civilized ku # 966 ~ the good, the bad, and a whole lota stuff in between

City tree / hitching post ~ Center City - Philadelphia, PA • click to embiggenPreviously, I mentioned I liked John Szarowski's Forward in Robert Adams's book, The New West. Here's an excerpt:

Adams's pictures are so civilized, temperate, and exact, eschewing hyperbole, theatrical gestures, moral postures, and espressivo effects generally, that some viewers might find them dull. There is probably nothing that can be done about this. It is not even certain that anything should be done about it, since the measured Attic view of things is not intrinsically better than the romantic. But for other viewers, for whom the shrill rodomontade of conventional conservation dialectics has lost its persuasive power, may find in these pictures nourishment, surprise, instruction, challenge, and perhaps hope.

Of course it should come as no surprise to Landscapist regulars that I like pictures that are "civilized, temperate, and exact, eschewing hyperbole, theatrical gestures, moral postures, and espressivo effects", aka: straight photography. Conjointly, those kinds of pictures are the kind I strive to make. So it comes as no surprise to me that "some viewers might find them (straight photography) dull" - how many times have I heard, "Why'd you take of picture of that?"

On the other hand, I have heard often enough (to be encouraging) the declaration of, "Interesting. I never would have taken a picture of that." Upon hearing such statements, I come to the conclusion that viewers of my pictures have found "nourishment, surprise, instruction, challenge, and perhaps hope". Although, like Swarkowski, writing re: Adams's pictures, I preface the word "hope" with the "perhaps" caveat.

My friend in NYC could barely look at the pictures in The New West book. He found them (as far as he got with them), way too depressing. Obviously, he did not find any hope in Adams's beautifully made pictures - pictures described by Swarkowski as "....pictures [that] describe with precision and fastidious justice some of the mortal and venial sins that we have committed against our land in recent decades. The gaggle of plywood ranch houses at the foot of the mountains, fenced in by the trailer parks, acid neon, and extruded plastic of the highway..."

It is well worth pointing out that my friend is attentive to, acquainted with, and well versed in the Fine Arts. He is open and receptive to all manner of derived meaning to be found therein. His interests go well beyond the merely decorative and entertaining. Nevertheless, about 20 pages into The New West, he had to put the book down.

Interestingly, as mentioned, I had purchased 2 Robert Adams books - the other being What Can We Believe Where? PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE AMERICAN WEST - and it was the second book that my friend seemed to really enjoy even though that book contained many of the pictures found in The New West book.

However, the second book also contained a good number of "pure" or, at least, minimum humanly-invasive landscape pictures (one of which hit me in the eye like a big pizza pie, punctum wise) that do not require a redacted and redirected reaction in order to appreciate them. The pictures are most definitely "precise" and exhibited "fastidious justice" to their referents but they do not describe any of humankind's "mortal and venial sins".

Those pictures are more Sir Ansel than they were Adams, the minor. And what they had in spades was the derived element of escapism. As in, "Let's escape to the beach where we can relax, drink Corona and lime, and pass the time away without a care in the world." That said, I suspect if one were to look long enough at those pictures and get beyond the element of escape one might find some hope inasmuch as the interaction between man and nature portrayed in some of those pictures suggests that humankind doesn't necessarily have to shit in their own bed every time they turn over the earth in the name of human aspiration.

I mention all of the preceding because it has always been bothersome and irritating to me that, when it comes to conservation picture making, there have only been 2 proscribed paths: 1) representing the over-the-top, spendorific beauty of the natural world, or, 2) representing how humankind has screwed it up, the more down-and-dirty the pictures, the better.

IMO, that's crappola, a load of malarkey, and misses the mark by a country mile. And, in case you haven't noticed, neither path appeals to me.

Paths 1 and 2, while not intrinsically untruthful when out of the hands of picturing drama queens, are largely concerned with extremes, i.e. positions which reside at the extreme far ends of the good/bad spectrum. In fact, there is a broad middle ground, that infamous and much maligned "gray area". A place where it is neither all black nor all white.

