civilized ku # 2104-6 ~ Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday

Listerine, hair band, empty vase and morning light ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenTime marches on and things change. Pictures let us view fleeting moments from the past which allows us to contemplate and reflect, if one is so inclined, upon the transience of all things.

Update on Thursday, March 8, 2012 at 10:57AM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: JB (no link provided) wrote: "You need a new toilet seat dude....gross!"

my response: Dude, remember, all things are transient. In this case because the cleaning lady was due - in a matter of hours - to help with the transience.

civilized ku # 2012 ~ profundity and the tableaux vivant, expanded edition

The Goat ~ by Jeff Wall • click to embiggen

BACKGROUND: This past Sunday, at the wife's urging - "he looks so much like his dad, take a picture for me" - while we were attending an all-day hockey tournament, I made the the netminder picture. It is a picture of my grandson, Hugo, who had decided to play in net for one of his games and, truth be told, he did look a lot like his dad (a full-time net minder) at the same age. So, never one to deny the wishes of the wife, I made a few pictures.

The first few pictures were made while Hugo was playing warm-up ball-of-tape hockey with a couple of his teammates after which I was fully prepared to say that was that, picture making wise. However, the 3 older kids seen in the netminder picture appeared on the scene and, recognizing Hugo, hung around and struck up some sort of a conversation with him. So, more for me than for the wife, I made a few more pictures.

The rest of the story: Sunday evening, while I was looking at the pictures during the RAW conversion stage, my attention was drawn to the aforeposted variant of the scene. For reasons I did not understand at the time, I found the picture to be somewhat disquieting in a sort of edgey kind of way. FYI, "edgey", as defined by the urban dictionary as, "Watch out, something is about to happen." or, as Sam Hames put it (in yesterday's comments), "... the tension is visible, just at this moment. What happens next?"

One of my first impressions was triggered by the expression on Hugo's face*, one which I can not recall ever having seen before, and those of the other kids, especially the crouching one immediately to Hugo's left**. And then there is also the fact that the other kids are quite obviously much older than Hugo and the first things that flashed into my mind were Jeff Wall's tableau vivant, The Goat and, to a lesser extent, the many emotionally unsettling tableaux pictures of Gregory Crewdson.

In any event, as a result of the aforementioned, I found the the netminder picture, as opposed to my on-the-spot perceived reality of the actual situation, to be rather disconcerting / unsettling. The actual situation - a younger kid being surrounded by much older kids - evidenced absolutely no sense of the disquieting / unsettling situation in Wall's manufactured / staged picture, The Goat. Or, for that matter, of the disquieting / unsettling perception(s) of the the netminder picture, as perceived by me.

However, that said, I believe I can state with some degree of certainty that my knowledge of Wall's picture, as well as Crewdson's and those of many others, had a significant influence, in a you-are-what-you-eat kind of way, on my perception(s) of the the netminder picture. Or at the very least, my knowledge of the work of Wall, Crewdson, and others certainly set me up to look for / be sensitive to expanded meaning(s) in the the netminder picture.

Re: expanded meaning(s), nearly concurrent with my first unsettling reaction to the picture was also the perception that the situation depicted in the scene was not threatening at all. In fact, it could be perceived, in light of Hugo's hockey prowess, as form of reverse athlete hero worship****. "Reverse" in the sense that it is more often than not the young who revere / worship their elders rather than vice versa. In fact, 2nd grader Hugo is very well accepted by the 3/4/5th grade cool-guy clique***.

While there is nothing inherently disquieting / unsettling about being accepted by the cool-guy clique, there is, nevertheless a cultural / societal story to be told about the cool-guy/ athlete in-crowd phenomenon. A story which could be perceived as disquieting / unsettling, dependent upon whether one is "in" or "out" and how one uses (or experiences) that in-crowd status.

All of the preceding said, while any of the aforementioned readings / interpretations of the the netminder picture are quite valid, the cool-guy / in-crowd reading is the most true vis-a-vis the actual situation on the ground. However, there can be no denying the ambiguity to be found in the picture. And, after considering my reaction to the picture, I believe it is the ambiguity factor which led to my disquieting / unsettling reaction to it.

Which leads me to the notion of staged / constructed pictures, ala Wall / Crewdson / Sherman / my son, The Cinemascapist (to name just a few), or, for that matter, could-be-read-many-different-ways street pictures, which the the netminder picture most closely resembles (it absolutely was not staged, constructed, or directed in any manner whatsoever) ...

... IMO, the strength of such pictures, even though they are "untrue" (in the sense that they are staged / constructed or moments-in-time presented without or out of context) is their very ambiguity. By the nature of that ambiguity, the pictures can be read in many different ways by many different viewers with each viewer being able to discover a different truth. Despite the specificity of a given scene / referent, the picture made of it can have a generality which can reveal / speak to a number of different truths.

And, IMO, the truth(s) to be found in any given picture is greatly influenced by a viewer's knowledge / total life experience. You are, in fact, what you eat. That is to state, you see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear predicated upon who you are*****. Picture viewing wise, I believe that, without a doubt, it is true that the possibilities for what one sees /reads in a picture is greatly influenced by one's knowledge and experience, re: the rich and varied possibilities inherent in the medium of photography.

For some (the un-experienced / un-knowledgeable?), a picture is just a picture. For others (the experienced / knowledgeable?), a picture - the viewing thereof and the making thereof - is fertile intellectual / emotional ground for discovery and learning. For them, the possibilities are nearly endless and the rewards and enjoyment thereof are also nearly endless.

an addendum: I do have the ability to view my pictures as though someone else had made them. In case of the the netminder picture, I was able to perceive multiple meanings / readings of the picture as if I possessed no knowledge of its making or the actual on-the-ground situation. That ability is why I am so often surprised by what I see / read in my pictures after viewing the results of my, one could say, seemingly out-of-body picture making efforts.

*Nick wrote, "The goalie looks lifeless or doll-like". John Linn said, "...everyone is looking at him but he is avoiding eye contact".
**Garet Munger (no link provided) wrote, "The expression and posture of the boy hiding in the corner is disquieting as well as what seem to be aggressive postures of the two bigger boys"
***As a matter of fact, Hugo spends a great deal of time with older kids. That is true both in school and especially so at the hockey rink where it would seem that his hockey skills give him the creds to fit in with / be well accepted by the older kids. However, the older kids in the picture, with the exception of the kid in the red jacket costume de rigueur of Saranac Lake "Red Storm" athletes, do not appear to be hockey players.
****Carolyn (no link provided) wrote, "Nothing unsettling about three fans admiring the rosy-cheeked goalie."
*****Unfortunately, there are quite a few spodas ("what I spoda do, massa?") on the planet who can't actually think for themselves, leading them to believe a lot of big-lie "truths". But that's a picture viewing / reading topic for another time.

FYI, tableau vivant (plural: tableaux vivants) means "living picture". The term describes a group of suitably costumed actors or artist's models, carefully posed and often theatrically lit. Throughout the duration of the display, the people shown do not speak or move. The approach thus marries the art forms of the stage with those of painting/photography, and as such it has been of interest to modern photographers.

In recent history the photographic tableau has become a vehicle by which the medium has entered the space of the art gallery. Many photographers now define their works solely as photographic tableaux and declare that they are artefacts, created specifically for the gallery wall. Self-sufficient in nature, the tableau seldom relies on supporting documents. It can be defined as a composition of staged people, often acting out a scenario that has been directly manipulated by the artist, although it can also be used to describe a photograph that does not contain any people but resembles the tableau in form. By its very nature the photographic tableau amalgamates the art forms of photography and theatre.

civilized ku # 2103 ~ my current heart's desire

Sky King tricycle ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenI spied this little beauty late last December while Xmas shopping at a local antique / collectibles store. Since that time, it has resided at the very top of my Wanter List, even above things picture making.

Unfortunately, the wife says, "no way". In part, her "reasoning" is that we have nowhere in the house to put / display it. Little does she know that, in the absence of a shrink ray to get me down to Sky King riding size, I want to weld it onto the roof of my car.

On the other hand, maybe the wife will get pregnant and then she'll let me get it for our love child.

BTW, the followup to yesterday's entry, profundity and tableaux vivant, will be coming later today.

civilized ku # 2102 ~ profundity and the tableaux vivant

The netminder ~ Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenYesterday, I made this picture. Upon viewing the result, I have found it to be rather emotionally / intellectually unsettling. I am currently writing an expanded entry to follow this entry. That entry will delve into my thoughts on the reasons why I find the picture to unsettling.

However, before I post the follow up / expanded entry, I wanted to post just the picture in order to solicit your reaction / response - uninfluenced by my thoughts - to it.

Please indulge me in this request. I am very interested in reading about your reaction to it.

civilized ku # 2101 ~ the Weee Hockey urinal game

Urinal hockey game with pubes and gum wad ~ Hockey rink / Plattsburgh, NY - • click to embiggenIf your aim is good, you can "shoot" the puck into the net and score.

According to the sales pitch, by using The Weee Hockey urinal game one can "keep your establishment clean and wow your patrons". Although, as evidenced by the dark stain on the floor, not everyone possesses the skill needed to hit shoot the puck or, for that matter, the urinal.

the life in my kitchen ~ IMO, good picture making is about focus

life in my kitchen ~ pictures made in my kitchen / Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenA short while back I mentioned that I intended to begin the long process of editing and organizing (into categories) the nearly 4,000 pictures in my "finals" folder. Well, the process has begun and the first category is life in my kitchen, a category which does not include my decay and disgust pictures which were also made in my kitchen.

I tackled this category first because I figured it to be: 1) easy to define and identify, and 2) not overwhelming, number of pictures wise. As it turned out, my figuring was correct. However, what I did not figure on is how impressed I would be (no serving of humble pie for me, thank you very much) with the pictures once they could be viewed as a cohesive body of work.

IMO, part of that surprise derived from the fact that the pictures were made over a period of 3-4+ years without the conscious intent of creating an organized / cohesive body of work. Truth be told, I just wasn't thinking of it in that manner. So, in a kind of after-the-fact awakening, it was a bit of surprise and a delight to view the pictures in the altogether.

Bodies of work are, IMO, the vehicle which allows a viewer to immerse him/herself in a special/unique world created by a picture maker. In a well executed body of work, a picture maker's vision should be rather obvious to all but the visually and cortically subilluminated, aka: dimwits. Dimwited or not, liking a particular body of work, no matter how well executed, is always a matter of viewer taste.

A well executed body of work should evince a consistent visual style and technique. Bouncing around from one focal length lens to another, mixing high contrast prints with low contrast prints or BW prints with color prints, and even mixing prints formats - say, squares with rectangles - are all are antithetical to the creation of and perception of a cohesive body of work.

A well executed body of work should also be consistent, re: the pictured referents - both actual and implied. That is to say, there should be an overarching umbrella under which body of work is created and presented. That umbrella can be narrowly focused, as in a body of work comprised exclusively of pictures of dead chickens, or, it could be more broadly defined, but nevertheless still focused, body of work comprised of pictures of chickens going about their daily business - eating, sleeping, nesting, pecking, crapping, and so on. Either approach represents a valid umbrella which can be defined as a cohesive body of work.

While the life in my kitchen was not created from the get-go as an intended body of work, rather it emerged organically from my ongoing desire to picture my life, I do have a number of ongoing bodies of work being created from pre-focused intents. As examples, decay & disgust, single women, life in pictures, art conveys / transports / reflects, and life without the APA are all tightly focused bodies of work. Needless to state, I enjoy keeping a number balls in the air.

All of that said, I did not expect the life in my kitchen work to be the first of the folios I would be making to circulate to galleries. However, that is exactly what I intend to do - ain't life full of surprises?

A question: Do any of you give any thought to making focused bodies of work?

FYI & BTW, a very good example of multiple focused bodies of work created by a single picture maker can be viewed HERE. I like them all but I am especially partial to the Windows work.

Update on Friday, March 2, 2012 at 12:20PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: John Linn asked: "Will life in my kitchen be available for online viewing?

my response: Yes, once I get it edited down to a more manageable number of pictures.

civilized ku # 2100 ~ dead dolls and other tragedies

Fallen babies / Rock 'em Sock 'em fighter ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen

civilized ku # 2099 ~ relevance

Utilities / Whiteface Mt. parking lot ~ Wilmington, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenI have what I consider to be a bad habit. A habit that I can't seem to break. One that is not exactly deleterious in its effect, but one that I wish I could nevertheless get under control. But, like many bad habits, it's hard to give up.

That said, it might surprise you to know the bad habit I am referring to is the fact that, everyday, I visit The Online Photographer despite the fact that, more often than not, I consider it to be a waste of my time.

I mean, if I wanted to read about roasting coffee beans, home theater speakers, cars, a whole lot of gear related stuff, and many other assorted other "off-topic", aka: non-picture, things, I'd go to blogs/sites devoted those things. It's not that I am not interested in such topics, it's just that, when I visit a blog/site ostensibly about the medium of photography, I expect (foolishly?) to read about, duh, the medium of photography. Or, at the very least, a topic related to it.

Now don't get me wrong, TOP's editor/author, Mike Johnston (along with a few contributing writers), does some Herculean lifting in keeping the enterprise rolling. Kudos to him for that piece of work along with the rewards of having a big audience. Filling up space on a blog on a near daily basis ain't the easiest endeavor on the planet. Take it from me, I know of what I speak - I can venture a bit off-topic from time to time. It happens, even to the best of us ...

... well, except, maybe not.

2 blogs/sites which I also visit on a near daily basis - Joerg Colberg's Conscientious and Aline Smithson's Lenscratch - seem to never stray from the medium of photography straight and narrow. Nearly every day, these 2 intrepid blog-o-sphere practitioners put forth a delightful smorgasbord of picture delights. And, much to my delight, those offerings (augmented by picture maker interviews and thought provoking opinion/critique pieces) tend, for the most part, to feature little known - at least to most of us - contemporary picture makers.

Unlike TOP, wherein the picture / picture maker emphasis is primarily upon the tried and true / the venerable known pictures and picture makers (despite an occasional Random Excellence entry), Colberg and Smithson focus is on what's-happening-now and they are kind and hard working enough to let us in on it. I am much more interested in what's new in the medium as opposed to rehashing the known - a subject that, admittedly, I know much about (while others may not).

And that's my other reason for considering my daily visits to TOP a bad habit. I learn very little which is new (to me) about the medium of photography. Whereas, both Colberg and Smithson offer up something new (to me) almost every day, something that happens on TOP only on rare occasions.

Let me clear about one thing - this entry should NOT be considered as a put-down/slam (it's a critique as opposed to a criticism) of TOP and its editor/author, Mike Johnston. While TOP may not be the sugar which sweetens my picture / picture making cup of tea, it is, nevertheless, a tremendous and successful endeavor which has a large following. Unquestionably, it is well received and appreciated by many.

And, truth be told, I'll probably never break the bad (for me) habit.

Update on Monday, March 5, 2012 at 09:42AM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: In a critique of The Landscapist blog on civilized ku # 2099 (wherein I critiqued TOP), Paul Bradforth (no link provided) wrote: "... I continue to follow your blog, because you take some spiffing pictures that speak to me, but I do wish you could sometimes talk more like a human than an Artist.

my response: Paul, thanks for the critique. I critiqued MJ and his TOP and you critiqued me and my The Landscapist. That's fair. What's good for goose is good for the gander.

BTW, did you read my Featured Comment (published last Friday, the day after my critique of TOP) - proof positive that I can't break the bad habit (although, in my defense, my comment was on an entry about the medium of photography).