SEEING IS BELIEVING - Documenting Contrasts

  

INTRODUCTION

 

The world we live in – life – is fluid, colorful, full of distractions constantly pulling one's attention in every which direction. Time is a fundamental factor in this dynamic. Life is unsentimentally sober, unapologetically continuous, does not wait for one to realize the importance of a moment before allowing it to pass and make room for the next. Life is ambiguous and conveys no clear message, purpose or deeper meaning. Life itself has no symbolism, contrasts or contradictions. It is the function of the individual and/or society to take a step back in order to ‘see the bigger picture’, that one may interpret the implications of what has happened; to give it meaning. This meaning is composed by analyzing the different trajectories of occurrences, contrasting them with one another, finally producing a narrative and therefore a logical purpose. To produce this narrative is an inherent urge embedded in humanity. Photography is nothing more than a physical manifestation – a tool – to pursue this urge. If executed successfully, it can pause and extract the precise moment in which meaning is conveyed. Cartier-Bresson would call it “the decisive moment”.

  

THE SPECTRUM OF GENRES

 

When contemplating my photographic work and the theorization of it, one of the first questions that arise is the one of categorization. Into which photographic genre do my images belong? In order to determine this, it is first necessary to asses within which spectrum an answer can be found. If that answer exists remains to be seen.

  

STREET PHOTOGRAPHY

 

Street photography is an art form that has existed since the Eastman-Kodak Company introduced the first portable camera in 1884. Shortly thereafter there was some public backlash. Even then, people had privacy concerns. They worried about their photo appearing in newspaper print for all their neighbors to see. And now, almost 130 years later, people are still concerned with the same thing. Instead of worrying about the newspaper reaching neighbors we now worry about photos reaching across the globe through internet platforms such as Facebook, Google Street view or photo blogs. With new technology pushing boundaries, privacy continues to be a battle street photographers must fight.

 

"Term given to photographs taken spontaneously on the street with or without the permission of their subjects. It is especially applied to the work of American photographers of the 1950s and 1960s, including Robert Frank, Garry Winogrand, and William Klein." (A Dictionary of Modern and Contemporary Art (2 ed.), Ian Chilvers and John Glaves-Smith, Oxford University Press, 2009)

 

‘Candid’ is a central term in street photography. It means: free from bias, impartial, sincere, informal and unposed. The common thread in all the descriptions of the word is honesty and purity. The nature of street photography itself implies this, since it takes place in an unarranged environment with subjects whose actions are unpredictable. The photographer must therefore react spontaneously and quickly to capture the significant moments. An equally important factor as the talent of the photographer is coincidence and luck. In the attempt to achieve unbiased honesty with the photography, the pictures are often taken in a way that the unposed nature is preserved. Achieved either by ‘shooting from the hip’, in which case the subject is at no point aware of the camera and the act of photography; or by the moment of surprise, in which the picture is taken before the subject is able to compose a reaction. This inability to adjust to the situation is also on the side of the photographer, since the moments pass quite quickly and he cannot see what is within the frame when shooting from the hip or merely concentrating on taking the picture, rather than its content. An ambiguity and uncertainty of the content arises from the spontaneous and perishable nature of these instances. The fact that images of street photography rather seldom are titled is a continuation of that ambiguity.

 

A prime example for street photography and this notion is Robert Frank’s The Americans, a book containing a photographic reportage with no clear message, but very strong observations of American society in the mid 1950’s. This book consists of 83 photographs, while it took Frank two years and 28,000 shots to complete. The realm of the street photographer being the capture of uniqueness and inimitability of everyday life while preserving its candidness - the moments when luck, talent and meaning synchronize - are few and far between. The main abilities of the street photographer are patience, anticipation and very quick reaction in order to capture these rare moments.

 

The cardinal point of street photography, even more so than it being candid, is its focus and concentration on the instant. That instant alone, without explanation, must carry substance. Enough substance, so that the viewer sees it as more than a picture of an unremarkable, everyday scene, which it essentially is, but pauses for a moment to analyze it in detail and hopefully extract meaning from it. Herein lies yet another talent that the photographer must possess: to find and select the unique within the plentiful. The one picture of a scene that conveys the concentrated meaning of an array of images. Or in the case of The Americans: a collection of photographs that embody the entirety and grandness of the American experience. This is a process of filtration, the photographer being that filter.