For me, that place is found in the "everyday" world. An imperfect landscape of nearly perfect dimensions. A vast readable landscape, some of which tells us what is, some of which tells us what has been, and some of which suggests what could be. To my eyes and sensibilities, it is a rich tapestry with an equally rich story on offer for those keen enough to be able to read it. in all of its various guises.

single woman # 11 ~ my kinda single woman

Rare sighting ~ B&H - NYC, NY • click to embiggenA woman bearing Olympus gifts, that is. However, a woman bearing anything behind the counter at B&H is indeed a very rare sighting.

BTW, did you know B&H has 1600 employees? Kind of staggering when you think about it.

civilized ku # 965 ~ did I mention I live in a park?

Nursery entrance road ~ Jay, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

civilized ku # 964 ~ 100+ year high water

Lake Champlain ~ Peru, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenLake Champlain has been at a record high water level. Although, as pictured here today, the level has dropped considerably, albeit no where near normal.

For an idea how high the water has been, notice the line of debris on the grass by the kayak. The log just beyond that is also not a normal feature. However, it is representative of what is floating around all over the lake - mostly just below the surface so, needless to say, boating is a hazardous activity.

civilized ku # 962-63 ~ noticing / ku

Scottish Highland Cattle ~ Moon Valley Farm - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
Welcome Friends ~ Au Sable Forks / Moon Valley Farm - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenYesterday, the wife and I went up the hill to fetch a lot of beef from Moon Valley Farm. In this case, a lot of beef is a 1/4 hunk (assorted cuts and grinds) of Scottish Highland Cattle and it's worth noting that these guys and girls are really big animals.

In any event and on to picturing things, a question comes up from time to time, this time from John Linn:

Maybe this is a stupid question but I cannot figure out what “ku” and “civilized ku” mean or represent. I guess it is irrelevant but I keep wondering.

IMO, the question is neither "stupid" nor "irrelevant".

It's not stupid because: a) given its idiomatic and idiosyncratic use, I'm the only one who can authoritatively (after all, it's my idiom and idiosyncrasy) answer the question, and, b) the answer is very relevant to my picturing MO. While I have been using ku in the title of most of my day-to-day-to-day (ad infinitum) pictures for nearly a decade, I find it very interesting that, over that time, a number of items have appeared which give added meaning to my use of ku.

As an example, at the Architecture and Phenomenology II Conference (Kyoto Seika University, Japan - June 2009), a paper - Engaging with Ku˜: from abstraction to meaning through the practice of noticing - was presented, the point of which was very closely related to my use of ku. Scary close, to be precise. In fact, if I had commissioned an academic to write an Artist Statement for my use, it might read exactly - albeit with a few self-evident changes - like the description of the aforementioned paper (FYI, in order to understand the following as an expansion of my original use of ku, it might help to first read my answer)....

This paper These pictures presents a design picture making project that exploreds the practice of “noticing”. Noticing is a way in and through which we are able to understand and create our relationship to space and place. The practice of noticing can facilitate awareness, reflection, learning and transformation (Mason 2002). Noticing is a practice that enables us to engage with the concept of Ku˜, meaning “space”, in Japanese. In this project context, Ku˜ is interpreted as a space of potentiality rather than emptiness or nothingness. Engaging with Ku˜ through the practice of noticing can enable a transition from abstraction to meaning. Ku˜ can also be an expression of the ambiguous potential of design picturing investigations: including knowing and the unknown, the limitations and the challenges. To practice design picture making in this way is to step outside of the confines of certainty and embark on an exploratory path of discovery. Just as design picturing is a way of engaging with space – to enunciate the unknown, to create meaning from the abstract – so too is noticing as a temporal practice of discovery and place making. Through the act of noticing the ambiguous openness of space is transformed into the connectedness of place. ~ Academia.edu

Those who have followed things here on The Landscapist for any length of time will notice many of the medium of photography / picturing related topics - relationship to space and place, connectedness, awareness, reflection, learning, meaning, knowing and the unknown, ambiguous, limitations and challenges - which are addressed in this paper's synopsis are part and parcel of the ongoing discussion / presentation on The Landscapist. That said, it is both interesting and affirming to note the attention of other disciplines, in this case - architecture and phenomenology - are touching upon such closely related ideas and notions.

civilized ku # 961 ~ bltn

Red Dodge pickup between church and rectory ~ Albany, NY • click to embiggenIn the hustle and bustle of the past couple weeks, not to mention the on-rushing tide of my continuing picture making, I failed to posted my favorite picture made during my recent Albany trip - Red Dodge between church and rectory.

