Essay on Intimate Life in Contemporary Art

Uelsmann’s work was not well received in the photography community. His creations were not considered photography; however, he was well received in the art community. John Szarkowski hosted a solo exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art in 1967. Uelsmann was considered “iconoclastic” and “set out to convince critics that photography offered alternatives to the conventional “purist” sensibility…” Uelsmann debated that photos could “evoke elusive states of feeling and thinking triggered by irrational and imaginative juxtaposition” (Kay). Uelsmann has succeeded in finding a following among photographers and artist alike. In the past forty years, Uelsmann’s work has been exhibited in over 100 solo shows throughout the US and overseas. He has permanent instillations in museums worldwide (Taylor). Uelsmann’s photos are now revered for their original technical form as well as their surreal matter (Johnson).

The essay written by Charles Baudelaire, titled “The Modern Public Photography”, is not only very clear to be negative towards the pursuing arts of photography, but also very controversial due to the independent and diverse views on this specific subject matter. Baudelaire makes it very clear in his writings that his opinion is firm on photography and its evolving approach to appease the various spectators of the fine arts. In this essay, Charles Baudelaire illustrates his opinion by insulting multiple previous photographic known ‘art pieces’ and breaking them down into literal meanings, insulting the modern idea of literal duplicates of reality as being defined as “art”, and also persuading those interested in category of photography to seek ‘out-of-the-box’.

Meanwhile, photography as a commodity in the industrial world at that time, its status in galleries and museums is determined by the price it sells, which means the higher the price is, the higher position it stands. This situation increases the gap between this photography and another type of photography, which works simply for exposing abuses caused by jobs, races, sex, social classes and etc. that people are unfamiliar to accept and consume.

NYC-based photographer Lucea Spinelli’s latest series titled Phōtosgraphé explores the movement of light in photography and the perception of reality. Spinelli reminds us instantly of photography’s purpose and origin. It is defined as a process of drawing with light. Its etymology implies a compound of the greek words φωτός (phōtos) “light” and γραφή (graphé) which is defined as “drawing”. The fleeting movement of the illumination becomes the paintbrush on its canvas, the film. “Like a human eye, the camera receives impressions of light reflected off the world around us. “

While the pictoralism movement dominated photography for majority of the eighteenth century, by the 1880’s another group of photographers were ready to captivate the world with a new medium of photography. This medium was meant to not only convey information, but to also awake public conscience to injustices around the world. This medium is what is known as documentary photography. In America, documentary photographers captured images ranging from poverty, unemployment, and hungry families. In The History of Photography, art historian and author Beaumont Newhall claims that, “The importance of these photographs lies in their power not only to inform us, to move us. They are at once interpretations and records; although they are no longer topical, they contain qualities which will last long as man is concerned with his brother.”1 Documentary photography not only poses as a record of recent universal events but also as valuable evidence of societal issues for centuries to come.

The question that I have chosen is ‘how have photographers used formal elements to objectify their subjects?’. In this essay I will try to answer that question while including some relevant history of photography and formalism, and examples of photographers which I think have used formal elements well in producing images that are aesthetically pleasing because of their visual qualities, by having good use of composition and colour manipulation, and that are not only good artworks because of their history or meaning behind them.

A photographer’s job is to capture a moment in a tangible form in which can last forever, perhaps in someone’s memory, or digitized in someone’s phone or modern museum and shown to the public. No matter the type of photographer, they will always take a photograph of human emotions, whatever the subject. Pepper No. 30 by Edward Weston is a simple picture of a bell pepper. What is less known about the photograph is that the exposure had taken up to six hours with an f-stop of f/240 (PetaPixel). Every piece of art always has a literal meaning based on what is immediately shown. In seeing Mark Rothko’s paintings for the first time, you feel that you can slather paint on a large canvas just as Rothko did and sell it for millions of dollars. Both

Photographs are also manifestations of time and records of experience. Consequently, writings on photographic theory are filled with references to representations of the past. Roland Barthes (1981, 76), for instance,

When considering photography one can examine a variety of aspects, there are subtleties built into each moving piece that constitutes a photograph. From the mechanisms of the camera to the motivations of the photographer or the contexts where the photograph is exhibited there is an intentionality in each element that affects how the photograph is interpreted and how photography as a whole influences our society. Examining the nuances of photography and their implications on the world as a whole are Susan Sontag in On Photography and Roland Barthes in Camera Lucida. They are both significant figures in photography criticism and their differing ideologies establish a foundation on which to begin critiquing photography. While Barthes asserts death as the core of photography and its influence on the subject, Sontag acknowledges death and aggression in the act of photography yet ultimately centers in on surrealism as the essence of photography.

She also discusses the social importance of photography. “In becoming a marker in an elite status, fine art photography has created aesthetic boundaries that separate it from popular forms of symbolic communication.”(Schwartz,

Photographs, are moments forever captured. They are mirrors of reality, ghosts of lives and events told through particles of ink and paper. From photography’s birth in 1839, to its most recent incarnation into selfies, photographs have been telling and retelling the stories of humanity. In On Photography, and Reading American Photographs, both Sontag, and Trachtenberg critically examine the nature of photography, and its impact on the past, present, and future world. Though Sontag, and Trachtenberg diverge stylistically in their exploration of photographs, both authors are united in their ideas of the influence of photographs on our understanding of history, as well as the power that one exercises when looking through a lense.

Photography grants the power to seize a moment, a moment so precious, so intimate, so important that we as humans are allowed to cherish and hold tight to that moment; a chance to reminisce. That precious moment, as Annette Kuhn says, “show[s] not so much that we were once there, as how we once were” (Annette Kuhn 95). The deceased are brought back to life. A childhood is relived. A relationship is repeatedly forged. Photography imprisons time, holds it hostage—chained to the walls of our memories, giving the viewer the power to continually find the treasure inside, that one split second in time. Photography captures the essence of a specific time and place; it grants the privilege to relive that exact moment.

Through endless hours of photographing came revelation upon revelation; it truly was a radical departure from what my eyes perceived through the sketches of my youth. Creativity to me no longer represented just originality, it was also a conduit for instilling an appreciation in what can’t be seen. Mastering the camera’s effects to manipulate photos illustrated this beauty of perspective diversity—leaving shots overexposed, oversaturated, too wide and too narrow revealed life in different lights.

When photography is used to explain or show anything it is done as to be open to discussion and questions. In Katherine Brickell’s “Home interiors, national identity and curatorial practice in the art photography of Simryn Gill” “home has become

Susan Sontag said photographs sends across the harmlessness and helplessness of the human life steering into their own ruin. Furthermore the bond connecting photography with departure from life tortures the human race. (Sontag 1977:64)