Wwhat Is Post Modernism In Photography?

[Terry_2293]

"I wouldn't have considered the Bechers to be pomo artists, any more than Kenna, Misrach, or Andreas Gursky."

I'm with you there, Chris, if you substitute Thomas Struth for Gursky. Gursky's digital manipulation is just so heavy-handed, deleting and adding major portions of the subject for the sake of emphasizing the idea he's trying to convey, that I think of him (like Cindy Sherman) as more of a pomo artist who chooses to use a camera than as a photographer recording a real-world reality in the pre-postmodernist sense of the term (ala Bechers, Kenna, etc.).

Interesting discussion!

...

[tim atherton]

I guess it depends where you are coming from - my direction being more from architecture rather than the plastic arts and painting. In that sense I really see the Struthsky's, Basilico, Bechers etc (Possibly Misrach, but not Kenna - he's a Romantic) to be much more post "Learning from Las Vegas" than Corbusier. In architecture, pomo tends to have a slightly different meaning than in "art".

But then I also believe that photography has only a tenuous link to painting and drawing and is much more closely linked to poetry and possibly architecture (especially with it's combination of technical and aesthetic).

So it's probably more to do with perspective

[domenicco]

people like Chris Jordan are a deterrent to the evolving of art . How can you be so sure that only your view of "how and in what direction photography should evolve" is the right one?

Why don't you put some of your bitterness and anger in your work?

[Michael A.Smith]

Relevant to critique of Post-Modernism: Quote from Sir Herbert read, eminent Art Historian; "Art is about feelings. If one has ideas to express, the proper medium is language."

[Pete Andrews]

I'd have more truck with post-modernism if the title itself weren't an oxymoron that shows utter contempt for, or total ignorance of, language and semantics.I think this is at the very heart of the controversy. Are these guys deliberately challenging the very fabric of convention, or just talentless twats who are so egotistical that they think they're the only ones on earth to have discovered that life is trivial/short/brutal/ironic/whatever? Who knows? The work itself usually does nothing to enlighten anyone.Until the proponents of this movement become literate and articulate enough to express their ideas clearly, in purely visual terms, and without some art-theory self-appointed guru printing a thesis beside every work, then the whole movement deserves all the contempt that it gets.

[Kaatharine Thayer]

The site Chris cited crashed my computer, but before it did, I saw enough to be sure that while I agree with some of his points, I'm sure not in agreement with him about what constitutes "good art." In fact, if it's narrative and storytelling that characterizes postmodern art, then the stuff at that site should fit perfectly, along with 19th century art photography that tried to replicate pre-Raphaelite painting. The main difference I see between any of the above and postmodern art is that the earlier work is marked by sentimentality and the more recent by irony, detachment and cynicism, which are the opposite side of the same coin and equally inimical to the creation of meaningful and lasting art, in my opinion. I wish I could remember where I read it and who said it, but in the last few days I've read a quote something to this effect: "Remember, postmodern art is the first postaudience art."

Also there was an interesting piece in the New Yorker a few weeks ago about the studio art department at Harvard, which suggested that art departments are starting to rethink their theory-laden programs and lean more toward studio programs.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Post-Modernist theory, although it originated as an architectural movement, was meant to be a criticism of the dominant 'paradigm' of Modernism. The way we think about photography and art is a product of Modernism, we look to the painting, photograph, what-ever as a piece of ?truth? which is expressed by an individual. PoMo theory would suggest that there is much more expressed than an individual?s take on the world.

I wonder how much PoMo theories have changed the way we think about art and photography; do we still believe (or did photographers ever believe) that a photograph is 'the truth'? I am hardly a Post-Modernist, but I think that to simply reject PoMo theory or art is a mistake, there are some insights offered by PoMo theory--perhaps even by photographers and artists-- which, IMHO, are useful and quite reasonable. Roland Barthes? book (ok, he is actually a Post-Structuralist) Mythologies (1972) is a great place to begin.

[Brian C. Miller]

It took a little searching on my part to find out that "pomo" is short for "postmodernism." I was wondering what this had to do with a tribe of native Americans.

Coming from a poor white trash perspective (yes, my truck IS bigger than your Volvo), a lot of it looks like "the emperor is butt-nekked and there's a dog humping his leg." Most of the argument for it looks to me like a bunch of ad copy for crappy products.

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary, modernism: "3 : modern artistic or literary philosophy and practice; especially : a self-conscious break with the past and a search for new forms of expression"

Now if we prefix "post-" to it, that would mean that the search for new forms of expression is over. Looks like they haven't found anything of value, and have wound up face down in the ditch.

The "rocks, lakes, trees" bunch are also post-modern, having skipped modernism altogether. While their product is derided because it graces calendars, it IS there BECAUSE it's worth looking at for a whole month at a time by a large mass of people.

Now then, Rebeca, as to what you might photograph: How about taking concepts such as truth, beauty, honesty, love, virtue, and integrity, and showing how they AREN'T found in postmodernism?

[Marcus Leonard]

When 42nd Street was waiting to be turned into Giuliani's Disneyland, there was a cinema marquee displaying 'Art is either revolution or plagiarism'. Think about it. By the way, the Seattle photographer who posted this really funny message, might also be a little open to the suggestion that beautiful, decorative images have their own role, which need not be 'art'. Most photographers are not artists, in particular many LF ones, who pick other people's brains about 'good locations' to make the so-manieth shot of that rock or what have you...

[Steve Gangi]

The problem I've always had was that po mo seemed (to me) as just a game to see who is more clever or more strange. I've seen some "stuff" that to me was just junk, and had several paragraphs of more "junk" that tried to explain how good or important the picture is... usually with lots of five dollar words and obscure references to other five dollar words. I got the feeling that the "artist" was just trying to convince us that he is smarter than we are. <YAWN> If a photo can't sell itself on its own merits without pages of "newspeak", then it's crap.