So, in accordance with the better late than never dictate, here it is.

civilized ku # 959-60 ~ happy birthday

Paradox Lodge panel truck ~ Lake Placid, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
Lower Canada College • 1912 • Football • G. Westgate ~ Paradox Lodge / Lake Placid, NY • click to embiggen


Yesterday was the wife's birthday so I took her to dinner at the Paradox Lodge. It was nice.

civilized ku # 958 ~ color vs b+w

Secaucus Junction pickup & drop-off view ~ Secaucus, NJ • click to embiggenIn a recent entry, Frank (no link provided) wrote:

You have written about photography representing the ‘real’ and I believe that you have also written that you use colour because that’s how we see. But given that all photography is an abstraction with black and white being more of an abstraction that colour (I believe) maybe you would talk about what you consider this photo* represents in B&W rather than colour.

Leaving aside the idea that I believe (straight) color photography is a representation of the real rather an "abstraction" thereof, I believe that b+w photography, since the advent of color photography, has become an abstraction expression of the real. Of course, historically speaking and prior to the wide-spread availability and use of color film, viewers of b+w pictures had little trouble in seeing and accepting them as accurate (minus color) representations of the real. However, in today's (color) media saturated world, color pictures rule the reality roost.

Nevertheless, there can be little question in stating that the b+w picturing medium is fully capable of creating, in the hands of skilled practitioners (such as my friend Michael Gordon), some remarkably beautiful pictures. I might also add, some of the most beautiful prints - as objects, in and of themselves - I have ever viewed are exquisitely crafted b+w prints.

However, the question is - are those pictures representations of the real or are they something else?

IMO, they are something else. That something else is derived from the real inasmuch as the real is the referential origin of most b+w picturing. However, IMO, as I have stated (and as Frank has reiterated), since we don't see in b+w, b+w pictures can not be, by their very nature, completely accurate (inasmuch as the medium and its apparatus allow) representations of the real.

That said, IMO, b+w pictures can be incredibly accurate representations of some visual aspects, if not the totality (inasmuch as the medium and its apparatus allow), of the real. Those "aspects" include tonality and tonal relationships (I am never so aware of peering into the shadows as I am when viewing rich "extended" dynamic range b+w pictures), shape, line, form, and texture - to name a few of the more obvious visual "aspects".

Some practitioners of b+w picturing will state - IMO, rightfully so - that these "aspects" of the real are made more easily perceivable by the fact that there is no color to distract the eye and the mind from these "aspects" of the pictured referent. It is only when they proceed from that logical and reasonable point to the idea that the monochromatic picturing of a referent is the best way to see/reveal that referent's "essence" that I part ways with their b+w raison d'être.

Sorry, but a referent's color is integral to how normally functioning (vision wise) humans see the world and how they relate to it. A referent's color is an important part of its essence and true qualities. Eliminating it in a picture, negates that part of its essence and therefore a significant part of its truth/realness.

And, as subjective as it might be, color is a significant factor, re: an emotional response, to how one sees an object/scene and how one responds to it and, in the case of pictures, how one responds to a representation of it. Consequently, one could argue that b+w pictures are more "analytical" / less "emotional" than color pictures and, to some extent, I believe that to be true.

That said, I must restate that analytical / abstract as b+w pictures might be, b+w picturing is fully capable of remarkably beautiful results. However, IMO, those results are never an as fully real representation of the real as the medium allows.

So, all of that blather aside but drawing upon it nevertheless, what do I think civilized ku # 950 represent in b+w rather than in color?

