Strife Photography
When it comes to “strife photography” I am a detached, immovable object. It’s not that I lack empathy, I am not a sociopath. It is the photography of said plight that isn’t engaging.I coined the term strife photography while I was at Art Center. I was looking for a more all encompassing term than simply “war photography”. It encompasses any documentary work that might not fetishize, but aesthetizes the unpleasant nature of a given situation, whether it be the war in Iraq or a holler in Appalachia. From war to the poor.
©Susan Meiselas
At the terrible photography “conference” Photo LA (basically a photo gallery bazaar) three years ago my experience was saved by a lecture from photographer Susan Meiselas. She showed work from Carnival Strippers (I believe she was there promoting a new edition), as well as Nicaragua and more recent projects. Her work is the kind of war photography that I ‘like’ to see. Straight, dead pan images with little to no romance and as objective as photographically possible (I know, I know). Strife is no place for style, war even less so.
Who else spoke at this conference? None other than the captain of colorful strife, Steve McCurry, famous for the “Afghan Girl” photograph that graced the cover of National Geographic. A girl with a dusty face and amazing eyes now defined Afghanistan for an entire country. Only years later, when McCurry set out to relocate and reshoot the girl, with the two image shown together did that photograph serve any real illustrative purpose to the strife of those living in Afghanistan.
©Steve McCurry
Prior to that it amounted to pretty travel photography. From the lecture it is actually hard to imagine him in a different light, something other than a really pretty travel photographer. In one breath there is a dramatic story of a treacherous border crossing with film sewn into clothes, and in the next a revealing statement about ethnocentric lack of engagement–after a number of trips he never bothered to learn any of the native language.
©Shelby Lee Adams
In contrast, Shelby Lee Adams is very involved with his subjects. He is connected to them geographically and is well liked by a fair amount of them, if we are to believe the documentary about his work in Appalachia, The True Meaning of Pictures. The difficult thing about Adams though, is that even though he calls himself a documentary photographer, he is (to go by this body of work) more of a portraitist. Everything is set up to a degree (some more than others) and everything is lit. There is a fair amount of editorializing going on in the images as well, which pushes it even further out of the documentary realm.
The lines for all of this are very vague, especially since I have done a poor job of defining what I believe “strife photography” really is. What started as basically a snide remark as turned into a partial framework for how I view all documentary photography. The big question being is it actually effective, or is it just attractive?
Oh and borderline strife photographer James Natchtwey won a TED award.
Well said. It’s a difficult issue and I can’t say that I’ve totally wrapped my head around it. I do know that I have a lot of respect for Meiselas’s work and what she has to say about it. In a tangential way her work is like the vérité work of the Maysles — clear transparent documentary images that retain a high aesthetic impact.
Comment by Davin — March 12, 2007 @ 5:41 am
It’s all just a series of choices, defining what there is to say and determining the best possible way to say it. Most reasonable photographers or filmmakers make reasonably appropriate choices, but when there is some bizarre denial of the nature of those choices it becomes problematic.
Comment by ross — March 12, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
Certainly beauty is in the eye of the beholder - no one can argue that. We may not like the taste or aesthetics of a certain beholder, and that will always be the case. For me, If I like to hang a certain
photograph in my home to live with and to continually observe, it would be the Afghan Refugee Girl who tells such an acid story with her eyes - and to have captured that in such a precise moment
of time - unrehearsed - causing some to tear, and provoke me to despise the zenophobic Russian
invasion, then professional jealousy has no place and only mutes the critic.
Douglas Dean
Comment by Douglas Dean — November 13, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
[...] Here are some more of his photographs from his blog (and one from here): [...]
Pingback by Sociological Images » ART AND REPRESENTATION — January 17, 2009 @ 2:06 am
[...] Here are some more of his photographs from his blog (and one from here): [...]
Pingback by Business Memes » ART AND REPRESENTATION — January 18, 2009 @ 9:38 am
Dear Ross,
I stumbled across your site today and decided to comment to hopefully clarify my methodology. I define my work in a lot of ways, now working for 35 years within my Appalachian community. My photos are formally arranged and lighting is added to help define the environment so that I might work with a 4×5 camera. My chosen tool. With this process I am given the benefit of making 4×5 Polaroids within 20 seconds in the field that I can share and review with my subjects. My subjects have input, so I call my work a working collaboration. I am a participant observer. My work is autobiographical, subjective, creative and documentary. I have never defined my work as one thing, others have. Life is very complex. The issues and relationships I’m working with far exceed any documentary films done on my work. I have published three books with my peoples understandings and currently have a 4th project I’m showing around. Working with your subjects you change things, move things, you want very much to please them, I listen to people, something most photographers might not consider. They have and still are told what to do by society, but not by me, we work together. It is an authentic relationship, making real photographs.
Comment by Shelby Lee Adams — March 8, 2009 @ 3:12 pm