urban ku # 22 ~ the nature of truth
Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 08:18AM 
At the intersection of I87 and Rt 9N - Keesville, NY - click on photo to embiggen I find it interesting that in a political age dominated by truthiness, the word "truth" incites reactions of distrust, suspicion and, I might also add, relativism. Not necessarily unwarranted, but interesting nevertheless.
Certainly history is replete with disastrous examples of the populous letting their critical-thought quard down and jumping willy-nilly on to a bandwagon driven by someone without a proper driver's license. The inevitable train wreck that follows is always quite ugly (can you say I-r-a-q?).
Critical analysis - vigilence - is a hallmark of a well-informed public. Discerning the truth of a matter is vital in all walks of life and doing so is not always an easy ride. What bothers me is the fact that so many people have given up the task and lapsed into relativism - one person's "truth" is as good as any other person's "truth". Just make certain that your "truth" is a comfortable fit with all of your prejudices and preconceptions and everything is hunky-dory.
All of that said, I don't want this to turn into a small-scale version of the cultures wars. This discussion is about photography in general and landscape photography in particular and the idea of creating a New Landscape Manifesto. A manifesto that expresses ideas about a photographic concept that is created in the context of our time - a time when, Truth be told, the landscape (a.k.a., the environment) is under assault from the acts of humankind like it never has been before. A time when it is fair game to ask, "Does Art matter?" A time when it is fair game to consider whether landscape photographers who aspire to create Art have a responsibility to pursue, if not the "truth", then, at the very least, the spirit of fact in the landscape that surrounds us and of which we are an integral part - not just passive slack-jaw-ed awe-struck bystanders standing in the shadow of the landscape's "grandeur"?
BTW, please keep in mind that my purpose here on The Landscapist is not to speak ex cathedra, but rather to bring up ideas and notions about the medium of photography in general and landscape photography in particular that I feel are worth considering and, hopefully, discussing.
FEATURED COMMENT: Paul Butzi wrote (in part); "...I think if not having a culture war is your goal, nearly all of it (this post) is on the wrong track. If you're not speaking ex cathedra and you want discussion, but you don't want the discussion to rest on a foundation of conflict, then voicing your own political opinions is probably not the best way to proceed."
publisher's response: Paul, good point and much thanks for the feedback. Let me clarify a little more.
My political aside (can you say...) was indeed a political statement but I didn't mean for it to politize my much more general premise regarding the consequences of letting one's critical-thought guard down. After last night's State of the Union event, it just popped into my mind as a ready example of the premise. Nevertheless, your point is well taken. The political aside probably did politize the general premise for many readers.
Re: not wanting the discussion to rest on a foundation of conflict - Actually, I do want to read conflicting opinions on the subjects raised here. If Art matters, then personal passions and convictions must be involved and some of them will inevitably be political in nature. I am not ruling out things political but I will always try to steer the discussion back to the photographic relevence of things political.
Case in point - Environmentalism and Conservation/Preservation have been politized. "Serious" photographers (see Group f64 manifesto in which the phrase "serious photographer" seems to mean [as I read it] someone who has moved beyond the pretty picture and for whom photography is more than entertainment) who have the landscape as their referent studium can not, or least, should not be ignorant of the fact that their connoted punctum will address (amongst other things) things political.
My hope is that differing personal passions and convictions can be discussed without resorting to unruly contentiousness. If not, there is always the moderator's delete button.
Reader Comments (3)
I'd say if you don't want this to turn into a version of the culture wars (on any scale) then the first part of this post is heading down the wrong track.
Actually, I think if not having a culture war is your goal, nearly all of it is on the wrong track. If you're not speaking ex cathedra and you want discussion, but you don't want the discussion to rest on a foundation of conflict, then voicing your own political opinions is probably not the best way to proceed.
I beg your pardon, but I am not a landscape photographer, but I am deeply concerned.
>Critical analysis - vigilence - is a hallmark of a well-informed public.
Of course, the public has no idea of critical analysis.
>What bothers me is the fact that so many people have given up the task and >lapsed into relativism - one person's "truth" is as good as any other >person's "truth".
If everything is true, then nothing is; truth looses any meaning. But you know that. The trend to relativism comes from the desire to make mediocre, half-efforts greater than the publicized others, and to spread warm fuzzies to the defenders of the mediocre.
>Truth be told, the landscape (a.k.a., the environment) is under assault
> [...] if not the "truth", then, at the very least, the spirit of fact
>in the >landscape that surrounds us and [...]
I've written of this before, elsewhere. There is an ancient Greek term called Aletheia. (Don't look to Wikipedia for its definition because it is incorrect). Before Aristotle in particular, the trend was to find what was unhidden, and not the true or not-true. In other words, the natural view was not polarized. Posits that included contradictions were free of Aletheia because contradictions are of the hidden. Language that strives to be modern (see Descartes and much that followed) is hidden.
Photography is the first modern craft that might be able to evince Aletheia and to that end, I'd welcome the idea that we couple it within the spirit of the suggested manifesto.
--
Pico diGoliardi, May, 2007
After more research, I am questioning the authenticity of a specific etymology of Aletheia in Ancient Greece. I've found no authoritative source in Greek and after finding Heidegger's account of Alethia it seems to be a convenient modern speculation: easy to believe but only in a modern context. "I want to believe" but remain in doubt.