Well, for one, the tonal relationship between the foliage and the man-made environment that surrounds it emphasizes the free-form randomness of the natural world as opposed to the harshly rigid regimentation of the man-made world - in a sense, organic vs numeric / mathamatical. In addition, the somewhat ethereal roundness and softness of the clouds is emphasized and contrasted against the straight-edged and hard contours of the man-made environment and its man-made objects. And, to my eye and sensibilities, there is a nearly palpable sense of air and atmosphere - a brilliance which the lighter tones of the greenery amply suggest and reinforce.

In addition to those visual representations, all of which are aspects of the real, there is also a sense of Form.

It is at this point, I must take you back to the civilized ku # 950 entry wherein I wrote about my purchase of 2 Robert Adams books and my reaction to them. I describe the reaction as "revelatory". I also wrote the books and my reaction to them instigated the b+w picturing activity which resulted in the civilized ku # 950 picture accompanying the entry(as well as # 954 and # 957).

The revelatory insight I experienced in the viewing of Adams's pictures was the nearly overwhelming sensation of Form the pictures conveyed. Having read several of Adams's books - Why People Photograph and Beauty in Photography in particular - I was mentally aware that Adams believes (as do I) "the proper goal of art is ... Beauty" and the Beauty that concerns him is that of Form - Beauty, for Adams, is "a synonym for the coherence and structure underlying life".

I used the phrase "mentally aware" regarding Adams's idea of underlying Form because, prior to viewing my 2 most recent Adams book purchases, I must admit that I was never really able to see that Form in his pictures. Which is not to state that I didn't appreciate his pictures - I most certainly did (and do), but the Form thing was something I struggled with seeing in his work.

That is, until I viewed Adams's beautifully reproduced pictures, especially so in his book, The New West. Those pictures - which have as their referents some of humankind's less endearing efforts at "civilizing" the planet, as mentioned in civilized ku # 950, exhibited an overwhelming sense of "radiant and luminous brilliance", a quality gained through Adams's picturing MO/trope (brilliantly accomplished) of picturing, almost exclusively, in brilliant / bright western sunlight.

In discussing Beauty and Form, Adams states:

... William Carlos Williams said that poets write for a single reason - to give witness to splendor (a word also used by Thomas Aquinas in defining the beautiful). It is a useful word, especially for a photographer, because it implies light - light of overwhelming intensity The Form toward which art points is of an incontrovertible brilliance, but it is also far too intense to examine directly. We are compelled to understand Form by its fragmentary reflection in the daily objects around us; art will never fully define light.

I have read that passage (and chapter) from Beauty in Photography quite a number times in an attempt to more fully understand Adams's, and perhaps my own, idea of Beauty and Form. However, it wasn't until I looked at the pictures in The New West that the light bulb rather suddenly turned on above the cartoon drawing of my head ...

... Beauty, Form, splendor, light, brilliance, intense ... I get it now - it is all about the light. The light is Adams' metaphor for the "coherence and structure underlying life", aka: Beauty / Form. Despite humankind's often banal efforts (and results) - many of those are amply represented in all of Adams's pictures - to civilize the planet, there is always the light, almost always brilliant and intense. So, voila, I can now view Adams's picture in a different light.

an aside - intentional or not on Adams's part, I am also very appreciative of the fact that Adams chooses to utilize as his metaphor, to reveal Beauty and Form, the light which is least appreciated, most often avoided like the plague, and scorned by those pretty picture makers who "chase" only the cliched, ubiquitously obvious, and over-wrought-ly presented "golden" light.

All of the preceding said, and back to the point of this entry (color vs b+w), I have included a color version of civilized ku # 950 for your consideration. I could brattle on for another 20 paragraphs about the difference between the 2 pictures, but suffice it to state, all of the aspects of the real that I see in the b+w version I see in the color version and then some. And, I most certainly respond much more emotionally to the color picture - amongst other elements, that red newspaper box really gets me wound up - than I do to the b+w picture.

In any event, that how I see it. How do you see it? - either pictures, themselves, or the color vs b+w topic itself.

*civilized ku # 950