"Regarding Walker Evans "..He was the very first, I think, to disguise prose as documentary photography". Not entirely. Ever heard of a certain Atget? "
you might even go back to the 19th century, and compare the american documentarians and landscapists ... matthew brady, timothy o'sullivan, etc..
i don't know if they had any influence at all on walker, but their work was definitely known by the later modernists who admired walker's work.
in europe, i think charles marville could be seen as a precursor to atget (though i have no idea if atget knew his work).
A collector I know believes that every kind of picture ever imagined was made in the 19th century. what was missing back then was any kind of encompassing historical linneage tying things together. many experiments happened in isolation--even by accident--so they managed to not influence anyone that came after. Then decades later some modernist, following a completely different path, would end up in the same place.
And then, decades after that, we discover the unknown guy from 1850 doing the same thing as the famous modernist, and wonder what's going on!
If you mean in the sense of Documentary vs. Prose (what Evans called working "in the documenatry style") - perhaps yes and no. In many senses the FSA photographers weren't "true" documentary photographers (if there is such a thing) - they were more along the lines of propaganda photographers - in the sense of the word before Goebels got his hands on it as it were.
Many of the FSA photographers had an agenda that informed their work - many overtly political. Evan's aggenda happened to be more personal and "artistic" than political (and he quite bltantly said so - certainly later and I think at the time) - or possibly political in the broadest political terms - and the personal tended to overide it - thankfully.
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
It would be interesting to know how much influence James Agee was having on Walker Evan's work as they were traveling and working together.
And, how much did Evans influence Agee's work like the film "Night of the Hunter", directed by Charles Laughton? It is full of images that any large format photographer could be proud of.
" In many senses the FSA photographers weren't "true" documentary photographers (if there is such a thing) - they were more along the lines of propaganda photographers"
couldn't you say the history of documentary photography has precisely been the history of propaganda photography? (again, in the pre-goebels sense ...)
"" In many senses the FSA photographers weren't "true" documentary photographers (if there is such a thing) - they were more along the lines of propaganda photographers"
couldn't you say the history of documentary photography has precisely been the history of propaganda photography? (again, in the pre-goebels sense ...)"
Exactly. Which is why I was so cautious about talkign about 'true" or "pure" docuemtnary photogorpahy, as i'm not sure such a beast exists.
In a way tghis is a side discussion (but not entirely)
Most documentary photography has some form of agenda - often big or small "p" politics. Evans' happened to have more of an aestheic agenda
You'd be amazed how small the demand is for pictures of trees... - Fred Astaire to Audrey Hepburn
I was thinking more in terms of Dorthea Lange (her migrant farm workers/families, etc), who's work parallels Walker's, but in a much more humanistic way...
Walker, Lange, and every thinking photographer has an agenda...
i read some goofy article about Disfarmer recently, the writer said that the people appeared that way because they didnt know what they were supposed to look like in a photograph...to some extent i think that can be true with the earlier stuff...
but also, i think people appear 'dead pan' in real life for maybe at least 80% of the time? Im looking at my computer screen right now and if you took my picture, it would be pretty dead pan. So whos to say whats right or what should be photographed if it all exists?
I think theres more to a photograph usually of someone being completely dead pan and thats it. Theres always a lot of nuances you get used to picking up in that kind of portrait or documentation (like the becher stuff...which btw i always thought was the most boring of the boring in books, but seeing them in the flesh is really quite nice and they are quite beautiful)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks