tuscany # 57 ~ living in a make-believe world
Wednesday, October 7, 2009 at 08:00AM 
Snow White and the Seven ~ in the countryside around Cortona, Tuscany • click to embiggenIn response to yesterday's entry, Anil Rao asked: "Is your disdain with the final image itself (one that bears little or no resemblance to the real world) or is it influenced by the fact that (some) aspects of the photographic process were employed in producing the image? Would you feel differently if someone were to create an equally fanciful rendition/description of nature using painting or writing as the medium of choice?
A CAVEAT - It should be noted that my fulminations, re: pretty pictures, are aimed squarely at those pictures made in/about the natural world, AKA - landscape pictures which feature (but not limited to) the natural landscape and/or its component parts.
That stated, the "final image"(s) that Anil refers to do not create feelings in me that rise to the level of "distain". My general reaction to them on a purely visual basis is, quite simply, blah. Rather, it is the deceptive message (as I and many others see it) - see yesterday's entry , man & nature # 240 ~ I'm just asking - that they convey, intentional or not, that gets me hot on under the collar.
And what gets me hot under the collar is not really all that connected to the medium of photography per se. It is photography related to be sure in as much as it is a picture that strikes the match, but the real issue for me is the bigger issue of life in a "retouched world".
Here in the good 'ole US of America, the bulk of the citizenry has become so addicted to the next big thing (as an example, photography-wise, the next "big" camera) ... an addiction aided and abetted by the constant fanning of the flames of desire by the media and its corporate advertising brethren. And, virtually all of that fanning is accomplished by the presentation of "retouched realities" - the "perfect" car, house, body, hair, vacation, spouse, kids, clothes, toaster, toothpaste, eyelashes, and on and on and on and ......
Our culture has been so saturated by "retouched realities" that most of the citizenry can no longer differentiate between shit and shine-ola - a fact of life here in the good'ole US of America that corporations and politicians in particular use much to their advantage.
So, my question becomes - why would a talented thinking person, photography-wise, want to participate in heaping any more "retouched realities" kindling on that fire?
As for Anil's question re: "equally fanciful rendition/description of nature using painting or writing", let me answer by bringing it back to the medium of photography. Everybody - and that definitely includes me - needs an "escape", a little break from the less fun aspects of daily life. For many people that escape is found in making pictures and that fact is not something that I have a problem with.
However, that said, when living in a state of escapism becomes a full-time pursuit, ultimately it becomes a rather destructive endeavor both individually and collectively - as the saying goes, too much of a good thing.
All of that said, I have a question - I am inclined to think that, as a nation, the good 'ole US of America is inclined to lead the world in many things, many of which fall under the heading of "nothing exceeds like excess". Relative to that concept, I wonder if we also lead the world in the creation of fanciful depictionss of the natural world that bear no relationship to reality?
What do you think?
Reader Comments (4)
In answer to your question, one word: television.
And, pursuant to Anil's use of the term "fanciful" in the discussion, I don't think that you've been inveighing against the fanciful. You've been inveighing against schlock "art". David Hockney's landscapes can be described as fanciful, but they're not schlock. Thomas Pynchon's descriptions of landscapes are usually fanciful, but, again, not schlock. I'd like to give some examples of the latter, but, well, who wastes time on schlock?
Let's see? How many U.S. citizens work for a Mega-Corporation to trying make mega-money to shop at a Mega-store or a Mega-Mall? How many watch their movies at the Mega-Plex or on Mega TVs? How many attend Mega-Churches?
many mini minds
make a mega mistake
Nuff' Said.
are square photos fanciful in a round world?
God I wish I had more "education" on what is a pretty picture and what isn't. I really like tuscany #16, not because it is "pretty" but because it is a great image that had to be made. My wife and I take the approach, "we made the image because it was there",I don't know how many times my wife and I hear people whisper, "What are they taking a picture of?"