“Almost everyone has their own collection of pictures -the earlier ones may be organized in packets or drawers, some may be in albums, others scattered around in a disorderly fashion but impossible to throw away” (Wells, 2015)

A Question for Seller is a strange project; collecting family images that are sold on eBay, and displaying them along with the response from the seller as to how they had come to acquire the images.

Firstly, it is hard for me to imagine that people would but their own family images up for sale in such a frivolous manner. I understand that images fall into our hands from finds in old houses and sometimes charity shops but the deliberate sale of personal images I doubt.

In the late early 2000’s it was the common cry you heard in the office when unwanted items were talked about “put in on eBay” and we all had watched TV such as Bargain Hunt which leads us to believe that is value in junk.

This leads me to question the meaning and explanation around the collections – particularly if the question was asked before the sale. Could the seller not just invent an interesting meaning to what the images were to raise their value or just promote the sale. Other than accompanying text meaning to the photo’s come from what an individual viewer brings to them – their imagination, personal experiences etc.

As with all “art” of course it value is increased by placing it on a gallery wall, there are many examples of this in the art world Damien Hirst’s infamous sheep and a lot of the work of Andy Warhol – on cynical level her was just recreating what already existed, Brillo-pad Boxes, Campbell Soup tins etc

The course manual directs us to watch a video that is no longer available on YouTube and I can find no alternative links on the student website which is rather disappointing.

I have done a brief search on YouTube for the photographer and have looked at some of his work and watched the interview below.

Not knowing the context of the video the college was pointing us to it is hard to know what they are looking for when they as us to consider the questions below, but as this is art there is no such thing as wrong…

Do you think there is more to this work than aesthetic beauty?

Crewsons’ work is very cinematic in its colour palette, very reminiscent of David Lynch’s Blue Velvet (1986) and the famous painting Nighthawks by Edward Hopper. So there is a beauty to them but it is certainly not a traditional form of beauty; for while the lighting and colour palette are stunning the subject and pictures as a whole give a sense of unease to the viewer.

How Crewson works is large scale, very much like a movie production – these scenes are staged and planned with many, many assistants involved. In fact, I  doubt that he has the physical capacity or skill to produce these images on his own – he is as a photographer is more akin to a Movie Director or Producer.

Do you think Crewson succeeds in making his work ‘psychological’? What does this mean?

I have no idea what is meant by psychological work – are you saying that they are there to make the viewer think?

I see images that are static, like a diorama, there is no movement everything looks very deliberately posed a lot of the time I can’t see what the photographer is asking me to think about – I more often wonder what was they photographer trying to say what was in his mind.

Many of the images are very dark and as I have said give a sense of unease, but at the same time are very ordinary (to an American audience) scenes.

Crewson himself as said he has enough of the story to bring the viewer in, but there care no answers in the images just questions so perhaps he does make psychological images because the stories the viewers see are from there mind not Crewson’s.

What is your goal when making pictures? Do you think there is anything wrong with making beauty your main goal? Why, or why not?

My main goal when I take a picture is to have something that I like, second is that someone else likes.

I take photographs unlike Crewson who creates them. Mainly a combination of street style and travel photography

I want to capture life, emotion that I see, I not trying to explore my inner self and lay it bare for the world to see in my photographs.

And there of course nothing wrong with setting to capture beauty in a photograph that is why we take certain styles of pictures. However, there is a fine line before this falls into the banal for example when photographers only every photography pretty girls.

This exercise asks us to view the above scene from Goodfellas and analyse what in the film world is called the mise-en-scene.

The scene is where the main protagonist of the film Henry Hill (Ray Liotta) takes his future wife, Karen (Lorraine Bracco)  on a first date to an extremely popular Copacabana Club in early 1960’s Manhattan.

Both our protagonist and his date are both working class people, or so Karen believes, however, the Copacabana Club then was a very high-end venue and the scene is littered with clues to the fact that Henry is far from the ordinary working class person Karen believes him to be.

• He is on first name terms with a seemingly unofficial “valet parking attendant”.
• They are able to skip the line and enter through that back door
• Again first name terms with many of the backroom staff at the club
• Henry tips everyone he comes across in the club – very generously
• Without asking another table is set for them in front of the stage
• There is a general air of respect given to Henry from staff and customers alike – drinks arrive bought by another table almost immediately

These clues show that Henry is a big deal; however, alongside this, the scene is cleverly accompanied by the song, “Then he kissed me” by The Crystals”, which if you listen to the lyrics is a girl describing her experience on a first date – something this scene also depicts. This gives another context to the clues above, Henry is a “big fish” out to make a good first impression.

The lighting and general colouring of the scene, whilst in context with a 60’s night club, also add to romantic setting reds, and dim light and the final reveal of walking into the club from the kitchen is very much reminiscent of a fairy-tale scene of a prince and princess entering a ballroom.

Finally, as the music quietens Karen as asks Henry “What do you do?”, Henry tries to avoid the question by pretending he can’t hear, but Karen presses, slightly uncomfortably he says “I’m in construction”, after being pressed that he that he doesn’t have the hands of a construction worker, he replies he’s a union rep. Again this is a clue that he’s not a construction union rep, but something in the criminal world but he is trying to keep that from his date to keep up the good first impression.

I have to admit I have been an admirer of this scene since a first saw it at the pictures back in 1990. In three minutes, Scorsese perfectly summarises Henry: A worldly, dynamic, resolute and determined man. Who will take shortcuts and spend some money to achieve his goal and get ahead of someone else. Someone who believes he can buy anything. Although, how he enters the club is not glamorous, the result is. This entrance is a metaphor of his career, entering through the side entrance to arrive at the top.