Showing posts with label Weegee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Weegee. Show all posts

2.09.2015

Review: Songbook by Alec Soth

This review is written by Adam Bell, a writer and photographer based in Brooklyn, and will also be published on his excellent photo book review site.
______________________________

Songbook by Alec Soth (MACK, 2015)

I want to invite you to dance. Yes, you. Here, I'll show you. Like this. 

Tender, innocuous words, yet full of vulnerability, Soth's latest work begins with an invitation. Arms held out, the dance beginning, we're invited to relearn songs we've forgotten or maybe never knew we knew. In many ways, it's hard to write something new about Soth. One of the most celebrated contemporary photographers, Soth's work builds on a long, and rich tradition of American photography—Walker Evans to Stephen Shore, William Eggleston, Joel Sternfeld, Diane Arbus, and more. With each project, Soth has plumbed the American landscape to create works that are deeply personal, but universally resonant. Compiled from Soth's collaborative work with Brad Zellar on the Little Brown Mushroom Dispatches (2012-2014), as well as work as a freelance photographer for Magnum and personal work, Songbook is a tender, but heartbreaking anthology of love songs, ballads, choral anthems, and sing-alongs masquerading as photographs that speak about our yearning for both individual expression and communal connection.


Photographs rely on context, yet often thrive in its absence. While the images in Soth's latest book are closely modeled after newspaper photography of the likes of Weegee or any number of nameless small-town newspaper photographers, here they are presented without their original context. As part of the LBM Dispatches the images were accompanied by pithy and insightful texts by Brad Zellar and in other settings by essays, such as the work from The New York Times. Stripped of their original context, Soth's photographs have a heightened mystery. Although there are often signifiers that place them in the present, the appearance of anachronistic dress or environments confound any easy assessment of their age or provenance. This tone is furthered by Soth's use of black-and white in place of his signature color. Although the images vary in approach and style, the more event and documentary oriented images, like those of conferences, events or church gatherings, reminded me of Bill Wood's Business, a show at the International Center for Photography and also a book by Marvin Heiferman and Diane Keaton, which featured the work of Bill Wood, a commercial photography from the late-30s to 70s in Fort Worth, Texas. Self-consciously modeled on photographers like Wood, Soth and Zellar reported on many local events including self-help conferences, church socials, and town dances. Attempting to see beyond what is often assumed to be American monoculture, they looked for the local. As Zellar put it, "we wanted to see how folks were faring outside the ersatz, isolating communities of office hives and cyber space."




 

In addition to small town photojournalism, the key visual reference for Songbook, is Evidence, the ur-photobook of decontextualized archival photographs by Mike Mandel and Larry Sultan from 1977. Shorn from their original text and accompanying archival context, Mandel and Sultan's images suggest a myriad of possible meanings. Like the odd images used by Mandel and Sultan, Soth's black-and-white images often utilize a strong flash, which not only freezes his subjects, but also places them under a clinical gaze and asks us to look more closely. References to Evidence can be seen throughout the book, but are most present in the more peculiar imagery. In one such image, a man wearing a baseball cap has pushed all his hair over his face and resembles Cousin It from the Addams Family. In another, two hands, cut off by the frame, toss a rock that's frozen mid-air. My personal favorite is a vertical photograph that shows a couple from behind sitting on a bed. Turned towards each other for a kiss, both their faces are obscured. Like a found photograph from the 50s, the image is a vexing puzzle.

Bound in a green fabric, the book is embossed with the title on the cover and the music and lyrics from Howard Dietz and Arthur Schwartz's "Dancing in the Dark" on the back. As the lyrics on the back cover instruct, "slowly, and with much expression." These are appropriate instructions for approaching the book. Generously proportioned, the book resembles the oversized songbook it references right down to its semi-soft cover. Throughout the book are fragments of song lyrics that guide us along. They help maintain a beat, and bring us back to the melody at hand. Like the images they accompany, they are drawn from the longer songs and offer their own mysterious allure. Save the few lyrics and a brilliant quote by Eugene Ionesco at the end, there is no text in the book. Thankfully, there is a LBM Dispatches book in the works that will include the excellent writing of Brad Zellar, whose writings and collaboration Soth acknowledges in the book as the unseen presence behind almost all the work.