  

DOCUMENTARY PHOTOGRAPHY

 

"In the broadest sense, all photography not intended purely as a means of artistic expression might be considered ‘documentary’, the photograph a visual document of an event, place, object, or person, providing evidence of a moment in time." (The Oxford Companion to the Photograph, Robin Lenman and Angela Nicholson, Oxford University Press, 2006)

 

While street photography is concerned with the instant, documentary photography is primarily concerned with sequence and context. A single documentary photograph is also capable of telling a story within itself, but is most commonly within a context, a story. For this reason, photojournalism is also within the field of documentary photography. It is the photographic documentation, proof, of a clearly defined moment in time, often accompanied by an article to give it the aforementioned context. The titles of these photographs are usually sober and concise descriptions of the place, timeframe and conditions that circumscribe the content of the image. This frames and clearly defines the image, taking away from its ambiguity and universality. The voice of the photographer then takes a back seat to the story that is to be told. This is not to say that unpredictability, coincidence and luck are not embedded in documentary photography. But these factors are certainly secondary.

 

Candidness is not an issue in documentary photography. While the street photographer attempts to blend in with the scene at hand in order to capture unadulterated truth, the photojournalist is concerned with telling a specific story. To accomplish this, it is not compulsory that he remains undetected by his subjects. At moments, it might even be beneficial for the photographer to have clearly distinguished role allocations, in which the subject is aware of the photographic documentation. The assumption of the role of the photographer instead of participant allows the subjects to mentally assimilate and adjust to the circumstances. Thus, the presence and function of the photographer is more likely to be accepted, or at least tolerated than in the case of street photography, where the photographer is constantly jumping between the roles of participant and documentalist. This fluctuation startles and agitates the subjects, for they have no time to adjust. This seems to sometimes leave them with a feeling of being exploited.

 

The term documentary photography also covers a far wider spectrum of potential subjects. As the dictionary entry claims, the main focus of this genre is to document. This implies an inherent distance from the scene or subject, since an analysis and interpretation has already taken place before the pictures are even taken. More so than street photography, documentary photography is based on assignments, which provide this predetermined viewpoint and interpretation. In order to actually receive paid assignments, Henri Cartier-Bresson was advised to categorize himself as a photojournalist when applying for photo agencies.

 

"I’m not interested in documenting. Documenting is extremely dull and I’m a very bad reporter. When I had an exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art in 1946, my friend, Robert Capa, told me, “Henri, be very careful. You must not have a label of a surrealist photographer. If you do, you won’t have an assignment and you’ll be like a hothouse plant. Do whatever you like, but the label should be ‘photojournalist.’" (‘Henri Cartier-Bresson: Living and Looking’)

 

This quote poignantly exemplifies the elusiveness of categorization and how even the protagonists within the respective fields hesitantly allow themselves to be pigeonholed. Even Robert Frank is deemed as a documentary photographer by some, which enhances the blurred nature of the lines between these genres even further. An attempt to find a definitive classification and containment of each genre is fruitless, for these genres are dynamic and ever-changing. To be deemed as part of one genre does not exclude the possibility of concurrently being part of another.

  

SUBJECTIVE DOCUMENTATION - FINDING A NICHE

 

“Contrast is what makes photography interesting.” (Conrad Hall)

 

Meaning is produced through contrasts, concentration on specifics and reflection, as is a photographic image. It might be for this reason why monochrome photography has such a strong appeal and often seems to convey a situation more forcefully than the color version of the same image. “When you photograph people in color, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in black and white, you photograph their souls.” (Ted Grant) These enhanced contrasts, through the elimination of the facade of colors, rid the picture of any superficial distractions. The viewer of the picture can then concentrate on the underlying situation at hand more easily. Instead of the gaze being pulled toward bright colors, it immediately focuses on the situation at hand and its details, promoting a more intimate and intrinsic perception and thus interpretation. This is also evoked by the foreignness of the monochrome image, which allows the viewer to see a familiar reality in a different way than he is accustomed to. “Black and white are the colors of photography. To me they symbolize the alternatives of hope and despair to which mankind is forever subjected.” (Robert Frank)

 

In essence, these are the concepts on which I base my photography: to freeze a passing moment and display its contrasts - be they on the surface or within the displayed situation - in order to signify a narrative; to produce a message that allows the audience to interpret it and extract meaning out of it. A forceful suggestion of only one message cannot be the objective, but rather a reduction of the scene at hand into a framework of confrontation that allows a spectrum of interpretation.

