“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.

Example of how to read an image

The course notes point us to OCA tutors Sharon Boothroyds 500 word interpretation of Jeff Wall’s Insomnia.

This is an inciteful read, as gives a practical demonstration of what we should be looking for in our upcoming assignment. In a concise 500 words, she covers the formal Denotation and personal connotations of the image – even from her point of view being able to add her personal experience of insomnia. Also tying and explaining Shakespeare use of insomnia as a plot devise to explain other mental issues. The 500 words also adds a context to the artist work in the larger art universe.

This is just as effective as the Arbus essay in the previous post and also points that whole books can be written about similar images.

My take away from she is to structure of description in formal manner things back to recognised and referencable sources, just like did for IFC.

Beneath the Surface

References

Boothroyd, S. (2012). Beneath the surface. [online] #weareoca. Available at: https://weareoca.com/subject/photography/beneath-the-surface/ [Accessed 19 Oct. 2018].

Read and reflect upon the chapter on Diane Arbus in Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs by Sophie Howarth (2005, London: Tate Publishing).

This essay begins with the statement:

 ‘The fictions we make about photographs are as unreliable as they are unavoidable’.

This is a very telling statement and it applies to all art, not just photographs. They are in the hands of those who interpret it.

A Young Brooklyn Family Going for a Sunday Outing, N.Y.C., 1966. © Diane Arbus

Jobey writes an eleven-page essay about this image asking leading questions based upon her preconceptions about the family depicted in the show and from the brief description that the photographer gave to it.

We can never fully know what is happening with the subjects a photograph because we can not see inside the subject’s mind, even as a photographer we can always fully know because you can only go upon what the subject tells us.

What a person writes about or how the viewer interprets a photograph says as much about the writer/viewer as it does about the photograph itself. I could be cynical because that there is ow such thing as wrong in art and write anything, but I’m not that cynical. I was before I undertook the Introduction to Film Culture course there I learnt how to interpret and now I see metaphors in TV programs and film that I didn’t see before.

References

Howarth, S. (2005) Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs. London: Tate Publishing

There are three subjects in the image, the main human subject is placed squarely in the centre with the others flanking her on the vertical third lines, however, the main protagonist in this image is the Chihuahuas in a hat. The image makes clear use of the rule of thirds, the vertical we have mentioned plus the shallow depth of field isolates the subjects from both the foreground and background.

Erwitt has placed the three subject at the base of the picture, creating a horizon which he has built the image. The chihuahua is the only character of whom we can see a face and it is staring at the camera, this reinforces its status of the main protagonist over its human companion.

The other subjects remain anonymous to the viewer. It is as if we are looking at the scene as the chihuahua would see it. Everything and everyone is huge and intimidating, the chihuahua has a forlorn look. In his use of this low viewpoint, Erwitt produces a  punctum, that is it is not immediately obvious that the legs on the left belong to another (very large) dog, not a human. One of the key features of why this image is so striking.

One interpretation of the picture is that expresses power and dominance. The size difference of the subjects does not leave any doubt about the position of each in that game of power. The leash that holds the chihuahua contributes to the political message, as does the apparent lack of leash on the bigger dog, establishing a relation of dependence or slavery between the small dog and the powerful and anonymous legs. The chihuahua has been stripped of its dignity and forced to wear ridiculous clothes as if it did not have a will. Whereas to the little dog has no leash, it is out of sight, he appears free a collaborator. Together the connection to Nazism of the leather boots frames the power and dominance expressed by the images into a metaphor for the persecution of the Jewish people in World War II Europe.

A further interpretation is to personify the subjects in the picture as a family unit; although two of them are animals. The punctum created by the low angle crop makes difficult to perceive the difference between the human legs and the animal legs. We tend to assume that the booted legs belong to a woman, the confusion pushes the viewer to assign the role of the husband to the big dog. Leaving the small dog as the child. This can then be a metaphor for how pets and be stand-in for absences within a person’s life – husband, wife or child.

For this exercise, we are asked to go to Nigel Shafran’s website and look at his series Washing-up as well as his other work.  Shafran’s Washing-up project can be seen here.  The course book talks about the captions that accompany the images in this series, Shafran’s website is royally useless as it does not contain the caption, which are really fundamental to understanding the work – or they are in my opinion. I have done some searching and I have found 3 images with a caption that I have created into a gallery here for casual viewers to understand, although I suspect the assessors and my tutor know this work like the back of their hands.

Did it surprise you that this was taken by a man? Why?

It’s a cultural perception that many of us have grown up with – that men don’t do housework, that cooking and dishes are women’s work. This was never the case in the household I grew up in, nor when I lived in a domestic partnership and as I am now living alone it would be downright impossible as I would just end up living in squalor if I didn’t do these things . Unfortunately there are many household the world over where this perception is still very much alive and well. So does this image surprise me that it authored by a man? No, but not because I have grown up doing the washing up but because it a very male thing to the do record what they do. When I read the captions I see that they possible taken buy man who suddenly found himself in the more domestic of the role in a household and decided to record it.