 

Despite the sense of loneliness that often pervades the work, the people depicted in Songbook are never ridiculed or patronized by Soth's camera. Although Soth acknowledges their quixotic search for fulfillment, expression and connection, each image seems to be recognition not only of that same longing in Soth, but also an invitation to recognize it within ourselves. This is a theme that is present in much of Soth's work from his breakthrough book Sleeping By The Mississippi to NIAGRA, and more recently, Broken Manual, his darkest work. It is also what makes his work so very American. Soth acknowledges the fragile but powerful bonds that unite us as a nation, while also recognizing our fierce independence. While Soth may bend the narrative of his images to fit his vision, he's created a story that speaks to our post-recession and socially anxious age. In the end, all artists frame a version of reality to tell a large truth. Whether or not that truth resonates is what matters. Fans of his work have no doubt snatched up this book already and don't need to be persuaded, but the work may also appeal to people who don't know his work, or were not persuaded by his previous books. Admirably, Soth has refused to rest on his laurels and has continued to challenge himself. In this new work, Soth continues to explore familiar territory, but shifts directions again. Like the dancer who opens the book, he's asking us to follow, dance and sing along.

5.24.2012

Interview: Blake Andrews, Part III

© Blake Andrews, Paris, 2010
This is the third of three interview posts with Blake Andrews. Part I can be found here and Part II here. We have a contest connected with this interview that you can take part in by clicking here.

f: The most personally important of your two major influences:

a. Garry Winogrand
b. Lee Friedlander
c. Both

BA: C. Winogrand and Friedlander are definitely two of my favorites, and my style probably reflects elements of both. Winogrand said that every photo is a battle of form vs. content, and I think that's a good lens through which to compare them. Generally Winogrand was more concerned with content and Friedlander with form. That may be an oversimplification but I think there's some truth to it. I think what binds them together, and what connects them to my photography, is that they are / were both very concerned with the photograph as the primary tool of expression. That's in contrast to the current style. Many photographers now put the photograph in a secondary role. It's at the service of some idea. It's an illustrative tool. But for Winogrand and Friedlander, and for me, the photo comes first. You don't know what the idea is until you see the photo. So the photo becomes the way to explore the world, not just the end product of that exploration.

I also empathize with both men because of their work habits. Both were / are absolutely committed to making photos regardless of outside events. Winogrand in particular. I think he photographed as much out of blind compulsion as anything. He just did it because that's what he did, and he felt better afterward, like eating. Or maybe taking a big dump is a better analogy. A huge 20,000 roll steaming dump that someone is going to have to deal with. Because it's fucking important.

© Blake Andrews, Cinemagic Theatre, Portland, 2009
f: You work with humor a lot more (and a lot better) than most photographers that I can think of, and it’s something I have always thought difficult to pull off in photography. Who else do you think works well with humor?

BA: [Elliott] Erwitt is probably the name that pops into everyone's mind first. He is a master of a certain humorous style. In that same vein, some of Kertesz, Doisneau, and Weegee have a humorous edge. More recently there's Kalvar, Mermelstein, and Parr. Those are sort of the platinum humor collection. In the younger crop I like Gordon Stettinius, Michael Northrup, Asger Carlsen, the iN-PUBLiC crew. Some of Chris Verene's photos are funny, especially with his captions. Many of the relatively new reappropriations are great. Champion Pig, Awkward Family Photos, Useful Photography, and stuff in that vein. There's one Tumblr that replaces hands with smaller versions. I mean WTF? That's funny. Sultan and Mandel's Evidence is probably the funniest photo book I own, but it's more absurdist.

I think most photographers steer clear of humor because it's confused with light material. But humor needn't be light. My favorite humor is absurdist, zen koan style. Philosophically that's as deep as it gets. Camus, Sartre, the existentialists, they all bumped their heads against absurdism. Humor doesn't have to be Three Stooges slapstick. Recently I've been enjoying the older episodes of Tim and Eric's Awesome show. It's the most absurd thing I've seen on TV in a while. It constantly bewildering. If someone could convert that brand of humor into photography, I'd buy their book.

© Blake Andrews, Hugo, 2012

f: Talk us through a day of shooting with you. Explain your specific ways of working, your tendencies, particular rhythms and habits.

BA: I don't think there's any typical day. How I shoot depends on where I am and what I'm shooting. When I'm shooting for the Grid projects I am often in residential or light industrial areas without a lot of pedestrians. In Portland I typically shoot the morning after photo meetings. As soon as there is enough light I drive to a new place in the grid, park, and start walking. I generally try to make a loop but the only real direction is toward the new. I avoid streets I've been on already. If I see an alley I generally go that way. If I see commercial activity I'm often drawn to that. I walk for about three or four hours until my legs are tired, shooting pretty much nonstop. Anything that catches my eye I photograph. Usually I can cover most of a grid (2.25 square miles) in three or four visits strung out over the course of a month.

With the Eugene grids I break it up into smaller chunks. I go out for one or two hours several times during the month. Generally the shooting pattern is the same as with Portland grid. I shoot anything that strikes me. I stay in new areas. I want to see it all block by block.

