~Ai Weiwei
Artistic photography is a field which many of us encounter throughout our lives. In fact, in tandem with photography as such.
I remember the changing technology throughout my life, regarding photos. From camera rolls you left at a photo shop for them to develop, to the ease of digital photos in this time, eventually on our mobile phones. It is a kind of – what is called - “commodification” toward mass consumerism.
Though I in the course of my life often enjoyed taking photos, such as during travels, the “art” was for me more in what I photographed – e.g a landscape, houses, weather – than how I took it. I did often not even bother to check out all the camera’s technical options and possibilities (lighting, panorama, zooming, highlighting) that much, only when necessary.
I did not even quite know how more “professional” photos were taken: something with resolution, sure, and with stands, and other added equipment.. Bigger cameras too. Much more I did not know. Neither did I ever have much interest in buying a more expensive, professional camera.
My interest got awaken more by visits to museums devoted to photography in Amsterdam – you have a few nice ones -, and elsewhere, such as Bilbao, combining usually specific compositions and scenes from everyday reality, that happened to be captured with camera. One exhibition, for example, I saw in Amsterdam’s FOAM museum was of photos of socially critical (exiled, freedom-loving) Chinese photographer Ai Weiwei (photo hereunder).
It opened my eyes for the fact that photography is – in fact – or can be considered – an actual art form: more than just documenting, or catching a real moment.
“In the '70s, in Britain, if you were going to do serious photography, you were obliged to work in black-and-white. Color was the palette of commercial photography and snapshot photography.”
~Martin Parr
COMMODIFICATION
I am afraid that with the massive spread of smart phones in the last decade, many people fancy themselves good, even artistic photographers, just by selecting good scenes and images, looking perhaps a bit at lighting. It is now not a “project” anymore, e.g. camera rolls you used to take to a developer to be picked up later, relating to a certain vacation or event. Now with the smart phones and the Internet it became a continuous “photo focus” as we go through life, some more fanatical than others.
“Technology has eliminated the basement darkroom and the whole notion of photography as an intense labor of love for obsessives and replaced them with a sense of immediacy and instant gratification”.
~Joe McNally
A funny building, bike, or car, a strange obstacle, a lively street scene, street art, extraordinary people.. all can be “photo worthy”, and when deemed as such, these digital photos spread publicly easily through social media, indeed full of such personal photo galleries.
Though I like taking photos and nice photos too, sometimes I feel it to be “overkill”. That might be a personal thing, for I have never been very “visually oriented”: music and text/content attracted me more, eased my mind more. For the same reason, I have never been a “film buff”, certainly not of the “superficial and spectacular” Hollywood films, with often more visual spectacle than substance. At least, there should be a balance.
Yet, a photo does not mean much by itself: there is always a story behind it, that makes it intriguing.
There is first the reporting, historical, and social value. The look in the eyes of people, usually tells a whole life story, without “deceptive” words.
HISTORY
As photography developed as such since the 1820s and 1830s, first in France, and then slowly “improved” and internationalized, some historical periods did not or hardly have direct images, rather representation, including paintings and drawings.
SLAVERY
One of those historical epochs I miss “documenting” photographs of, is that of slavery of Africans in the Americas, and the related trans-Atlantic slave trade between Africa and the Americas. Such a crucial and impactful period for many people and several continents, is visually mostly represented by drawings and paintings. Some drawn by those officially hired, but sometimes still with free spirits.
An example of the last is the Scottish-Flemish soldier in Dutch service John Gabriël Stedman, who showed the cruelty of slavery in Suriname, a Dutch colony. His drawings/sketchings were mostly supported by written historical sources, including the cruel punishment and conditions of slaves.
Somewhat ironically, he was sent to Suriname as a soldier to help suppress slave rebellions in that colony, later somewhat switched as he got in a relationship with a slave woman, and began to question the conditions, or at least the severity, of slavery. Some images of slavery in Suriname he left that were manmade, yet somehow educational. Not real, but hinting at reality.
Similar drawings/sketching or paintings of slavery exist from elsewhere in the Americas: e.g. the French colonies, Brazil, Jamaica, and Cuba. The painters/drawing artists tended to be somehow serving the colonial government, but at times more free to allow some reality, besides the “idealizing” of all-too picturesque plantations, as a harmonious village, that it never was: it was overall based on fear and violence.
I worked for years in a scientific institute studying (especially) Caribbean slavery, and I remember those drawings, often as illustration in works about slavery, in e.g. Jamaica or Suriname (with drawings by the mentioned Stedman). Later historical epochs were of course illustrated with, well, photos.
