I really enjoyed your article – and apologize for arriving late.
It may be nothing, and it may be everything, but I seem to notice a lot of photography coming out in books and galleries, that are about time capsules and ‘remember when….’ Inevitably, these photographs are about people. Sure, you can look at the model of a car and guess – within reason – the period of photograph, but what we enjoy to look at and debate are hairstyles, clothing, make-up, shoes, signs in windows, prices of hamburgers, buildings that are no more, etc., etc.
I don’t know what the right lag-time is for these observations, what it takes to become a ‘document’ of a time gone by. I do know that the popularity of these images is immense. And it seems, it has always been this way. Curtis’ record of first nations, Julia Margaret Cameron’s chicken-coop, Karsh’s or Sidibe’s studio portraits, or William Klein’s NY. Whatever we may feel about these images, we are grateful for their existence, because they tell us something about ourselves and where we came from. We take great pleasure in debating their context in any number of ways from deep resentment of the context, exploitation, circumstances, access, privilege, etc., etc. But, without them, where would we be?
In reality, what we should be, is grateful these images exist, that photographers went to the effort to make them, tracking humanity through their lenses. Could the photographers have done better? Maybe. Could they have been more objective? Perhaps. Could they have been better at contextualizing? More than likely. But without them, what would we do?
The reality is that every time we find a cardboard suitcase full of photographs, full of memories, we stir. We love it. We recognize things, we remember things, or we are told by those that remember what it was like then. We argue about them. We fight over them. We hate them. We write about them…….
Anyone remember Vivian Maier? Clearly a photographer who made photographs for her own enjoyment, but the discovery or her hoard and the subsequent exploitation…. Love or hate the how, but the record of time and place is fantastic. And are we not richer and wiser for it?
In 2050, if we have no photographic records of people in 2023, because we were afraid to make the photographs, wouldn’t that be a shame. A tragedy?
Thank you for formulating this. No one should be "below" any threshold of being photographed — that is my firmly held belief, otherwise they are made invisible — see for instance the current value of @blackarchives IG account. But at the same time they should not be exploited by means of the photo, which means that a level playing field needs somehow to extend to the person behind the camera, not just the people who are depicted. How to articulate that kind of conception through presenting a photo or a series of them is knotty and probably quite individual photographer to photographer, but there is no categorical reason to hold off.
Thank you for the great text. For me, it is often the way of presentation that makes a difference: seeing the suffering of portrayed people in huge prints in an expensive event-like exhibition makes me angry, whereas I can quite like the same shots in a photo book. The appeal to all involved to engage with each other is honourable, although the engagement between sitters and audience remains a one-way street. Only the photographers can talk to the portrayed. In the best case, the pictures speak enough in the exhibition or the book.
This articulates, far better than I could, ideas that have been nebulously floating around my mind for a few years now, thank so much for writing this with such clarity and power.
I should have said, the current treasuring of the @blackarchives.co IG account, to give it its proper name. Some of the photos they show may have been taken exploitatively, and even today there may be ways of looking at them that get the subjects they show badly wrong, but I am convinced an overwhelming majority of the mass following sees these photos as restorative and compelling documentation.
Re: In Defense of Portraits
I really enjoyed your article – and apologize for arriving late.
It may be nothing, and it may be everything, but I seem to notice a lot of photography coming out in books and galleries, that are about time capsules and ‘remember when….’ Inevitably, these photographs are about people. Sure, you can look at the model of a car and guess – within reason – the period of photograph, but what we enjoy to look at and debate are hairstyles, clothing, make-up, shoes, signs in windows, prices of hamburgers, buildings that are no more, etc., etc.
I don’t know what the right lag-time is for these observations, what it takes to become a ‘document’ of a time gone by. I do know that the popularity of these images is immense. And it seems, it has always been this way. Curtis’ record of first nations, Julia Margaret Cameron’s chicken-coop, Karsh’s or Sidibe’s studio portraits, or William Klein’s NY. Whatever we may feel about these images, we are grateful for their existence, because they tell us something about ourselves and where we came from. We take great pleasure in debating their context in any number of ways from deep resentment of the context, exploitation, circumstances, access, privilege, etc., etc. But, without them, where would we be?
In reality, what we should be, is grateful these images exist, that photographers went to the effort to make them, tracking humanity through their lenses. Could the photographers have done better? Maybe. Could they have been more objective? Perhaps. Could they have been better at contextualizing? More than likely. But without them, what would we do?
The reality is that every time we find a cardboard suitcase full of photographs, full of memories, we stir. We love it. We recognize things, we remember things, or we are told by those that remember what it was like then. We argue about them. We fight over them. We hate them. We write about them…….
Anyone remember Vivian Maier? Clearly a photographer who made photographs for her own enjoyment, but the discovery or her hoard and the subsequent exploitation…. Love or hate the how, but the record of time and place is fantastic. And are we not richer and wiser for it?
In 2050, if we have no photographic records of people in 2023, because we were afraid to make the photographs, wouldn’t that be a shame. A tragedy?
Søren K. Harbel
Thank you for formulating this. No one should be "below" any threshold of being photographed — that is my firmly held belief, otherwise they are made invisible — see for instance the current value of @blackarchives IG account. But at the same time they should not be exploited by means of the photo, which means that a level playing field needs somehow to extend to the person behind the camera, not just the people who are depicted. How to articulate that kind of conception through presenting a photo or a series of them is knotty and probably quite individual photographer to photographer, but there is no categorical reason to hold off.
Thank you for the great text. For me, it is often the way of presentation that makes a difference: seeing the suffering of portrayed people in huge prints in an expensive event-like exhibition makes me angry, whereas I can quite like the same shots in a photo book. The appeal to all involved to engage with each other is honourable, although the engagement between sitters and audience remains a one-way street. Only the photographers can talk to the portrayed. In the best case, the pictures speak enough in the exhibition or the book.
This articulates, far better than I could, ideas that have been nebulously floating around my mind for a few years now, thank so much for writing this with such clarity and power.
Fantastic read, really looking forward to more of these
Thank you for writing this.
Very grateful for this x
A brilliant read. Thank you!
I should have said, the current treasuring of the @blackarchives.co IG account, to give it its proper name. Some of the photos they show may have been taken exploitatively, and even today there may be ways of looking at them that get the subjects they show badly wrong, but I am convinced an overwhelming majority of the mass following sees these photos as restorative and compelling documentation.