Downtown Portland is where I do most of my urban street shooting, and there my pattern is a bit different. Every week or so I'll park downtown and spend a few hours walking. Often I see gallery shows on the way, so I wind up parking at Blue Sky. From there my "normal" circuit is up Broadway to Pioneer Courthouse Square, around the bus malls and parks and whatever looks interesting, then back down 10th by Powell's through the Pearl back to Blue Sky. What I shoot depends a bit on my mood. I often look for people doing interesting things or wearing interesting outfits. Sometimes I follow them for a few blocks. I always shoot pigeons and car racks. Sometimes I will stake out a corner for a little while if the light is good or there's a good background scene. I know the city very well so there aren't many surprises. But that said, things always change. You never know what will be around the next corner. My shooting downtown is denser than in the grids. I might go through two or three rolls an hour compared to maybe half that rate in the grids. I only shoot the Leica downtown. Whereas in the grids I bring the wider quiver which lately has been Leica, Diana, Yashica TLR, and sometimes a Holga with color.

I don't generally shoot much downtown Eugene. It's pretty dead and there's not enough anonymity or suspense. Sometimes I shoot near the University where there's a lot of foot traffic.

Between all of that shooting is just my normal day to day photography. I always have my camera running errands. Sometimes I shoot from the car, especially if it's raining. And of course at home I shoot my kids and family all the time. Lately I've been exploring my kitchen with a small point and shoot digital camera. Shooting fork tines and food scraps and whatever's around. It's a good camera for getting in close.

But there's no real typical day. I shoot whatever's in front of me, and that's always changing.

© Blake Andrews, East 10th and Burnside, Portland, 2004
f: How would you say you have changed and grown as a photographer over time?

I'm generally looser as a shooter and tighter as an editor. I'm less formal with a camera than I used to be. I used to spend a lot of time lining up shapes and worrying about precision in photos. Now I'm more open to chance and natural flow. I don't want to dominate the moment so much. I want my photos to look more like snapshots than formal landscapes. I want to tap into that thing that can't be tapped into, but you know it when it's been tapped. And that's where the editing comes in. What's been tapped? I'm pickier now about images. I won't print some now that I might have printed before, especially street stuff. It has to have some twist or spark which is fairly rare.

I have more experience looking at other work now. I keep up with what's out there and I think it's made me more skeptical. I'm more open to other photographic approaches but also more picky, more sure of myself. I used to look through the books at Powell's and marvel at all the great photo books that were out there. I wanted so many. Now when I browse the stacks I wonder, "How did this shit get published?" Most of it strikes me as pretentious crap. So I guess I'm more of an arrogant asshole now. At the same time I'm more receptive to a wider range of approaches. I have an appreciation for portraits, for a example, in a way that I didn't just five years ago. So it's a paradox. Go figure.

© Blake Andrews, 42nd Avenue, 2004
f: You have said a number of times you work off Winogrand's motto: “I photograph to see what something looks like in a picture” and that Friedlander taught you that “a photo can be just about visual pleasure with no other burden.” True to these comments, your visual intelligence shows in your work - the combination of two incongruous elements to make a third meaning, plays with geometry, visual puns, the way you line things up and cut things off are unique and impressively developed skills.

Going beyond that, it seems your bodies of images, your writing and even your site push to understand and structure life - via lists, classifications, labeling, pointing out, collecting, and grid projects - and that it’s ultimately about the failure to be able to do so because it’s impossible to fully organize, accurately classify, and keep up with all the images and lists and projects.

My thoughts on your work are:
a. astute
b. horsefeathers
c. something you already thought
d. there’s something to it, but...

 BA: D. I just like making photographs. It's much less enjoyable for me to deal with the aftermath. I know that sounds like a cop-out, but it's just how I am. That said, I am actually quite organized. If you ask me to find a particular photo I can generally locate it quickly. My main organizing technique is by date. Every photo gets a date on the back, along with a few other notes to help me find the negative. But mostly I keep track chronologically. I think this is important not only because dates are vital, but because it says something about my style. All these photos I'm making form a chronological chain. It's a life journal as much as it is anything else. In a way dating simplifies everything. No two photos can happen at once. Every image has a place.

Dates are being erased and that's one of my pet peeves. We're losing our cultural memory. Sometimes I'll load a re-released CD into iTunes and the date comes up as 2005 or something when I know the material was recorded in 1975. To me that's erasing history. It's criminal. I have the same problem with some blogs and Tumblrs. If the posts aren't dated I can't read them. It's just a mishmash. A date provides so much context. Every book I've ever opened I've looked at the date before anything else.

 f: Lastly, what’s next for you, Blake?

BA: One of my dreams since childhood has been to make an NFL roster, so I'm going to give that a crack this fall.

© Blake Andrews, Adrian, Maine, 2001