In your opinion does gender contribute to the creation of an image?

Of course. Men and women see things differently and even if they both photograph the same subject, the end result would look completely different as a result of their different points of view and perceptions. This does challenge feminism in some way but that not the intent. In general, men photographers are more reluctant to show their own image in their pictures – I know I am. Is this motivated by the influence of Western Culture, where the female figure is notoriously more represented in art than the male body? “active looking has been accorded to the male spectator ‘Woman’ becomes the object of his gaze.” (Wells, p.326). This no doubt must influence male photographer, who are influenced old stereotypical notions of masculinity and femininity. In my last module Introduction to Film Culture I read a lot about gender and gender representation – what I too form that is that sex is binary, the gender traits we portray are and should be more fluid due to the influences on us from our environment and the modern world is happening more. Shafran’s work echoes to me of a modern man starting to go through this process – he is becoming more domestic but still wants to retain the tradition male matter of fact-ness.

What does this series achieve by not including people?

A mystery created in this series by not featuring people. Even without referring to the captions ( which I feel really are needed for to understand the piece) I am intrigued by the ever-changing scenario around the sink; the variation from natural light to fluorescent or tungsten leaves little clues as to the time of day and therefore meals the washing up is from.

The captions like “16th March 2000. 1.30pm Second photograph of the day. Breakfast crumpets and tea [mine with cottage cheese and honey, Ruth’s with Marmite with Jose and Claudio who I think washed-up]” add a different dimension.  Yes, we are given a description of the meal that we can wonder about, but the caption are so matter-of-fact you know they are from a male. Therefore, you start to wonder why on earth is he taking pictures of a sink. I wish this was my project, I really do.

 Do you regard them as interesting ‘still life’ compositions?

Why not? The images are full of detail they fit well together as a set there is a repetition about them, however, each image gives a little more information on the subject. Within some of the pictues, there are elements that raise questions the “N” & “R” behind the taps does that relate to the artist and his wife, the paintbrush. Also, the sink and location changes did they move house? I said above I wish these was my assignmemt

References

Nigelshafran.com. (n.d.). Washing-up 2000 [2000] : Nigel Shafran. [online] Available at: http://nigelshafran.com/category/washing-up-2000-2000/page/13/ [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

weareoca. (n.d.). Still Life with Nigel Shafran – #weareoca. [online] Available at: https://weareoca.com/subject/photography/still-life-with-nigel-shafran/ [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

Wells, L. (2015). Photography: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Anna Fox British photographer and professor at the University of the Creative Arts. The video below features Anna Fox talking a little about her major projects so far – that is until the video was pubished circa 2010.

Fox explains in the video, she presented the Cockroach Diary in a very personal way. The work is presented in a sleeve containing two little books. The photographs are featured in a separate book, while the diary itself is in a spiral bound book containing scans of Fox’s actual diary, giving it an authentic feel.

Although the photographs feature cockroaches and their traces, the narrative is more about the family and friends living in Fox’s house at the time and their dysfunctional relationships with comic and sad elements to it.

References

YouTube. (2018). Anna Fox / Cockroach Diary & Other Stories / Impressions Gallery. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S86X0iPO_iw&feature=youtu.be [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

Durdan, M. (2009). Anna Fox: Photographs 1983-2007 – FOTO8. [online] FOTO8. Available at: http://www.foto8.com/live/anna-fox-photographs-1983-2007-2/ [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

Fano, N. (2013). ASX Interviews Anna Fox (2013). [online] AMERICAN SUBURB X. Available at: http://www.americansuburbx.com/2013/06/interview-anna-fox-asx-interviews-anna-fox-2013.html [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

Maria Kapajeva is the first artist mentioned in the course notes looking self-absented portraitures.  A self-absented portrait does not feature the photographer in a literal sense. The photographer may choose to use stand-in instead or might choose not to have anyone in the image at all.

Maria is an Estonian born, currently working in of the UK. She emigrated to the UK, leaving her life in Estonia behind to study at University of the Creative Arts – where he is now a tutor. And looking at her work and reading about her I’m starting to understand a little about myself.

As an expat who has lived in 3 separate countries, I can understand to her statement in ‘

It’s not easy to be Other and become someone in a foreign place.’

When you emigrate, you leave behind everything that is familiar and become a stranger, an interloper who has to learn to fit in and learn the culture of the new country. This is not always easy, as English male you try to find an English pub to act as a safe haven.

When  Kapajava talks about who how she works statement regarding methods of working.

I think there are two ways of working as an artist (at least I see these two): one is you start from a technique and develop / master/ transform it. The second way is to start from an idea and find a technique for it.

I am certainly in the former category, I seldom get an idea and develop it I tend to go from what in know and try to turn that into an idea. This something that I need to change.

Her project A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Woman features portraits of fellow immigrants who are her peers and with whom she identifies. The series of images can be termed self-absented portraits in that Kapajeva has expressed something of her own experiences, struggles and emotions in each portrait. The idea is that the women who are the actual subjects reflect something back to the viewer about Kapajeva.

