decay # 18 ~ a game against the machine
Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 11:38AM 
Spring bounty, decay-wise • click to embiggenFirst, a note to the wife; while moving some stuff on the upstairs porch, look what I found - a little bit of decay heaven. I will, really I will, try to remove it from the kitchen counter before your arrival.
Now, on to business - I want to express thanks to all who have contributed of late to The Landscapist with your all your comments and feedback. I've enjoyed hearing from some new voices as well as the 'regulars' and I sincerely hope that you are all appreciative of the added value that this brings to the site. Thanks much.
One particular comment that especially interested me was that from Ana regarding yesterday's limited imagination - ouch! entry.
I think you'd enjoy reading "towards a philosophy of photography" by Vilem Flusser. It's all about creative (as opposed to redundant) photography as a game against the machine (where, by machine, he means the entire technology and infrastructure behind photography). The work of all the photographers who have gone before have, to a certain extent, entered the arsenal of the machine --they become limiting and redundant. The point of the game is to outwit the machine by opening up a possibility that hasn't been seen before.
To which I will add, "Exactly." I'll probably buy (and read) the book, if for no other reason than Ana (she's a smart cookie) suggested it. Although my insatiable curiosity is a driving factor as well.
I have always been a fan of raging against the machine, any machine. Just pick one and I'll most likely be game to try and 'outwit' it in one fashion or another. Hey, ask the wife, I'm aways trying to outwit her machine. And, I really like Flusser's notion of thinking of the idea of "originality" as a game (of opportunity / possibility) as opposed to just trying like hell to be "original".
Another idea that seems to be implicit in Ana's synopsis of Flosser's philosophy is one of my favorite ideas of what it takes to avoid being redundant - the knowledge and understanding of what came before, or, as he (you?) put it, of the what, who, why, of the arsenal of the photography machine.
A question for all - how many of you have made an effort to really know and understand the arsenal of the machine, aka, the history of the medium? Do you think that it's important for your photography to do so?
decay
Reader Comments (5)
I took a class in college on the history of photography and was a bit disappointed that it wasn't more in depth. It just seemed to gloss over it all, like an abbreviated art history class. It did pique my interest and I do think it is important to my photography. I really feel the need to know what has come before me and some of those old photos are inspirational as well. I do want to add that learning about the different processes that photography took to get to today is interesting, but what photographers did within the constraints of the medium in their time is much more important to me. I have to say, some of my favorite photos are those from the Civil War. I can't put my finger on it why though.
Hi Michelle, I also find it really interesting what photographers did within the constraints of the medium in their time. The more I learn about the early pioneers of photography the more I am awed by them and realize that they were very sophisticated thinkers. I wonder many (possibly silly) things about them. For one thing I wonder if it had something to do with the "shock" of photography when it first came on the scene --here was a technology that could freeze time and preserve people even after death and that philosophical shock led people to think in new ways about time and existence that they then explored through photography. I also wonder if there was a different kind of person involved with photography at the time: it seems that many of the early experimenters with photography were great scientists and philosophers of the time and not surprisingly they did a shitload of interesting things.
ps. Mark, I think you'll enjoy Flusser for an additional reason: his writing style. I don't know if I wish that I had met him --I may not be brave enough for that-- but I definitely wish I could have listened to him at a debate. This is a guy who (I think) was not afraid to make outlandish statements just for the joy of seeing other people screech and have a nervous breakdown.
History will teach us nothing, or so the song goes... I too rage against the machine, but rather the present machine than the machine of the past. Call me romantic, sedated, conservative, I really don't care. To me it is impossible to comprehend why one wouldn't learn as much as possible about the past. Especially in a context of originality you are severely at risk of trying to "reinvent the wheel" if you haven't studied those that came before you.
What I have learned from the masters of the past is simply three things: (1) The latest and greatest equipment is useless in the hands of an idiot. (2) Photography is all about subject. Unless you photograph something that is interesting your craft is a waste of energy. A large, detailed and perfectly executed photograph of a boring subject will always be a boring photograph. (3) Last but not least, you make great photographs by being there, taking the picture and bringing home the honey. Great art isn't made discussing equipment on online forums.
BTW: While the essay "The myth of progress" by Georg Henrik von Wright isn't about photography per se, it has many interesting parallels to the current state of the medium. Well worth a read.
My guess is that you'll soon be raging against Flusser, but that's good, too. If you like Zizek (I do), you might like Flusser for the reasons Ana mentioned; they both delight in playing games with ideas. Somehow I doubt Flusser actually enjoyed making photographs, but I'd love to see some if I'm wrong. I believe it's all grist for the mill, it's what you make of it personally that matters. I read and have learned a lot from the history of photography (meaning up to and including today), but also painting, philosophy, whatever. But let's not forget engagement with the world not of ideas. If coaching basketball or volunteering at the local hospital doesn't exactly make you a better photographer, it will at least provide you with great subjects and perspective on them. I agree with Svein-Frode's points, but I also think that re-inventing the wheel is the only way we get better wheels.