 

The goal of the photographer is to produce an image which is strong enough to facilitate and withstand different perceptions and their scrutiny. Much like a parent, the aim is not to dictate a path for one's child, but to raise the child to be strong enough to pursue its own path. Ultimately, no matter how strong a photographer's agenda is, the viewer can and will choose his own understanding of the material, consequently enriching its meaning. The photographer can only hope that the spectrum of possible views and interpretations provided by an image is acknowledged and thereby contributes to the audience's understanding and catharsis. To not force a single view upon the audience, but to present the possibility of different views. “Ideas are very dangerous. […] When you are photographing you are not trying to push a point or explain something or prove something […] it comes by itself.” (‘Henri Cartier-Bresson: Living and Looking’)

 

The photographs I have chosen to discuss are of situations that, while quasi-staged, are extractions from the mundane, prosaic reality, which hopefully acquire a new or condensed context through a unique perspective. Staged not in the sense that the subjects are posing for me, but rather that they are publicly displaying abstract concepts manifested through an extroverted performance. The two scenarios I am discussing are: firstly, political demonstrations and secondly, artistic street performances. The previous is an obvious confrontation of two entities: demonstrators and police. Both stage physical performances of abstract concepts: the dissatisfaction with the state and its modus operandi opposed by the display of power by the state. The latter mentioned body of work is constituted by a group called Garbage Embrace, who go to crowded areas of a city to unexpectedly begin caressing trash cans, embracing them and eventually submerging their heads and torsos into the trash cans, making fluid movements with their protruding legs. Naturally, this provokes a wide array of reactions from the pedestrians, ranging from confusion and disbelief to a conscious disregard. Whereas the last-mentioned is actually also a form of performance, since it is obvious that the people engaged in this behavior are aware of the performance going on in front of them. But they refuse to be engulfed by it and continue to go about their day, as if nothing has happened. When taking pictures of these scenes, it is my objective to capture the reactions and interactions brought to life by aforementioned confrontations.

 

These performances take place on a momentary level, not necessarily intended for documentation, but more a form of social interaction. A political demonstration or Garbage Embrace are not instigated for me, the photographer, but for the respective counterparts; the audience. They are undefined moments that quickly pass, during which my goal is to catch the most polarizing situations that arise. By photographically documenting these situations, I am able to capture an image and narrate it through my perspective and perception before the performances, along with their meaning, dissolve.

 

What I aim to do with my photography is shine a light on aspects of everyday life; reactions, actions, interplay of any kind and the circumstances that generate them. This is an act of holding a mirror before society, to force it to see itself for what it is. It is meant as a commentary from a singular perspective, a social and political act based on an internal perception of the external, so to say. “Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world.” (Arnold Newman) The focus is predominately on the darker aspects of society. Nonetheless, this is not rooted in a hatred, but in fact an affection for society; and in the belief that if only honestly confronted with the reality of its behavior it can change and improve.

 

“I have been frequently accused of deliberately twisting subject matter to my point of view. Above all, I know that life for a photographer cannot be a matter of indifference. Opinion often consists of a kind of criticism. But criticism can come out of love. It is important to see what is invisible to others. Perhaps the look of hope or the look of sadness. Also, it is always the instantaneous reaction to oneself that produces a photograph.” (Robert Frank - Page 115 of U.S. Camera 1958. Published by the U.S. Camera Publishing Corp., 1957)

 

Motivated by the will to display these deficits in order to produce a consciousness of them, which could contribute to a reduction or even repair of them; my photography is seldom meant as a celebration of the beauty of the world, but more an appeal to better it. Therefore, I usually do not take pictures of beautiful landscapes or flowers, but of the destitute, the helpless, the oppressed, the arrogant, the blinded people and the situations brought forth by modern society and the status quo, which best display these contrasts. The root of this is always the photographer. While attempting to mirror society as he sees is, he simultaneously mirrors himself by showing his subjective view of the world and what occupies his mind. It is a very personal act. At the same time, it is an act of alienation. Through the camera and the act of photography, a physical and mental divide is produced between photographer and subject. In most cases, my aim is to prohibit an interaction between myself and the subjects. I intend to document the interaction before me, not an interaction with me. This goal is relatively unattainable. As soon as my intended subject notices me and my camera, the moment of true documentation is diminished. This does not mean that there is no longer a quality photograph to be captured, but that the entire momentum and meaning of the moment is shifted.