References

Mariakapajeva.com. (n.d.). A Portrait of the Artist… | Maria Kapajeva. [online] Available at: http://www.mariakapajeva.com/a-portrait-of-the-artist-as-a-young-woman/ [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

Boothroyd, S. (2014). Maria Kapajeva. [online] photoparley. Available at: https://photoparley.wordpress.com/2014/05/13/maria-kapajeva/ [Accessed 9 Oct. 2018].

In this series, Australian photographer Tracey Moffat dresses up as a number of famous females Scorpios, which is her own horoscope sign, including among others Hillary Clinton, Bibi Anderssen, Vivian Leigh and Bjork.

“Like all artists, we make art to see if we can do it. I think that’s why I did this, to see if I could do it, if I could become all these women”

While Moffat conceals her face in many of the pictures, it is remarkable how well she resembles he subjects. Moffat manages these transformations through Photoshop and various costumes – I’m assuming many trips to the charity shop. And as she is concealing her face the majority of the time she is relying on gesture and copying the subjects body language.

The project works well when viewed I conjunction with Moffat’s series “Being” which serves as 2^nd part to “Scorpio”. This series shows the contact sheets of the transformation process and selection for the base images that were then photoshopped to the final images of “Scorpio”. There is a nice juxtaposition here as they are rather mundane whereas the final images of Scorpio are quite flamboyant.

Reference

Roslynoxley9.com.au. (2018). Tracey Moffatt – Being – Under the Sign of Scorpio, Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery, Sydney, 2005 – Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery. [online] Available at: http://www.roslynoxley9.com.au/artists/26/Tracey_Moffatt/385/ [Accessed 8 Oct. 2018].

Roslynoxley9.com.au. (2018). Tracey Moffatt – Under the Sign of Scorpio, Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery, Sydney, 2005 – Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery. [online] Available at: http://www.roslynoxley9.com.au/artists/26/Tracey_Moffatt/380/ [Accessed 8 Oct. 2018].

The Sydney Morning Herald. (2018). The secret lives of Tracey Moffatt. [online] Available at: https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/the-secret-lives-of-tracey-moffatt-20050730-gdls0e.html [Accessed 8 Oct. 2018].

The coursebook asked me to look at  3 pieces of work by Trish Morrissey

Front (2005-7).

I this project, she visits beaches around the UK and Australia and gets random family groups to allow her to swap places with the mother including wearing their clothes and copying their mannerisms. She then assumes the physical place of the person, i.e. cuddling “her” children and/or snuggling up to “her” partner, while the person she replaces takes the photograph.

the artist’s statement,

These highly performative photographs are shaped by chance encounters with strangers, and by what happens when physical and psychological boundaries are crossed. Ideas around the mythological creature the ‘shapeshifter’ and the cuckoo are evoked.

The cuckoo metaphor very obviously (after reading the artists statement), and there is a sense of Morrissey taking advantage of the people involved. Obviously, they agreed to allow her to enter the group however the whole series gives off a sense that she has crossed boundaries, this is echoed by the boundaries the individual groups have built around themselves at the beach.

While I would love to go back and be a fly on the wall for the conversations that must have preceded each shoot – which no doubt were very interesting.  I doubt I would have to Morrissey’s request, as a male I doubt I would have been asked but I would encourage anyone I was with to refuse too.

Interestingly, on the point not agreeing to the request, I doubt a male photographer would be able to accomplish this project – there would be much-ingrained resistance males rarely swap clothes with mates never mind strangers…

The Failed Realist (2011)

Based on a very interesting premise; that young children’s imagination is very much more mature than their ability to draw what they are seeing. The project consists of a number of portraits of Morrissey, with her face daubed in face paints by her daughter. Which are a mess due to the daughter being too young to be controlled in her actions

The project is one trick pony with most of the pictures being very very similar, this is a mess. It strikes me as the self-indulgence of a parent, showing off anything there child does. I would have enjoyed it more if was a series portraits of different mums (or dads) with the face painted by their own child.

Seven Years (2001-4)

In this series, Morrissey and her sister assume the characters of a variety of fictitious family scene, from the 1970s and 80s, to say something about the generalities of family life.

Extract from the artist’s statement,

They assume different characters and roles in each image, utilizing body language to reveal the subtext of psychological tensions inherent in all family relations. The resulting photographs isolate telling moments in which the unconscious leaks out from behind the façade of the face and into the minute gestures of the body.

The images produced are familiar to anyone who has a family album covering that period – stilted, posed pictures and typical clothes and hairstyles. I actually enjoy this series more from a pure nostalgic point of view.

Together these projects show that  Morrissey is a performer as much as a photographer. She has to convincingly act the part of the person she is pretending to be, in order for the fantasy to work.

Even though I want to push my comfort zone I cannot say that this type of self-portraiture I would try to emulate.

References

Trishmorrissey.com. (2018). Trish Morrissey. [online] Available at: http://www.trishmorrissey.com/works_pages/work-sy/workpg-09.html [Accessed 7 Oct. 2018].