A selection of such paintings/drawings of African slavery in the Americas, I used for the video of my song Backra Massa (including Stedman’s sketches in Suriname).
PHOTOS OF SLAVERY?
Photos, on the other hand, could “hide” or “rework’ the reality of plantation much less than such drawings or paintings, and I even theorized once that the British abolished slavery (in 1836) fearing the photos (that soon spread to Britain by the 1830s) of plantation slavery in its colonies, and the negative image of cruelty it would give the British Empire. Slavery was abolished later in places like Suriname, the US, Brazil, and Cuba, between the 1850s and even 1880s, so photos of plantation slavery could have been made there more, but mostly were not allowed, for being unfavorable to the colonial authorities, or inconvenient. Yet, some were made.
“It takes a lot of imagination to be a good photographer. You need less imagination to be a painter because you can invent things. But in photography everything is so ordinary; it takes a lot of looking before you learn to see the extraordinary”.
~David Bailey
There are some actual photos of people who were actually slaves, African-born and American born, and those are intriguing and impactful. Especially in the US, between the 1840s and 1860s – including the transitional civil war, actual photos were taken, of plantation slaves in southern states like South Carolina or Virginia. Quite some photos of slaves were also made in Brazil and elsewhere.
The expression on faces of actual slaves are telling and impressive, as well as the general context. These photos visualized the horror and tragedy of dehumanization, of being made inferior like cattle. Facial expressions of enslaved Africans show often a mixture of resignation, sadness, and anger. Photos can capture that directly, drawings/paintings only imitate that.
Here is such an impressive series regarding the US, but there are also interesting photos during slavery, of slaves, taken in Brazil, Cuba, and elsewhere.
http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/maai/enslavement/text1/photosenslaved.pdf
GREY AREA
These documenting photos of “harsh reality” (including those taken during WW II and the Holocaust, in wars, of famine) – with little room for “posing” – contrast somewhat with later “journalistic” photos – photojournalism -, often with interested parties (promotion, often for commercial or political reasons), but also with more artistic aspirations of photography developing over time.
A grey area between “reporting/documenting” photos and “art” photos developed, normally called “documentary photos”. Capturing moments – as photography does -, but in a specific wider context. “Stylized reality”, you can consider it, e.g. a photo series on “Life in the favelas of Rio”.. Of course photos of such a project are not random, or taken nonchalantly, as so many do with their smart phones, nowadays. They are professional photos. Moreover, they refer to a social reality one wants to “report” on, as it were, visually. There’s a story and a message.
“Photography is the easiest medium with which to be merely competent. Almost anybody can be competent. It's the hardest medium in which to have some sort of personal vision and to have a signature style.”
~Chuck Close
From this, the following step is toward what is known as “fine-art photography”, defined as “using photography as a medium for creative expression” and with as goal “expressing an idea, a message, or an emotion”.
An intriguing field, which I myself however could never grasp fully, yet often appreciated, such as in museums, online, in books and journals. Of course, I tried to make “fine-art” photos myself, with limited means, haha. Using light/shadow, setting, and perspective, etcetera, as so many may have. I remembered that one of my older brothers took it further: he was more visually oriented than me – even took up painting -, but also devoted for a period time to “fine-art photos”, including in black and white.
Yet, what I still not fully understand is the difference between “representational” (or documentary) photography and “fine-art” photography: is it the same difference as between figurative and abstract art?
A painting friend of mine from El Salvador, who made mainly abstract paintings with medical references (he was also a doctor/physician), told me: “You don’t “understand” abstract art, but instead you “feel” it..”.
Is that it?
ORCHESTRATED
All in all, my ambiguous relationship with artistic or fine-art photography lies precisely in its staged, orchestrated character. Scenes are not natural, people are not themselves, but pose. Or are they? In one’s posing one expresses one’s dormant ambitions or desires, still shining through in the facial expression and attitude, however orchestrated and “artificial” a photo scene or setting may seem.
Other modern fine-art photos include the “photoshopping”-like techniques, moving even more into the world of the fictional, artificial, and unreal, but with an artistic function. The latter is an added value, because there are countless “photoshopped” photos based on lame humour, as well as photo manipulations for political or economic goals.
Large political crises (or “hypes”), like the one around corona since 2020, often make – like dictatorships – use of photos and films to “shape” minds. The Nazi propaganda of superior Aryans, versus footage of a Jewish ghetto, that Nazi films portrayed as filthy and with sordid characters and facial expressions, or related to newsreels about dictators like Mussolini or Franco doing “good” works, like opening a bridge or estuary, in the country. Nowadays, some photos of overloaded hospitals, or a man collapsed on the street (of course an unusual reaction to a flu, however severe, by the way) are proven to be manipulated, or misapplied (with a lying text) to the supposed “danger” of covid..