  

PROCESS & AFTERMATH – MEANING, MESSAGE & CATEGORIZATION

 

While often having a very strong opinion towards my photography – or at least the situations out of which they arise - the only influence I can have on the audience’s reception of it is primarily the selection of a motif, followed by the framing and finally the title. “It is my intention to present - through the medium of photography - intuitive observations of the natural world which may have meaning to the spectators.” (Ansel Adams) There is a more or less conscious process involved in this, but fundamentally I am a captive of my own mind. I cannot be objective when documenting the situation, since I only have my own view of it. This notion is then carried forth in the titling of the image, in which the aim is to provoke an interpretation that might not be initially considered at first view, nor must it be the interpretation that I had of the original situation. The thought conveyed in the title is of course one that I have developed, thus not objective. It is very doubtful these photographs can then be considered as unbiased documentation, even though they depict a real situation that happened, by intention ideally uninfluenced by the fact that I was documenting it. In choosing to include certain aspects while leaving others out, then implicating an interpretation with my title, I have produced the basis on which this image can be seen. Still, a relatively wide spectrum of possible readings remains, but even that spectrum is at the mercy of the photographer.

 

My photography is initially motivated by the intention to document a moment. But if I am able to find the 'poetry of the moment' and extract it from the prosaic ambiguity of reality, the work transforms into something different. Perhaps art, perhaps artificiality. This extraction can range from a purely visual one to an extraction of meaning and concentration of the situation into a much more polarizing depiction of that particular moment. The intention then switches from documenting a specific instant to showing the universality of that instant and how it is an analogy of something much broader, applicable to many different aspects of life. This is the instance in which meaning becomes message. On the basis of reality and through the medium of photography, a microcosm is produced and presented, in which the forces of said reality become condensed. This condensation leads to an accessibility, a simplified understanding of complex concepts and therefore produces a basis on which a judgment can be made.

 

“Facts are not interesting – it's the point of view on facts which is important and in photography it is the evocation […] There are no new ideas in the world – there is only new arrangement of things.” (Henri Cartier-Bresson)

 

The photograph, then, is no longer of that specific moment, but of an abstract concept. The focus is no longer on a man with his head in a trash can, but of the spectacle itself and the responses it provokes within the audience. The performer becomes secondary, while the real focus shifts to the audience and its wide range of reactions. Without their reactions as contrast and grounding within reality, the image would have no depth; it would have no relation to the world that surrounds us. The picture of a single man opposing a line of police is not about that man on that day in that street, but it is a picture of resistance as such; of determination and of opposing forces. It is as well the externalization of the internal in the sense of physically expressing, performing a sentiment. The armchair placed on the street is a symbol thereof. “To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event.” (Henri Cartier-Bresson)

 

This notion of abstraction and significance is – in a way - a justification for depicting someone without their permission. If the interpretation and perceived message of the photograph outgrow the mere depiction of a person, I believe that message should not be silenced by that one person for individual reasons. War photography is the most extreme example of this notion. It functions as a medium to produce awareness. But in order to produce this awareness, the image must be authentic. This implies that the photographer does not influence the situation by helping the victims or hindering the aggressors, at least until he has gotten his shot. It is no longer about any one person, but about a broader concept. The photograph then develops an independent existence and becomes a means to an end, to a higher purpose.

 

The process of photography itself, in that moment is more instinctual, subconscious. However, when analyzed in hindsight, one can distinguish different dynamics taking place throughout the entire process. Through the confrontational and performative nature of these images, the theatrical metaphor developed by Erving Goffman for the distinction between 'front' and 'back' regions and the role of the photographer therein, described by Lisa Henderson, seem quite fitting. The 'front' region is the area in which the audience is to perceive the performance. The 'back' region is the area in which the performer does not need to uphold the performance. These notions are applied to the individual in society by Goffman, who claims that there is a strong distinction between the performed self, which is shown in public (front), and the true self, that can only be found in complete privacy ('back'), and that every individual is involved in a Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, which is fittingly the title of his book. As soon as a person is aware of the gaze or attention of others, he will no longer be his true self and rather perform a role. This dynamic seems quite interesting when applied to Garbage Embrace or political demonstrations, in which there is a clear provocation on the frontal level by the protestors/performers towards the police/pedestrians/society. This provocation is an attempt to break through the 'front' of these oppositional forces - to disarm them - and to plant a seed of thought into their 'back' – to produce a consciousness. Gaining access to one’s subconscious through a physical and - in so doing - visual externalization, much like what photography achieves.

