography textbook. The image has be-
come a symbol of the death of the dirigible as a passenger-carrying craft.
Yet few could even name the photographer (Sam Shere). Even fewer
could recall even a single different image from the thousands made by
Shere during his 40 years as a newspaper photographer.
68 " ON LOOKING AT PHOTOGRAPHS: DAVID HURN & BILL JAY
There are many other examples. In more recent times, it would be difficult
to find an American or European who was not familiar with the image of a
Vietnam police officer executing by pistol a captured Vietcong in the streets
of Saigon. This photograph by Eddie Adams became a striking symbol of the
Vietnam war and probably did more than any other single factor in turning
the tide of public attitude against America s involvement in the conflict. Why
was this particular image adopted as a symbol? Other photographs were
equally shocking in subject matter; many were far more vivid images of
death; a great many were much better pictures than this simple, direct snap-
shot. Yet a symbol it became  and a classic of its type.
On the other hand, it is unlikely that it would be included in an anthol-
ogy or exhibition of great photographs-as-art. It is too closely linked
to a specific time, place and political event.
3. The single photograph which is valued may combine both symbolic func-
tion and act as a reminder of the photographer s body of work. One photo-
graph beloved by the art establishment is Moonrise Over Hernandez by Ansel
Adams. It may very well be the best-selling art print in the history of pho-
tography, each copy selling for thousands of dollars. The image is sym-
bolic of an America at peace, in a time of old-fashioned moral values when
life was less complicated; it is also a reminder of Adam s other classic im-
ages and his great ability to dramatize the landscape and impart a sense of
grandeur and dignity to an otherwise common scene. As a postscript it should
be noted that this image also illustrates photography s ability to produce
multiples of the same print. A best estimate is that 1,000 prints of this single
picture were printed and sold by Adams before his death!
Back to the problem of understanding the specialized area of art pho-
tography. And it can be a problem even for the knowledgeable, sophis-
ticated viewer. There are several reasons for this state of uncertainty.
First, and perhaps most important, most of the museum and gallery
photographs are being shown out of context from their original intent.
The vast majority of photographers throughout this history of the
medium have been working professionals. This is also true of most of
ART, AND WHY IT IS SO DIFFERENT " 69
the great names of photography in recent decades who have been
singled out as artists for the edification of students, who are not in-
formed of the photographers professional status. These names in-
clude Bill Brandt, Ansel Adams, Robert Frank, Garry Winogrand, Elliot
Erwitt, Duane Michals, W. Eugene Smith, Walker Evans, Henri Cartier-
Bresson, Richard Avedon, Irving Penn, Diane Arbus, Weegee, et al.
Their photographs were often taken on assignment, for magazines or
books, or on advertising or fashion assignments, with not the slightest
suggestion of the art-status of their images. Yet in recent years single
pictures from their assignments have appeared on gallery or museum
walls, carefully and tastefully matted and framed, and discreetly sepa-
rated from their neighboring images, and presented as individual art
objects.
There is no objection to this practice; there are no ethical or critical reasons
why photographs should not be used in a variety of contexts. The problem
which confronts us as viewers, however, is that we are suddenly asked (be-
cause of the art context) to approach the photograph from a mental per-
spective at variance with the original intent. Occasionally the image slides
quite naturally into this role; often, the mental jarring necessary to accom-
plish the shift leads to confusion.
Here s a personal example. Throughout the late 1950s Robert Frank
traveled the length and breadth of America, shooting thousands of
pictures of cafe interiors, juke boxes, political rallies, people on the
street, urban squalor, street furniture and motor vehicles and so
on. Many were shot on magazine assignments. The final selection
was presented in a carefully edited and sequenced book, The Ameri-
cans, which has become a classic in 20th-century photography. The
book, as a unit, is very powerful. In recent years single pictures
have been extracted from the book and exhibited in museums and
galleries. Out of context, I find there are not many great pictures
and most are rather dull, except as reminders of the whole set; as a
unity I think of The Americans as one of the most interesting books
ever published in the world of photography.
70 " ON LOOKING AT PHOTOGRAPHS: DAVID HURN & BILL JAY
The lesson here is that many photographs may cause confusion when
viewed as fine art, because they do not work best under those circum-
stances. This is not a criticism of those photographs, or of the need for a
gallery or museum to emphasize individual works, but merely a recogni-
tion that it would be unfair to judge all dogs by the beauty of their feathers.
Another major difficulty when viewing fine-art photographs in
galleries resides in their appearance. Often they do not look like pho-
tographs at all. These manipulated images are often combinations of
processes, with applied color, employing multiple negatives or a wide
variety of other techniques and print-making methods. The original
subject matter may be totally obscured by style and the picture
assumed to be incomprehensible. Yet we have discovered (in the first
chapter) that subject matter is of prime concern in photography. Does
this mean that such art-photographs can be instantly and totally
dismissed as the personal indulgences of artists, of no concern in the
medium of photography?
Not necessarily. It is a help, when confronted with such strange concoctions,
to remember a simple sentence: although these images may be considered
photographs, they are not made by photographers. Therefore the principles
of photography as previously outlined do not apply. In order to understand
these photographs we must switch to art principles. They are made, dis-
cussed, analyzed and judged according to the current standards of art criti-
cism which is very different from the principles involved in general photogra-
phy. It is as well to remember that artists are at liberty to employ the medium
of photography for their own purposes with no regard for this medium s
historical origins or intrinsic characteristics. The only difficulty arises when
the critical issues of art are applied to non-art photographs and when the [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]