On Jun 3, 2011, at 4:03 AM, Bob W wrote: >> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of >> Stan Halpin >> >> I cannot see how Dorothea Lange's photos are substantively different >> from those that illustrate the story, but I guess the point is not the >> images themselves, but rather the way in which the photographers and >> editors used those photos in shaping a social narrative. >> > > I think the main difference is that the workers are photographing themselves > and their own situation, rather than being the passive subjects of someone > else's regard. > > B > OK Bob, I can see that. And it raises a large handful of philosophical and/or practical issues about photography. E.g., I wonder if we should accept the assumption that a participant is more likely to recognize key elements of their condition (suffering, poverty, hard work, old age, whatever) and thus is more likely to capture that in an image than an outsider. Or whether an amateur with no preconceptions about "art" and "composition" is more likely than a professional to capture good images. There is almost an 18th century argument that the pure natural state is better than the educated/developed one.
So yes, I can see how the interviewee might distinguish the work from e.g. Lange's based on process and method. But looking at the images and the stories they tell, none of that really matters to the viewer, and I would prefer the emphasis were on how different approaches lead to similar outcomes. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