 

My goal as the photographer in this situation is to catch the moments in which these attempts at disarmament succeed or fail. I would like to think that I have no active role in this, that I have no influence on the performance or the reactions, that I am invisible. But this is unfortunately not the case. I always considered these photographs as street photography, merely for the fact that I was on the street, nothing was staged and nobody was explicitly posing for me, the photographer. That however implies an unplanned, spontaneous basis. My original intention might have been to produce street photography, but in these cases the stage has been set. As soon as I am aware that something will definitely happen, which is obvious with demonstrations or prearranged street performances, it is difficult to categorize the work as street photography. This would shift the work into the realm of documentary photography, for I am documenting a predetermined moment.

 

However, to categorize these images as mere unbiased documentations is not fitting either, for I clearly position the message of the image within a certain framework of interpretation. This is done by basically editing reality with the camera. Some parts are consciously left out, while others are emphasized, reinforcing the intended message, which can then be substantiated further by the title. The fact alone, that I give my pictures titles that imply a specific viewpoint and understanding, is a break with both described genres. By doing so, to a certain extent I chose to be the moderator of the meaning and message of the photograph. If that moderation is approved of or affirmed is irrelevant. What is important is that I have presented the image of the situation through my perspective and, by giving it a title, am able to manipulate the presentation and initial perception of that image. Much like a painter or sculptor, whose last act of control over his artwork is determining the lighting conditions under which his artwork is to be presented and viewed.

 

More times than not, coincidence plays a bigger role in the composition and development of meaning, but the influence of the photographer is furthered by his selection of which images are to be used and which are not; by filtration. After the images have been passed through different levels of selection, the meaning of the images and the message conveyed by the photographer become progressively clear. Naturally, the question arises of ‘What is the message?’. The message, for the photographer, can only be the presentation of that image. To say ‘Take a moment and look at that’; no more and no less. The audience cannot develop an opinion about something that they have never seen or perceived. To artificially produce this perception is the scope of the photographer, to allow the audience to at least have a mediated experience, so that a consciousness and a corresponding opinion can be formed. This is the basis upon which change can be achieved, be it on a singular or collective level.

  

Final Thoughts & Conclusion

 

As one might have been able to anticipate, I have not been able to clearly distinguish within which genre my work can be categorized. Many similarities and divergences to both fields have been revealed, but no clear tendency could be discerned. This however has in no way daunted me. To the contrary. I believe what has made photographers like Robert Frank and Henri Cartier-Bresson highly recognized is their departure from classification and established standards of photography. They had visions that went beyond these standards and thereby established an expansion and metamorphosis of those standards. Now that their developed principles are widely acknowledged and fortified, it is the function of photography to once again break new ground which can no longer be accurately defined with the established norms. I do not desire to claim that this is what I have achieved with my photographic approach. I am however willing to claim that a photographer should never see himself constrained to a set of guidelines that prohibit and as a result inhibit his approach and objective.

 

If there is one conclusion I have extracted from this train of thought, it is that the two described and explored genres have more similarities than differences. The aim of both is to tell a story, be that with or without a context or explanation or ‘grounding’. The difference is that street photography tends to tell a far more intimate story, both on the basis of the subject and the photographer. Documentary photography tells a much broader, political and social story that is on a far larger scale than any relationship between photographer and subject. Both protagonists become invisible and interchangeable agents within a greater scheme. While the scope of the street photographer is to hold a mirror up to the individual and himself, it is the function of the documentary photographer to hold that mirror up to society. These pictured presentations are always mediated through the photographer and therefore never objective or unbiased. Each genre, in its own way aims to produce an insight and consciousness of issues ranging in scale from minute and visceral to monumental and complex. But what the ultimate goal of both fields seems to be is to turn that consciousness into a conscience. Because to have a conscience implies having an active participation in the presented issue. Even if that conscience manifests itself in a stark criticism of the photographic genre itself, which is for example the case with Susan Sontag regarding to the issues of privacy and war photography. That criticism widens the platform of content and debate, thereby enriching it and keeping it alive. As Robert Frank has established and I strongly agree with: “criticism can come from love”. To assume a position of disregard and indifference is far more harmful. Indifference allows an issue to stay silent, to never be raised, therefore never contemplated or discussed and ultimately remain unchanged. Advancement is achieved by confrontation, and confrontation is achieved by exposure.