Psychologically, this is also interesting. As knowledge developed that “traumas” tend to be very “visual” in remembrance, especially among the victims. They often remember "visual" details of traumatic events stronger than, e.g. background noise, things said, smells, or – remarkably – sometimes even the felt physical or mental pain. This shows the strength and impact on our brains of "the visual" or imagery. Of course this very strength was and is misused, such as for political or commercial goals.
AMSTERDAM
The two photography museums I visited several times in Amsterdam, the Huis Marseille and the FOAM, convinced me of this added value of an “artistic” goal, rather than “comedic” or political/economic ones. They exhibited international photo art, often with political connotations, but indirectly.
In addition to my regular visits to these and other museums over the years (including also in Marseille, and the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao, N. Spain -photo above), in my personal circle I encountered people who told me about their professional photographic activities. Dimitris Meletis (orig. from Greece) has his own site, and also Alessandra Carnio (Argentinian, of Italian origin), both of whom I met in Amsterdam. There are also examples of their art and work on these websites.
and
https://www.alessandracarnio.com
To both of them, during conversations, I made the same joke: that I feared that with those smart phones, almost everyone fancies oneself a somehow “artistic” photographer, mostly unjustly. That “joke” of mine is only funny because it is true. Expectedly, their response was something along the lines of “that’s not the same..”. Not the same, they hinted at, because of an artistic approach, preparation, and technology/tools.
Especially for those interested in water and bridges, by the way, the Dutch capital Amsterdam is an appropriate location. One of the cities in Europe – and even the world – with most canals and water through the city, and – relatedly – the city with most bridges in the entire world (true fact).
Though the overall architecture in Amsterdam is perhaps more “Protestant” and “Germanic/ Northern European” than what one knows of flamboyant or graceful architecture in e.g. Southern or Eastern Europe, it is not without nice decorative and beautified streets, houses, of cityscapes, along with varied social and human scenes. Both Meletis and Carnio used the city Amsterdam for their photo art too.
While Alessandra Carnio seems to focus more on “fine-art photography” as such (including "portraits"), and Dimitris Meletis has a broader, professional approach (including video/documentaries on international social themes, and commercial photo assignations), both try to make a living out of it, and therefore have to operate commercially, on a market. Thus, they each in their own way move also in the “grey area” between fine-art photography and something more economic or political. Like with other “pure” art forms: there is no money in it, so they have to.
Yet, the world right now needs pure art, and also this art, especially after the overload of political and mass media manipulation – including misuse of photos and imagery – during the so-called “corona crisis” since Early 2020, and the draconian “lockdown and curfew policies” damaging (or attacking?) culture and art. The morbid emphasis on a virus and supposed “infections” driven by elites, had little joy and inspiration, due to its political – and some say cold financial – motivations, especially leaving a bad taste, as the stated “public health” goals were merely an excuse or a cover.
In reality, this “plandemic” as some call it, creates something unreal, by “faking” the real. Art – including fine-art photography -, does in fact the contrary: it shows the real through the unreal. Exactly the opposite.. That's the reason for censorship of "free" art in dictatorships.
And all of us with our mobile smartphones? It depends on the person and ambitions, but mostly resembling “representational”, reporting, or quasi-journalistic photos, thus more daily and mundane.
CONCLUSION
The implicit question throughout this essay was if I really view photography as a valid creative art form. This essay served in a sense for me to assemble arguments in favour or against that notion.
An interesting article I found on the Internet, addresses this same question:
https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/is-photography-art-debate/
I can conclude from all this, that I consider some types of photography as actually artistic, as is called “fine art-photography”, relating in my opinion mostly to “intent” and goals, as also the "formal" definition of art, I mentioned before. Techniques are not irrelevant, but advanced techniques (perspectives, camera, lighting etc.) have been used – some say: misused - as much for commercial or political photography.
Goals of artistic photography should ultimately relate to edifying, enlightening – as all art. In other words: showing different ways to view reality, rising above it, while enchanting or “moving”. This is different from the utilitarian goals of commercial aims or political propaganda. It is more uplifting.
I have seen quite some examples of this too..
"I think art certainly is the vehicle for us to develop any new ideas, to be creative, to extend our imagination, to change the current conditions."
~Ai Weiwei
